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) |
|
CCP Rise
C C P C C P Alliance
5338
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 13:51:08 -
[1] - Quote
Here is a feedback thread for some awesome new ships, Command Destroyers!
So here's the basics. We are adding a new line of Tech II destroyers based on the Algos, Dragoon, Corax and Talwar along with a new type of module called the Micro Jump Field Generator, which the new Destroyers will have exclusive access to. I'm going to go through some basic questions here at the top and then give you all the details after.
First, why Command Destroyers? We have always wanted to do a line of smaller ships that could provide gang support, but we expected to wait until after a rework of the ganglink mechanics, but here we saw a perfect opportunity to bring you this awesome new module and combining the role with gang support seems ideal. We still want to rework links and think these will slot in perfectly to that rework when it happens, but in the mean time you guys get a few awesome new tools.
Second, how exactly does the Micro Jump Field Generator work? This module is exactly like a Micro Jump Drive except that when it fires, it pulls any ships nearby along with it for the jump. There's a lot of specifics to consider here but the big restrictions you need to know are that you cannot use this module in high sec, you can not pull invulnerable targets (ships that have just undocked or just jumped through a gate and are still cloaked), and you can not jump into starbase shields. You CAN however do a lot of really crazy thing such as pull bombs that are midair, pull dictor bubbles or chain multiple jumps in a row using several Command Destroyers. As for numbers, we have a base spool up time of 9 seconds, a reactivation delay of 160 seconds, a pull radius of 6km from the ship and a jump distance of 100km. The module requires 5 PG and 31 CPU to fit and requires the same skill as normal MJDs to use.
Now, for the ships themselves. We are aiming to have a set of destroyers that are both faster and more resilient than either their Tech I counterparts or Interdictors, but sacrifice offense. This should make the support role, whether with MJFG or links, easier to fill while leaving them vulnerable to abuse in combat. Their weapon systems will be missile or drone based, like their base hulls.
Here are the bonuses:
MAGUS Gallente Destroyer Per Level: 10% Bonus to Drone Damage 4% bonus to armor resists Command Destroyer Per Level: 2% to Armor and Skirmish Warfare link effectiveness 5% reduction in MJFG spool up time Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators Role: Can fit one Warfare Link
PONTIFEX Amarr Destroyer per Level: 10% Bonus to Drone Damage 4% bonus to Armor Resistances Command Destroyer per Level: 2% to Armor and Information Warfare link effectiveness 5% reduction in MJFG spool up time Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators Role: Can fit one Warfare Link
STORK Caldari Destroyer per Level: 10% to Rocket and Light Missile Damage 4% Bonus to Shield Resistances Command Destroyer per Level: 2% to Siege and Information link effectiveness per level 5% reduction in MJFG spool up time Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators Role: Can fit one Warfare Link
BIFROST Minmatar Destroyer per Level: 10% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile Damage 4% bonus to shield resists Command Destroyer per Level: 2% to Siege and Skirmish Warfare link effectiveness 5% reduction in MJFG spool up time Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators Role: Can fit one Warfare Link
And for their attributes I'm using a google doc this time for better readability: ATTRIBUTES
As always, we look forward to your feedback. With these ships I'm especially interested in any opinions or insights on the powergrid and CPU numbers, as the ships will probably get used a few different ways and I'm not positive we've accounted for all of them.
If you have any questions or need clarifications please ask, and don't be surprised if there's a typo here and there that needs fixing :)
Thanks !
@ccp_rise
|
|
ChromeStriker
Out of Focus Odin's Call
964
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 13:55:36 -
[2] - Quote
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
No Worries
|
Cephei Kells
Black Omega Security The OSS
28
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 13:59:09 -
[3] - Quote
Please tell me I'm not the only one who sees this as another way to attempt to limit fleet sizes/tactics? |
|
CCP Rise
C C P C C P Alliance
5340
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:02:35 -
[4] - Quote
Cephei Kells wrote:Please tell me I'm not the only one who sees this as another way to attempt to limit fleet sizes/tactics?
More than any module/mechanic I've worked on, this is an attempt to expand fleet sizes and tactics, not limit them. I believe (as long as the numbers end up somewhat balanced) this is one of the most promising 'sandbox' module/ship additions we've done recently and the fact that we have no idea what players will do with it feels really great and exciting.
@ccp_rise
|
|
Xenontechs
Stealth Bustards
0
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:04:39 -
[5] - Quote
Quote:Gallente Destroyer Per Level: 10% Bonus to Drone Damage
Amarr Destroyer per Level: 10% Bonus to Drone Damage
Caldari Destroyer per Level: 10% to Rocket and Light Missile Damage
Minmatar Destroyer per Level: 10% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile Damage
I get that these are the big brothers of other ships with these sort of bonuses, but I'd love to see more weapon types |
ChromeStriker
Out of Focus Odin's Call
964
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:05:21 -
[6] - Quote
Are there any prerequisites for the command destroyer skill??
No Worries
|
Vesan Terakol
The Goat Farm Bad Intention
118
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:06:57 -
[7] - Quote
The drone combat capabilities limiting for the Gallente and Amarr seems to be a bit harsher. I'd take 50% durability instead of 50% damage if i had the choice. The other 2 might lack any application bonus, but at least they can't loose their main weapon so easily. |
Titus Balls
Soggy Biscuit. Did he say Jump
92
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:07:35 -
[8] - Quote
ChromeStriker wrote:AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH SO stoked for these Would say this calls for a T3D balance pass first tho (cough svipul cough)... otherwise your effectivly buffing them in gangs (easy skirmish/siege links)
Stoked....or Storked? :D
These look like they could be fun ships for small gangs. |
Suitonia
Furnace Thermodynamics
674
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:08:29 -
[9] - Quote
Super cool
Contributer to Eve is Easy:
https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos
Solo PvP is possible with a 20 day old character! :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvOB4KXYk-o
|
Mr Grape Drink
Sugar - Water - Purple The Mutiny
73
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:08:49 -
[10] - Quote
Does a scram shut it off like a regular MJD? |
|
Minchurra
Perkone
24
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:08:58 -
[11] - Quote
Does the new group MJD move everything 100km in the direction the destroyer is moving, or does it move each ship in range 100km in the direction they were originally moving?
The role bonus says "can fit one warfare link", does this mean there is a hard restriction on the number that can be fitted (like a damage control), or does it mean I can fit as many as I want but only use one at a time (like battlecruiser links)? If I fit command procs can I use two or three at once?
You mention I cannot MJD into a pos, how will this work? Do things appear inside and then bounce off? Is the activation cancelled? Do ships just spawn on the edge of the shield? Can I jump out of a pos?
Can I MJD NPC ships like rats? What about deployables like mobile depots and anchorable bubbles? Does it also teleport drones?
Any possibility of the Minmatar/Gallente ships getting an active tank bonus instead of a passive to mirror the Command ships?
You probably don't have time to answer all of these but a little more information in your post would be appreciated so I have to spend less time on the test server working it out myself. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
15049
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:10:06 -
[12] - Quote
They're really not differentiated much between races, are they? Just in the bonus types they give. Might as well have just made it one ship from the ORE lineup, or something. Granted, the extra art assets are cool, but I fail to see what justifies making four of these as opposed to one.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Yngvar ayShorn
Einheit X-6
536
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:10:21 -
[13] - Quote
I am able to fly to a Titan and jump that massiv Ship 100km away in my small tiny Command-Destroyer?
30 Tage EVE testen! -->> Klick mich <<--
|
Pellit1
Spiritus Draconis Spaceship Bebop
7
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:10:24 -
[14] - Quote
Definitely one of the most interesting introductions to the game for a while - Think it's going to affect lowsec warfare an awful lot.
Rise: What are the limits on the size of ships that can be jumped? |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
5726
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:11:37 -
[15] - Quote
ChromeStriker wrote:AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH SO stoked for these Would say this calls for a T3D balance pass first tho (cough svipul cough)... otherwise your effectivly buffing them in gangs (easy skirmish/siege links)
So Storked?
Woo! CSM X!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
1580
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:11:38 -
[16] - Quote
BY THORS HAMMER..
THE BIFROST IS HERE!!!
Yaay!!!!
|
Alyssia Benar
Vision Inc Hole Control
30
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:11:50 -
[17] - Quote
Is 6km the base range of the module? Can it be extended or is it a fixed value and not depending on skills? |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1169
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:14:06 -
[18] - Quote
Quote:We still want to rework links
when? this is one of the most broken things in game, but it gets no attention |
Capqu
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
1187
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:14:09 -
[19] - Quote
i think more than 1 link is required to justify a wing or fleet command position, even in a small fleet
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
Suitonia
Furnace Thermodynamics
674
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:14:11 -
[20] - Quote
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?)
On SISI it requires Leadership 5, Warfare Link Spec 4 (Approx 10 days of skill training time if you do not have those). + Racial Destroyer V.
Contributer to Eve is Easy:
https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos
Solo PvP is possible with a 20 day old character! :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvOB4KXYk-o
|
|
|
CCP Rise
C C P C C P Alliance
5346
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:15:30 -
[21] - Quote
Minchurra wrote:Does the new group MJD move everything 100km in the direction the destroyer is moving, or does it move each ship in range 100km in the direction they were originally moving? The role bonus says "can fit one warfare link", does this mean there is a hard restriction on the number that can be fitted (like a damage control), or does it mean I can fit as many as I want but only use one at a time (like battlecruiser links)? If I fit command procs can I use two or three at once? You mention I cannot MJD into a pos, how will this work? Do things appear inside and then bounce off? Is the activation cancelled? Do ships just spawn on the edge of the shield? Can I MJD NPC ships like rats? What about deployables like mobile depots and anchorable bubbles? Does it also teleport drones? Any possibility of the Minmatar/Gallente ships getting an active tank bonus instead of a passive to mirror the Command ships? You probably don't have time to answer all of these but a little more information in your post would be appreciated so I have to spend less time on the test server working it out myself.
MJD moves everything using the direction of the command destroyer, all the ships moved retain their original vectors upon landing.
No hard restriction, same as BCs.
If you MJD towards a pos I believe it will place you 50k from the pos instead of inside.
Yes you can move NPCs, you can not move anchored things like deployables or anchored bubbles. Yes drones.
We deliberately didn't do active bonus because we thought resistance would be much more desirable in a fleet environment (similar to HICs).
@ccp_rise
|
|
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
1974
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:15:39 -
[22] - Quote
New and exciting gameplay opportunities? Check. Player skill factor involved with crazy opportunities? Check. Bonus points for being able to move dictor bubbles and bombs.
This sounds like a great addition for EVE!
A few questions though:
- You don't seem to mention if it will teleport capital and supercapital ships or not. I''m assuming it will? o_O
- You implied that it only teleports dictor bubbles, what about regular bubbles? That sounds like a free get out of jail card for capital blobs.
- What is the effect of warp scramblers (and soon focused interdiction) on this? Do you need to scramble the Command Destroyer for the whole jump not to happen, or do you need to scramble each affected ship?
- Have you considered the implications of the actual ship stats into this role? Interdictors are the prime example of how speed is almost the only factor to consider for that type of ship. Will we have one over represented Bifrost to go along with the Sabre, or will the use of the other races be encouraged somehow? The Bifrost even has the shield resist bonus, which means that if it gets the bonus speed, the Stork won't have much left to compete with it.
Signature Tanking Best Tanking
Retired Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - Ex-BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
|
Saint Michaels Soul
Zero Effect Industries Phoebe Freeport Republic
26
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:16:27 -
[23] - Quote
Cephei Kells wrote:Please tell me I'm not the only one who sees this as another way to attempt to limit fleet sizes/tactics?
Hey Cephei, long time no shoot!
This might encourage the break up of the blob/anchor tactic and it might make conventionally flown fleets a bit more susceptible to well flown smaller gangs but I just see more oppportunity for massive chaos in massive fights ... on our newly expanded 2000km grids.
Really looking forward to this. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2407
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:16:58 -
[24] - Quote
Are these getting full T2 resists?
Also, do cloaked targets get pulled?
Do you have a UI icon to show you if you're in range of the effect?
Can you fly out of range once it is activated? I certainly hope so..........
What happens if there are a group of these who all align in the same direction and stagger their mods by 2 seconds each? Do they daisy chain the jumps, mere seconds apart?
And boo to another new skill. Command ships would have been fine, if you really had to. |
|
CCP Rise
C C P C C P Alliance
5346
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:17:27 -
[25] - Quote
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
@ccp_rise
|
|
ChromeStriker
Out of Focus Odin's Call
964
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:17:37 -
[26] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:ChromeStriker wrote:AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH SO stoked for these Would say this calls for a T3D balance pass first tho (cough svipul cough)... otherwise your effectivly buffing them in gangs (easy skirmish/siege links) So Storked? Edit: I'm slow
Hmmm more han one person has said this lol...
No Worries
|
|
CCP Rise
C C P C C P Alliance
5346
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:18:15 -
[27] - Quote
Mr Grape Drink wrote:Does a scram shut it off like a regular MJD?
Yes, scram will shut off an active MJFG and will also keep any targets in range of one that fires from taking the jump.
@ccp_rise
|
|
Luscius Uta
181
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:19:12 -
[28] - Quote
Why both Amarr/Gallente and Caldari/Minmatar have identical bonuses? Jeez, have some creativity.
Drifters have arrived - The End is nigh!
|
Random McNally
The Vendunari End of Life
100762
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:19:16 -
[29] - Quote
This will be awesome!
Host of High Drag Podcast. http://highdrag.wordpress.com/
Space music http://minddivided.com
I G Channel HighDragChat
Broadcast4Reps
|
Lair Osen
106
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:21:12 -
[30] - Quote
Could we get at least 70 drone space on the magnus so it can store 2 flights of drones?
What happened to the kinetic lock? :P |
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1169
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:21:39 -
[31] - Quote
and the 35 bandwidth 60 bay thing the algos and magus get is really bad. if you want more drone damage, give it a bigger damage bonus. giving me the option to downgrade to slower, larger, easier to kill drones that can't hit anything on a destroyer is really strange, and having no spares is awful.
the mwd sig bonuses are iffy. it's a kiting bonus, it does very little for brawling fits.
other than that all I can think of is how their actual reasonable speed makes the T1 destroyers look really bad, especially corax and any kind of armor rigged fits. I don't get why tac destroyers, interdictors and now these all get proper speeds, but T1 can't move at all. |
Marisol Aldurad
EVE University Ivy League
2
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:22:16 -
[32] - Quote
I am very much looking forward to these! |
Random McNally
The Vendunari End of Life
100762
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:22:20 -
[33] - Quote
Please please please rename the Caldari version to "Shrike".
Host of High Drag Podcast. http://highdrag.wordpress.com/
Space music http://minddivided.com
I G Channel HighDragChat
Broadcast4Reps
|
Leokokim
Mining Industry Exile Foundation Warlords of the Deep
38
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:22:44 -
[34] - Quote
Does the MJD skill bonus apply to the MJFG?
So do you get ~5s spool up with All V or only 6.75s from the Command Destroyer Bonus? |
|
CCP Rise
C C P C C P Alliance
5346
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:23:42 -
[35] - Quote
Leokokim wrote:Does the MJD skill bonus apply to the MJFG?
So do you get ~5s spool up with All V or only 6.75s from the Command Destroyer Bonus?
~5s
@ccp_rise
|
|
Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
529
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:25:25 -
[36] - Quote
the end of brawling begin. everybody ready to relive the kiting era?
Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
|
5pitf1re
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
87
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:26:18 -
[37] - Quote
I assume it jumps cloaked ships too? |
Arla Sarain
699
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:27:05 -
[38] - Quote
Pontifex seems to be really bad off. Lowest PG (its an amarr ship...?) Low damage potential due to lack of drone bandwidth. Second slowest MWD speed and align time. Second slowest base velocity.
Also, why bother giving the Stork second highest base velocity if you are just going to shaft it with higher mass, giving it the longest align time and slowest MWD speed. Well, at least the stork gets the passive PG.
Also, Bifrost and Magus will be arguably the most popular... Both being fast and agile, along with skirmish links. |
Cephei Kells
Black Omega Security The OSS
28
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:28:27 -
[39] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:
More than any module/mechanic I've worked on, this is an attempt to expand fleet sizes and tactics, not limit them. I believe (as long as the numbers end up somewhat balanced) this is one of the most promising 'sandbox' module/ship additions we've done recently and the fact that we have no idea what players will do with it feels really great and exciting.
The problem that I'm seeing is that anchoring in a fleet doctrine which isn't specifically a fast moving/kiting doctrine is pretty much dead now as this new AOE MJD has the ability to remove your ships from logistical rep range and with the addition of RR falloff you have a much tighter bubble to where you can turtle with a doctrine meaning its easier than ever for a single person to MJD all your dudes off and force them to warp off and back to the fight. Rewarping to the fight is a moot point if its your logistics who get blinked as everything will be dead by the time they return.
The point I'm getting at is there needs to be a counter to this which is not just killing the ship attempting to do this as the simple counter to that is to fling 5-6 of these at a hostile fleet and watch them scatter while not being able to do anything about it.
Please do not release this without there being a competent counter because this will honestly kill all fleet combat which isn't cerbs and ishtars. |
|
CCP Rise
C C P C C P Alliance
5349
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:29:53 -
[40] - Quote
5pitf1re wrote:I assume it jumps cloaked ships too?
Yep.
@ccp_rise
|
|
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2407
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:30:24 -
[41] - Quote
Cephei Kells wrote:CCP Rise wrote:
More than any module/mechanic I've worked on, this is an attempt to expand fleet sizes and tactics, not limit them. I believe (as long as the numbers end up somewhat balanced) this is one of the most promising 'sandbox' module/ship additions we've done recently and the fact that we have no idea what players will do with it feels really great and exciting.
The problem that I'm seeing is that anchoring in a fleet doctrine which isn't specifically a fast moving/kiting doctrine is pretty much dead now as this new AOE MJD has the ability to remove your ships from logistical rep range and with the addition of RR falloff you have a much tighter bubble to where you can turtle with a doctrine meaning its easier than ever for a single person to MJD all your dudes off and force them to warp off and back to the fight. Rewarping to the fight is a moot point if its your logistics who get blinked as everything will be dead by the time they return. The point I'm getting at is there needs to be a counter to this which is not just killing the ship attempting to do this as the simple counter to that is to fling 5-6 of these at a hostile fleet and watch them scatter while not being able to do anything about it. Please do not release this without there being a competent counter because this will honestly kill all fleet combat which isn't cerbs and ishtars.
People will need to start fitting scrams.
The new HIC scripts make even more sense considering this (I'm surprised no-one mentioned it in that thread tbh) |
|
CCP Rise
C C P C C P Alliance
5349
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:30:58 -
[42] - Quote
Quote:Please do not release this without there being a competent counter because this will honestly kill all fleet combat which isn't cerbs and ishtars.
If this kind of tactic becomes really common it is always an option to either defend your logi/fleet with long range scrams to use on the incoming Command Dessies or, if you don't have another option, simply scram your own fleet.
@ccp_rise
|
|
Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
529
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:31:27 -
[43] - Quote
still no t2 coercer and no t2 cormorant. but yet minmatar and gallente get to enjoy mixed weapon t2 destroyers. yay.
Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
|
Sakey Isu
Respawn Disabled Initiative Mercenaries
1
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:32:33 -
[44] - Quote
ChromeStriker wrote:Are there any prerequisites for the command destroyer skill??)
this* is the only thing I care about with these new ships |
Aquila Sagitta
Blue-Fire Great Blue Balls of Fire
676
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:32:54 -
[45] - Quote
Do objects like missiles and bombs get teleported as well?
Blue-Fire Best Fire
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2407
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:33:19 -
[46] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Quote:Please do not release this without there being a competent counter because this will honestly kill all fleet combat which isn't cerbs and ishtars. If this kind of tactic becomes really common it is always an option to either defend your logi/fleet with long range scrams to use on the incoming Command Dessies or, if you don't have another option, simply scram your own fleet.
To be fair, there is absolutely no IF, about it. These will be warped in, via probes, and immediate spool up.
You'd be absolutely insane not to. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1169
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:34:23 -
[47] - Quote
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 |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1169
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:35:27 -
[48] - Quote
Cephei Kells wrote:ishtars
I guess mjd their drones a few times |
5pitf1re
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
87
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:35:30 -
[49] - Quote
Aquila Sagitta wrote:Do objects like missiles and bombs get teleported as well?
That was mentioned in the OP. |
Alyssia Benar
Vision Inc Hole Control
30
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:35:41 -
[50] - Quote
Still no answer to whether we can jump Caps or not. :( |
|
Zockhandra
Jewish Zeppelin Mafia
20
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:37:18 -
[51] - Quote
CCP RiseCommand Destroyers!
Second, how exactly does the Micro Jump Field Generator work? This module is exactly like a Micro Jump Drive except that when it fires, it pulls any ships nearby along with it for the jump. There's a lot of specifics to consider here but the big restrictions you need to know are that you cannot use this module in high sec, you can not pull invulnerable targets (ships that have just undocked or just jumped through a gate and are still cloaked), you can not move capitals, and you can not jump into starbase shields. You CAN however do a lot of really crazy thing such as pull bombs that are midair, pull dictor bubbles or chain multiple jumps in a row using several Command Destroyers. As for numbers, we have a base spool up time of 9 seconds, a reactivation delay of 160 seconds, a pull radius of 6km from the ship and a jump distance of 100km. The module requires 5 PG and 31 CPU to fit and requires the same skill as normal MJDs to use.
Whilst i really like this idea, (especially that you make links available on them) here are my thoughts.
If this modules works like other MJD (can only be shut down via scram), what is stopping players from diving into a bubble to save titans?
What happens when you use this device near starbase structures, marauders, Deployed bubbles and drones?
Can it be used to reposition Cyno jammers?
Big one: How in hells name are Bomber fleets going to feel when the vast majority of the fleet that has been dragged into a bubble and is about to be dropped, just vanishes? lets use an example:
You setup a MJD beacon using the dessie 100km off a trapped Rattlesnake, you activate the MJD, but halfway through cycle you also activate the MJFG, so the moment you land on the Rattlesnake, it is dragged to safety 100km away. Extending further into this question. What if the ship you are SAVING has a cyno fitted? are we allowing cynos to be bumped around to safety now? Now i admit, the idea of saving ships by warping in on them and then activating sound fun, and good for gameplay. but i can see an aweful lots of very exploitave behaviour.
Another example, if this ship can drag mining barges too, whats stopping mining bots in null from also having these dessies orbiting them? so not only they warp out when a neut enters system, but also jump 100km away from the warpin, making it even harder to catch them.
If this is going ahead, it sounds like ALOT of restrctions need to be made, or atleast another form of shutting these little monsters down.
Also, Mr Rise that is one fantastic beard you had during the championships |
Minchurra
Perkone
24
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:37:24 -
[52] - Quote
Cephei Kells wrote:CCP Rise wrote:
More than any module/mechanic I've worked on, this is an attempt to expand fleet sizes and tactics, not limit them. I believe (as long as the numbers end up somewhat balanced) this is one of the most promising 'sandbox' module/ship additions we've done recently and the fact that we have no idea what players will do with it feels really great and exciting.
The problem that I'm seeing is that anchoring in a fleet doctrine which isn't specifically a fast moving/kiting doctrine is pretty much dead now as this new AOE MJD has the ability to remove your ships from logistical rep range and with the addition of RR falloff you have a much tighter bubble to where you can turtle with a doctrine meaning its easier than ever for a single person to MJD all your dudes off and force them to warp off and back to the fight. Rewarping to the fight is a moot point if its your logistics who get blinked as everything will be dead by the time they return. The point I'm getting at is there needs to be a counter to this which is not just killing the ship attempting to do this as the simple counter to that is to fling 5-6 of these at a hostile fleet and watch them scatter while not being able to do anything about it. Please do not release this without there being a competent counter because this will honestly kill all fleet combat which isn't cerbs and ishtars.
You can scramble them to turn off the MJD, it's not a great solution though.
The minimum activation time with max skills was quoted in this thread to be about 5 seconds, even with the sig bloom a lot of cruisers will struggle to lock these before they get teleported which doesn't feel particularly reasonable. |
Meltmind2
NED-Clan Goonswarm Federation
51
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:37:40 -
[53] - Quote
Alyssia Benar wrote:Still no answer to whether we can jump Caps or not. :( IIRC CCP has already stated that the MJFG won't affect capitals.
Q: will the new HIC scram shut down these new MJFG aswell? |
Yadaryon Vondawn
Alius Itineris Virtus
70
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:37:55 -
[54] - Quote
Can you MJD the following?:
- Active bastion Marauders
- Active portal Black Ops
- Regular missiles/rockets and defender missiles (in the last case, what happens?)
- Probes
- Cans
- Asteroids
|
Cephei Kells
Black Omega Security The OSS
28
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:38:28 -
[55] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Quote:Please do not release this without there being a competent counter because this will honestly kill all fleet combat which isn't cerbs and ishtars. If this kind of tactic becomes really common it is always an option to either defend your logi/fleet with long range scrams to use on the incoming Command Dessies or, if you don't have another option, simply scram your own fleet.
Do you really think the only counter to this should be sticking 3 dudes in proteus with the express purpose of tackling MJD dessies so they dont **** up your world? Because I guarantee you that you've killed BS fleet combat for all but the most dedicated which doesn't sound like you're helping the sandbox become more sandboxy by removing an entire class of ships from use. Who knows, Maybe BC fleets will die again too. |
Mornak
Exotic Dancers Union SONS of BANE
62
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:38:50 -
[56] - Quote
sweet stuff :)
CCP Rise wrote: .... Yes drones. ...
will your drones keep the targetlock when jumped and keep firing as long as you're within 250km of the target? |
Ix Method
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
480
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:38:56 -
[57] - Quote
Alyssia Benar wrote:Still no answer to whether we can jump Caps or not. :( You could always read the OP
Thankyou for these. Been so long but so worth the wait.
Travelling at the speed of love.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
2275
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:39:27 -
[58] - Quote
Lair Osen wrote: What happened to the kinetic lock? :P
You were taken on a ruse cruise.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Max Kolonko
WATAHA. Unseen Wolves
572
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:45:09 -
[59] - Quote
What about capitals in general, capitals in siege/triage, supers/titans, marauder in bastion - will mjfg affect them?
Read and support:
Don't mess with OUR WH's
What is Your stance on WH stuff?
|
|
CCP Rise
C C P C C P Alliance
5352
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:46:53 -
[60] - Quote
Alyssia Benar wrote:Still no answer to whether we can jump Caps or not. :(
You cannot jump caps. Sorry I missed that in the OP, it's added now.
@ccp_rise
|
|
|
Aiyshimin
Fistful of Finns Paisti Syndicate
587
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:47:15 -
[61] - Quote
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"
|
Aebe Amraen
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
186
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:47:24 -
[62] - Quote
Does the 6km radius on the MJFG apply to
1) All ships/etc. that are within 6km when you activate the module (i.e. when spoolup starts)
or
2) All ships/etc. that are within 6km when spoolup finishes
or
3) Something else? |
Ned Thomas
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
1805
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:47:30 -
[63] - Quote
Folks, it specifically says in the OP that you can't jump capitals.
Repeat after me: You. Can't. Jump. Capitals.
"Can't" being the important word.
As in you will not be able to do it. "It" being "jump capitals".
Which was specifically stated in the first post of this thread.
Ok? |
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising Decayed Orbit
115
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:47:47 -
[64] - Quote
Alyssia Benar wrote:Still no answer to whether we can jump Caps or not. :(
you cant |
|
CCP Rise
C C P C C P Alliance
5352
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:48:20 -
[65] - Quote
Aebe Amraen wrote:Does the 6km radius on the MJFG apply to
1) All ships/etc. that are within 6km when you activate the module (i.e. when spoolup starts)
or
2) All ships/etc. that are within 6km when spoolup finishes
or
3) Something else?
2.
When it finishes. Doesn't matter what happens during spool up.
@ccp_rise
|
|
Ivory Kantenu
EXPCS Corp SpaceMonkey's Alliance
90
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:48:44 -
[66] - Quote
I see that the module affects bombs. I'm assuming hostile drones and missiles will be on this list as well?
[i]Learn the basics of Wormhole Selling:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=101693&find=unread[/i]
|
Thanatos Marathon
Black Fox Marauders
571
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:50:17 -
[67] - Quote
Will these be allowed inside Small FW outposts? If so they will need to be tuned down some or we are looking at another year of having a single ship type dominate small plexes and AFs will still be missing their niche in FW Lowsec (assuming they get T2 resist profiles).
Will there be any sort of aggression mechanics applied to jumping someone or something around, and if so will that give Faction Standings penalties to people in FW? |
|
CCP Rise
C C P C C P Alliance
5352
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:50:34 -
[68] - Quote
Ivory Kantenu wrote:I see that the module affects bombs. I'm assuming hostile drones and missiles will be on this list as well?
Yes.
@ccp_rise
|
|
Anthar Thebess
1375
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:54:42 -
[69] - Quote
Drones on a ship that one of the base roles is to jump 100km is a very bad idea.
Capital Remote AID Rebalance
Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.
|
Cpt Patrick Archer
Quam Singulari Triumvirate.
53
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:54:50 -
[70] - Quote
So why exactly is CCP adding this?
I have no idea how this going to be fun to use, apart from being another big gimmick which will annoy people big time.
What's the counter going to be? Apart from some insta lock ships to blap it before it does the MJD fagottery. |
|
Oddsodz
Rifterlings Zero.Four Ops
171
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:55:18 -
[71] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:
because the eris is such a great ship right
Alas my dear, You have no clue just how good that ship is. 800DPS Hull Tank Man Point = WIN Eris.
As for the new ships. I Can not tell you how happy I am to hear that they can be daisy chained MFJG. That alone will reward pilot skill of flying the ship (And I mean manual piloting). I can not tell you how much fun I am going to have with a wing man that knows what we are doing. Oh the Joys of "HOE SNATCHING" (thank CCP Avalon for that term) is just going to be wonderful. Now all I got to do is find a Wingman and have a nice little gang of Assult frigs to back me up. Them null fleets with them big blobs, I am shall PICK YOU APARTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT.
Can you tell I am happy? |
Cpt Patrick Archer
Quam Singulari Triumvirate.
53
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 14:57:44 -
[72] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:If this kind of tactic becomes really common it is always an option to either defend your logi/fleet with long range scrams to use on the incoming Command Dessies or, if you don't have another option, simply scram your own fleet.
Please tell me you're joking? |
Lord Jasta
The Scope Gallente Federation
20
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:00:22 -
[73] - Quote
Yet another item that can't be used in high sec, :( why not have this with a criminal timer? |
Arline Kley
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
630
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:01:55 -
[74] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:When it finishes. Doesn't matter what happens during spool up.
What about chaining spools? So CD#1 starts to spool up, and then just before it fires CD#2 starts to spool its one up
"For it was said they had become like those peculiar demons, which dwell in matter but in whom no light may be found." - Father Grigori, Ravens 3:57
|
|
CCP Rise
C C P C C P Alliance
5352
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:03:44 -
[75] - Quote
Arline Kley wrote:CCP Rise wrote:When it finishes. Doesn't matter what happens during spool up. What about chaining spools? So CD#1 starts to spool up, and then just before it fires CD#2 starts to spool its one up
This works, can't wait to see what's possible with it.
@ccp_rise
|
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
2275
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:03:53 -
[76] - Quote
Arline Kley wrote:CCP Rise wrote:When it finishes. Doesn't matter what happens during spool up. What about chaining spools? So CD#1 starts to spool up, and then just before it fires CD#2 starts to spool its one up This is allowed and works exactly like you'd think. With a 6km radius, though, it'll be tough to make this work in practice!
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
CCP Terminus
C C P C C P Alliance
466
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:03:53 -
[77] - Quote
Arline Kley wrote:CCP Rise wrote:When it finishes. Doesn't matter what happens during spool up. What about chaining spools? So CD#1 starts to spool up, and then just before it fires CD#2 starts to spool its one up You can daisy chain them yes.
@CCP_Terminus // Game Designer // Team Size Matters
|
|
|
CCP Rise
C C P C C P Alliance
5352
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:04:30 -
[78] - Quote
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 :(
@ccp_rise
|
|
Max Kolonko
WATAHA. Unseen Wolves
572
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:06:03 -
[79] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Ivory Kantenu wrote:I see that the module affects bombs. I'm assuming hostile drones and missiles will be on this list as well? Yes.
How will missile or bomb behave after the jump? I assume missile will follow to the target (turning in spot if needed) while i assume bomb will continue in direction it was moving but it now obviously miss its target?
Also about pos ff block. Does this only refer to ff you dont have or one of mjd ships dont have access to or any ff? Also since you land 50km from ff what uf you activate for example 20km from ff, what will happen then?
Read and support:
Don't mess with OUR WH's
What is Your stance on WH stuff?
|
Alyssia Benar
Vision Inc Hole Control
30
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:06:14 -
[80] - Quote
Ned Thomas wrote:Folks, it specifically says in the OP that you can't jump capitals.
Repeat after me: You. Can't. Jump. Capitals.
"Can't" being the important word.
As in you will not be able to do it. "It" being "jump capitals".
Which was specifically stated in the first post of this thread.
Ok?
He edited it in later:
CCP Rise wrote:You cannot jump caps. Sorry I missed that in the OP, it's added now.
|
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
2276
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:06:15 -
[81] - 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 :( Hahaha, oh man. I get the intention here, but you picked a pretty bad example to use. :haw:
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Alyssia Benar
Vision Inc Hole Control
30
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:07:38 -
[82] - Quote
Another Question: Can you activate it from within a Force Field to jump ships out? |
Sanders Schmittlaub
New Jovian Exploration Department A Band Apart.
15
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:08:33 -
[83] - Quote
Big fan of these, will definitely be getting, using, and abusing several of them.
One complaint.
The Magus really needs an expanded drone bay. Not having enough drones to replace one lost wave is going to be a pain in the butt.
My reasoning is simple enough - the Vexor has 75mbits of bandwidth and 125mbits of capacity, while the Ishtar, which is exactly the same hull, gets 125mbits of bandwith and 375m3 of capacity. The Myrmidon has 200m3/100mbits while the Eos has 250m3/125mbits.
I don't care about the bandwidth, but if the T2 variants of two different Gallente ships can expand both their bandwith and capacity with no modifications to the ship models, I think the same approach can be given to the Magus and expand its drone bay a little bit (at least 70m3 would be my vote). |
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising Decayed Orbit
115
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:08:34 -
[84] - 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 :(
How can you discriminate against lowsec and 0.0 incursion fleets?:p
In a more serious note ... you could make the spool up already give you criminal status. which gives the fleet some chance to react. but tbh ... the crap people would do with them to miners, haulers and so on is probably not worth the trouble. bumping haulers with machariels is bad enough. we don't have to make it easier. |
Zockhandra
Jewish Zeppelin Mafia
20
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:08:48 -
[85] - Quote
Alyssia Benar wrote:Another Question: Can you activate it from within a Force Field to jump ships out?
Oh god, dragging out 5 bot machs using a AWOXer, okay i like that idea |
Maksmad
Perkone Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:09:22 -
[86] - Quote
WHat rank will be the new command destroyers skill?
Also will you rename Command Ships skill to Command Cruisers? |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2407
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:10:04 -
[87] - 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 :(
It's not over the top. It's hilarious and moreover, some needed risk to that community.
If we expect fleets to offensively scram these down, or each other, why then is it unreasonable for us to expect the same of incusioners? |
Zaed Trevize
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:10:24 -
[88] - Quote
1) Go as close as you can to the logis
2) Activate magic module
3) ???
4)Profit
|
Matt Faithbringer
Ravens Of Faith and Light
24
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:13:36 -
[89] - 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 :(
Why? Why cannot the incursion fleet scram each other? How exactly would you be able to destroy them then? |
Lumpymayo
Jebediah Kerman's Junkyard and Spaceship Parts Co. I N F A M O U S
103
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:14:47 -
[90] - Quote
I feel like they need a CPU reduction bonus for command processors. Fitting 2 links will make these things so weak, and fitting 2 links with some tank, DCU and MWD doesn't seem reasonable to me.
I am assuming the cpu from this screenshot. http://i.imgur.com/Ha2IfjO.png |
|
Rosal Milag
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
10
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:15:11 -
[91] - Quote
afkalt wrote: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 :( It's not over the top. It's hilarious and moreover, some needed risk to that community.
When there is no counterplay, its over the top. Specifically referring to the ability of these destroyers to warp into an incursion fight, activate without anyone stopping them and killing the fleet as the logi is now 100km away and useless.
In low and null, as soon as the destroyer lands, its able to be killed. In high sec, you get concorded. Even a criminal timer when it activates isn't enough, both for the fleet to kill it or for it to activate before concord kills it in certain systems. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2409
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:17:17 -
[92] - Quote
Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote: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 :( It's not over the top. It's hilarious and moreover, some needed risk to that community. When there is no counterplay, its over the top. Specifically referring to the ability of these destroyers to warp into an incursion fight, activate without anyone stopping them and killing the fleet as the logi is now 100km away and useless. In low and null, as soon as the destroyer lands, its able to be killed. In high sec, you get concorded. Even a criminal timer when it activates isn't enough, both for the fleet to kill it or for it to activate before concord kills it in certain systems.
There is instant counterplay.
You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time.
Again, if you can expect combat fleets to do this, you can JUST as easily expect incursion fleets to do this.
ed: And it should only go suspect, imo. |
Morwen Lagann
Tyrathlion Interstellar
1587
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:19:04 -
[93] - Quote
Haven't seen it asked, so - what's the expected deal with Command Destroyers, Micro Jump Field Generators, and (official) tournaments?
I'd personally make the assumption that the destroyers themselves will be allowed but that the MJFG module would not be; is this accurate, or would we have one of the other two options - that the Command Destroyer is banned in its entirety, or that the MJFG module is legal to fit on them (which could result in some comedy, but not particularly good TV)?
Morwen Lagann
CEO, Tyrathlion Interstellar
Owner, The Golden Masque
|
Alyssia Benar
Vision Inc Hole Control
30
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:19:49 -
[94] - Quote
Zockhandra wrote:Alyssia Benar wrote:Another Question: Can you activate it from within a Force Field to jump ships out? Oh god, dragging out 5 bot machs using a AWOXer, okay i like that idea And you wouldn't even have to burn that Char because there is no need to get on the killmail. ;) |
Cephei Kells
Black Omega Security The OSS
28
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:20:03 -
[95] - 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 :(
Sure would be a shame if a fleet comp like one from an incursion would have to stick half its dudes into anti-mjd ships to counter this exciting new gameplay. |
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising Decayed Orbit
115
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:21:21 -
[96] - Quote
afkalt wrote:You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time.
Again, if you can expect combat fleets to do this, you can JUST as easily expect incursion fleets to do this.
ed: And it should only go suspect, imo.
only works if they go suspect already during spool up. and then you have a *5* second window to lock the thing and scram it.that means your webbing loki or so needs to be with the bulk of the fleet. and if e.g. the lokis are a bit behind the main bulk fleet (let's say 20km) and the loki cant get into range to stop the dessy fast enough ... it jumps away the logis and leaving the normal ships to die. so turtle up is the only real option then to make warp scrambling as counter work. |
Meltmind2
NED-Clan Goonswarm Federation
51
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:22:22 -
[97] - Quote
Question on the MJFG: will spooling up the module increase the sigradius of the parent ship by 50% like the current MJDs? |
Zockhandra
Jewish Zeppelin Mafia
20
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:22:37 -
[98] - Quote
Alyssia Benar wrote:Zockhandra wrote:Alyssia Benar wrote:Another Question: Can you activate it from within a Force Field to jump ships out? Oh god, dragging out 5 bot machs using a AWOXer, okay i like that idea And you wouldn't even have to burn that Char because there is no need to get on the killmail. ;)
I take it back
Doooooooooooooooooo eeeeeeeeeeeeeet
Make them Alive Mr Rise!
|
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising Decayed Orbit
115
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:22:55 -
[99] - Quote
Morwen Lagann wrote:Haven't seen it asked, so - what's the expected deal with Command Destroyers, Micro Jump Field Generators, and (official) tournaments?
I'd personally make the assumption that the destroyers themselves will be allowed but that the MJFG module would not be; is this accurate, or would we have one of the other two options - that the Command Destroyer is banned in its entirety, or that the MJFG module is legal to fit on them (which could result in some comedy, but not particularly good TV)?
TBH ... it could even be a viable module during the tournament... if the MJD usage in the amarr championship is any indication. and it would give frigs and dessies even more of an important task. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2409
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:25:00 -
[100] - Quote
Airi Cho wrote:afkalt wrote:You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time.
Again, if you can expect combat fleets to do this, you can JUST as easily expect incursion fleets to do this.
ed: And it should only go suspect, imo. only works if they go suspect already during spool up. and then you have a *5* second window to lock the thing and scram it.that means your webbing loki or so needs to be with the bulk of the fleet. and if e.g. the lokis are a bit behind the main bulk fleet (let's say 20km) and the loki cant get into range to stop the dessy fast enough ... it jumps away the logis and leaving the normal ships to die. so turtle up is the only real option then to make warp scrambling as counter work.
Which they should (go flashy at activation).
It's sure be swell if there was a new module script coming that allowed 35+ km scrams. Man that would make these more than manageable.
But wait, your isk/hour, right?
Your entire argument falters because you're under the EXACT same situation and problem as any fleet, ANYWHERE provided they go flashy at spool up, which they would because actions are tied to activations, not effects.
If it is reasonable to expect fleets in low, null and WH space to lock (and tackle) these on land, the same level of reasonableness MUST therefore apply to incursions.
But wait, your isk/hour, right? |
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
2276
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:27:52 -
[101] - Quote
Question: will MJFG use show up on killmails?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising Decayed Orbit
115
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:28:06 -
[102] - Quote
I dont run incursion. the difference is ... the fleet compositions you will normally find in null/lowsec will include tackle already. |
Arla Sarain
699
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:28:11 -
[103] - Quote
I get the bitter feeling that this detracts from dedicated probers utility. The ability to act as a positioning tool and a warpin was pretty uch the only reason to bring a prober to a fight, seeing as how easy it is to evade probes otherwise. Now having a prober ongrid seems pretty redundant. |
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising Decayed Orbit
115
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:29:33 -
[104] - Quote
Arla Sarain wrote:I get the bitter feeling that this detracts from dedicated probers utility. The ability to act as a positioning tool and a warpin was pretty uch the only reason to bring a prober to a fight, seeing as how easy it is to evade probes otherwise. Now having a prober ongrid seems pretty redundant.
Probers will have so many other good uses than just blinking your fleet 100km. |
Hendrink Collie
Blood Oath Foundation Adaptation.
76
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:30:39 -
[105] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote: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 :( It's not over the top. It's hilarious and moreover, some needed risk to that community. When there is no counterplay, its over the top. Specifically referring to the ability of these destroyers to warp into an incursion fight, activate without anyone stopping them and killing the fleet as the logi is now 100km away and useless. In low and null, as soon as the destroyer lands, its able to be killed. In high sec, you get concorded. Even a criminal timer when it activates isn't enough, both for the fleet to kill it or for it to activate before concord kills it in certain systems. There is instant counterplay. You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time. Again, if you can expect combat fleets to do this, you can JUST as easily expect incursion fleets to do this. ed: And it should only go suspect, imo.
Luckily incursion fleets rarely go into lowsec/nullsec where you can use the module
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2409
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:31:26 -
[106] - Quote
Airi Cho wrote:I dont run incursion. the difference is ... the fleet compositions you will normally find in null/lowsec will include tackle already.
So it comes down to isk/hour and not wanting to pay that HIC pilot.
Also, those fleets tend not to run tackle because the big tussles are over assets and leaving the field loses the asset. They will also require refitting/adapting to these.
Hitting incursion isk/hour is NOT a good reason to deny high sec access to these. The counters are there, if people are too lazy or too dumb, or too cheap to use them then they deserve to die in a fire. |
NearNihil
Jump Drive Appreciation Society Test Alliance Please Ignore
145
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:33:40 -
[107] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Their weapon systems will be missile or drone based, like their base hulls. Now, this question has probably been asked before, but... why is this a thing now and not for the existing interdictors? I want lasers on the Heretic, dammit. |
Quindaster
Infernal Laboratory Infernal Octopus
120
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:34:06 -
[108] - Quote
Omg...new crazy drug idea from CCP...
It wasn't enough to see here uncatchable t3 destroyers, now we will see fleets of 50 frigs or destroyers jumping on 100+100+100km every 10 seconda and back, and till you try to lock them - they jump out. Zero kills, but CCP happy - they can show to EVE-Online owners "how they work hard...".
Most of people will not even undock to fight with frigs or destroyrs - it's boring for most of players who more then 2 years old, even crusers. No reason to risk own ships for this cheap destroyers or crusers, no one will undock for them, except some crazy noobs in zero space.
Would be better if CCP start to think how to bring back old middle scale fight in EVE, because most of old players leave EVE and I bored of it too and will leave too for other more intresting games, because after 8 years of gaming CCP did nothing for old players - always just nerf-nerf-nerf and CCP only play in database modifications and they call it "new patch" cheap and easy way to do nothing for CCP.
We have 100 different ships now in dock, but we do not use them, becauase 90% of them - useless now. Most of them I still didn't refite after most of stupid CCP patches, because noone have power to refit 200 ships and change they's fitting after each new patch in 50 different systems and stations. If CCP this we have nothing to do and will do it - they are WRONG !
Even if clever people try to give some ideas for CCP how to change this boring docking game - CCP never listen, for this people leave and most of clever and old players stop to write on foruns, because we all know it's useless spending of own time.
This fight in EVE more and more short, you spend hours on waiting and 2-5 min fighting. CCP think it FUN and nerf ships HP...not, it's not fun. Fun when you can spend 5 min on waiting and 30 minute fighting.
Where is walking in stations? Fighting in stations? Where is building cities on planets like in ANNO 2070? Where is Tech 2 capitals, supercapitals? Where is different type of weapons for big ships? Where is T3 BS ? Where is fighting arena where anyone can join from station and fight with random people? and so on and so on. CCP did NOTHING in last 3 years, absolutely nothing. They do now this kind of things which they was need to do 7 years ago, like adding to direct scan that ray on map where you can see where you scanning. But no, CCP show this things like something awesome and NEW in 2015... CCP - voke up. it's not 1999 out there ! This things was fun 16 years ago, but even in 1999 we had better games. |
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising Decayed Orbit
115
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:37:39 -
[109] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Hitting incursion isk/hour is NOT a good reason to deny high sec access to these. The counters are there, if people are too lazy or too dumb, or too cheap to use them then they deserve to die in a fire.
if you read my post ... you would have noticed that incursions were my minor gripe with this. there is a lot of game play that doesn't allow much free movement. (mining with orca on field comes to mind.) there is also many ships which by their nature are quite vulnerable to MJFG without having a proper counter to them. DST, orcas. I assume freighters are excempted by "is a capital".
and "because it is funny to blink them away" is not a good argument *for* MJFG in highsec either.
When you consider "is game mechanic X useful in highsec/lowsec/0.0" you should also look at what the activities in those areas require. |
Nina Latina
ECHO MOB
3
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:37:48 -
[110] - Quote
Will make good use in fw/lowsec space. |
|
handige harrie
Hedion University Amarr Empire
347
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:38:32 -
[111] - Quote
One of the most interesting additions to eve in a long time, I don't think Highsec should be excluded however.
There already is counterplay to the module everywhere in eve and that is not being close together. Since Incursion fleets are not static, they are just as able to spread out as anyone else is. Just add that as soon as you activate the module you go blinky and can be shot without concord interfering in highsec and give a penalty to the activation spool up, so instead of 9 seconds, it'll take like 30 in highsec for it to activate.
Now as an incursion pilot you have time and opportunity to defend yourself. A bit more risk and need to pay attention while earning the highest isk/hour per pilot in highsec by far is not a bad thing.
Because the module doesn't stop the affected ship from doing what it's doing, like aligning/moving or anything else, getting your industrial moved 100km shouldn't be too big of a deal really and with 30 seconds before activation you have plenty of time to react anyway.
--
If you use the module on a ship with an active cyno, will the cyno move too?
Baddest poster ever
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2410
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:40:01 -
[112] - Quote
Airi Cho wrote:afkalt wrote:Hitting incursion isk/hour is NOT a good reason to deny high sec access to these. The counters are there, if people are too lazy or too dumb, or too cheap to use them then they deserve to die in a fire. if you read my post ... you would have noticed that incursions were my minor gripe with this. there is a lot of game play that doesn't allow much free movement. (mining with orca on field comes to mind.) there is also many ships which by their nature are quite vulnerable to MJFG without having a proper counter to them. DST, orcas. I assume freighters are excempted by "is a capital". and "because it is funny to blink them away" is not a good argument *for* MJFG in highsec either. When you consider "is game mechanic X useful in highsec/lowsec/0.0" you should also look at what the activities in those areas require.
It brings "good" and "bad" to highsec, depending on your situation.
It will really hurt station game players. It will allow a solid anti-bump counterplay. It lets you blink away neutral RR.
It's not just about one thing. It would bring a lot of cool stuff, but incursions were cited as Rise's concern so I dealt with that first. |
Sentient Blade
Crisis Atmosphere Coalition of the Unfortunate
1558
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:40:52 -
[113] - Quote
I love everything these represent. A real shake-up of the meta.
It reminds me of the Rooks & Kings video about pipe bombing "What about firing ship sized bullets". Except these will be more like ship-sized pool balls.
They are going to be absolutely lethal on station undocks. That one might require a preemptive balance pass otherwise we'll end up with cloaked command destroyers sitting outside every station. Will freighters / capital industrials be effected or are they considered capitals for this?
What will the overheat bonus provide? There's a few good options to my mind, either reduced spool up time, increased pull radius, increased jump range (150km maybe?).
They will be hugely disruptive to capital warfare too. I can imagine the price of these ships is going to go up and down like crazy as alliances sacrifice hundreds of them to clear the bubbles and interdictors from their trapped supercapital fleets.
Will it have an almost-obligatory micro-jump-area-disruptor deployable that can interfear with its operation?
Looks fun. |
Ria Nieyli
Nieyli Enterprises
35317
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:48:13 -
[114] - Quote
So, will these things be able to only fit one link module regardless of how much command processors stick on them or am I reading this wrong? |
Jin alPatar
Entertainment 7wenty
73
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:50:52 -
[115] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote: restrictions you need to know are that you cannot use this module in high sec
Can we give the MJFG an option to be scripted to work like a normal MJD that can be used in HiSec? |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
3236
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:50:54 -
[116] - Quote
Are the drone boats not getting drone HP bonuses? or is it a typo?
Second if I may suggest a change to the Magus
Change the drone bandwidth to 50Mbps and give it a 75m3 drone bay, change the drone damage bonus to a tracking bonus and then give the ship 4 turret hard points. The DPS is comparable but it gives it some separation to the Pontifex
If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
|
Rosal Milag
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
10
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:53:15 -
[117] - Quote
afkalt wrote:
There is instant counterplay.
You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time.
Again, if you can expect combat fleets to do this, you can JUST as easily expect incursion fleets to do this.
ed: And it should only go suspect, imo.
Problem is, in high sec, a gank attempt targets one ship. Yes with a large enough suicide fleet, you can kill an entire incursion fleet. But that is committing numbers and can be noticed on D-scan.
With these destroyers, they can kill a whole fleet in ~5 seconds. With one ship. Tell me how that is not overpowered. I don't care what your thoughts are on incursion runners, that is not the point here. One ship, in high sec, should not be able to effectively kill 10 others illegally in 5 seconds.
PvP fleets are fit to take down PvP ships. A PvE fleet is not designed nor intended to engage a PvP target, especially a destroyer sized target with battleship targeting. |
Aiyshimin
Fistful of Finns Paisti Syndicate
588
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:54:13 -
[118] - Quote
Ria Nieyli wrote:So, will these things be able to only fit one link module regardless of how much command processors stick on them or am I reading this wrong?
They can fit one link without command processors, just like BCs. Adding more command processors enables more links, but most of these can't actually do that due to slot layout and fittings.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2410
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:55:45 -
[119] - Quote
Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote:
There is instant counterplay.
You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time.
Again, if you can expect combat fleets to do this, you can JUST as easily expect incursion fleets to do this.
ed: And it should only go suspect, imo.
Problem is, in high sec, a gank attempt targets one ship. Yes with a large enough suicide fleet, you can kill an entire incursion fleet. But that is committing numbers and can be noticed on D-scan. With these destroyers, they can kill a whole fleet in ~5 seconds. With one ship. Tell me how that is not overpowered. I don't care what your thoughts are on incursion runners, that is not the point here. One ship, in high sec, should not be able to effectively kill 10 others illegally in 5 seconds. PvP fleets are fit to take down PvP ships. A PvE fleet is not designed nor intended to engage a PvP target, especially a destroyer sized target with battleship targeting.
So bring a SeBod HIC. It's not exactly hard to stop these.
Maybe, >gasp< you need to adapt your fittings. The horror. |
MuraSaki Siki
Minmatar Ship Construction Services
64
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:56:32 -
[120] - Quote
1. would command DD move a cyno field with it? and the ship activating cyno?
2. how about marauder with bastion ON? |
|
TinkerHell
Nocturnal Romance Cynosural Field Theory.
208
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:58:25 -
[121] - Quote
Im sorry but i absolutely hate the entire idea of these. Having a ship that has such a powerful ability with a 5s activation time and a tank bonus, reasonable hitpoints, decent amount of slots for tank AND a small sig radius so larger ships cant even lock it in time is beyond crazy. As far as i see it, these ships are another huge penalty to the slower bulkier doctrines of Eve. Id seriously have the consider replacing the ECCM off our logi fits and fitting a scram, then having a scram buddy to tackle ourselves....From the fear of a single ship on the field im going to have to consider tackling my fleet myself? That is completely ridiculous.
A question i have is, say i have 5 Command Destroyers and they all activate their mod 1 second after each other, will the mod drag the other 4 Command Destroyers 100km? Which then will land with 1s left on their activation jumping them again? So i can travel 500km in 5 seconds?
Im sorry but i really see these as promoting more nano kiting, sniping and scimitar gangs rather than guardians, BS, BCs and capitals. (capitals because your much needed support can just be randomly jumped away and you have no way of getting to the 100km off) BS gangs with triage with these destroyers running around? Eurgh. |
Sarah Flynt
131
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 15:59:59 -
[122] - Quote
Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote: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 :( It's not over the top. It's hilarious and moreover, some needed risk to that community. When there is no counterplay, its over the top.
But there is lots of counterplay!
First: You could fit a scram on every ship or alternatively use an alt in an Arazu to 100% protect you. Wait, you can't be arsed to use an alt to protect your multi-billion ship? Then you don't deserve it in the first place! If you don't have an alt, get friends! I'm sure they love this kind of gameplay.
Second: You could also dscan every three seconds and warp out if such a ship appears on it.
Third: you could gank it!
Fourth: you could bring your own Command Destroyer and jump the whole fleet back within seconds
That's four counters to this which seems pretty unbalanced in the opposite direction!!!
Wait, this isn't the freighter bumping/ganking thread? Nevermind then ...
Sick of High-Sec gankers? Join the public channel Anti-ganking and the dedicated intel channel Gank-Intel !
|
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers Goonswarm Federation
269
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:02:51 -
[123] - Quote
Airi Cho wrote: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 :( How can you discriminate against lowsec and 0.0 incursion fleets?:p
First:
You do have groups in low and Null that run Incursions when they appear and what of your new shiny Drifter Incursions? Why are Hi-sec Incursion runners getting preferential treatment? If certain low, Null, and Wormhole groups got preferential treatment and safeties added specifically for them so new ships wouldnt effect them torches would get lit. If we have to learn new tricks for our shinies fighting drifters and Sansha invasions they can adapt and do so as well.
I Mean could this not also kill the Drifter groups and future "group PVE" sites for null that was mentioned coming in the future, what about those in wormholes? These could easily murder WH runner setups. Why does only one form of PVE get special treatment? Its Risk vs reward, stop removing risk.
Second onto the ships:
How come these stats seem to of been lazily done? I am all for these ships don't misunderstand. But they are very ... cookie cut is the term we use here in New York in the Project Management field. When everything is designed same and only slightly modified when needed. You will see the process used in commercial locations so its patrons are not confused with layouts in different retail, financial, and grocery stores of different companies. A simplification process.
Gallente + Amarr = both resist fit + drones
Caldari + Minmitar = both resist fit + missile
The hull choices seems chosen over the simplicity of cut & paste for 2 ship types vs making 4 unique ships and play styles. Gallente could of continued its trait of Armor Repair bonus keeping Amarr unique with resist, same with Caldari for resist and Minmitar getting a boost bonus.
I know these are supposed to be limited in combat effectiveness but the Magus and Pontifax will especially hurt with its fragile weapon systems. They could of at least received 10% bonus to Drone hit points and damage.
I would of thoroughly enjoyed seeing these ships with less cut and paste and more individualism to them. As it is now I can Jump into any of these new ships and only need to ever touch two of them to get a feel.
I hope this cookie cutter approach will not be the new Meta going into the future. Its a step backwards for an MMO. |
Ra's al-ghul Demons-Head
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:04:42 -
[124] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:...the big restrictions you need to know are that you cannot use this module in high sec,...
Awww there goes my dream of pulling gankers away from the jita undocks |
Dirk Magnum
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
515
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:06:46 -
[125] - Quote
Drone bonus on a ship specialized to leap out of drone range. Does MJD'ing break contact with drones or can you still recall them? (Didn't read entire thread before posting.)
-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á "LIVE FAST DIE."
- traditional Minmatar ethos [citation needed]
|
Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
214
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:06:56 -
[126] - Quote
Questions
1) Number of warfare links per dessie? Command ships get 3 links per ship without command processors. Without the special bonus you need a command proc for each additional link above 1. Obviously command processors are not an option on dessies because PG. So one link per dessie? It doesn't seem like a reasonable choice for a link ship, since to at least have a full, say, skirmish set you are going to need a fleet with a skilled fleet commander. As in a person who has fleet commander 1 which means the person has wing commander 5 which most likely means the person has a full rack of leadership skills and can fly a booster T3 with hyperspatial rigs, and the point of using a dessie with a single link becomes moot.
2) Blueprints for MJFG. I assume it's the same as MJDs - BPC drops from data sites only?
3) Command dessie manufacturing is broken on SiSi. Can't be built on stations and in advanced small ship construction arrays. ETA on fixes? Or maybe there are some intended restrictions on manufacturing in place? |
Rosal Milag
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
10
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:07:37 -
[127] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote:
There is instant counterplay.
You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time.
Again, if you can expect combat fleets to do this, you can JUST as easily expect incursion fleets to do this.
ed: And it should only go suspect, imo.
Problem is, in high sec, a gank attempt targets one ship. Yes with a large enough suicide fleet, you can kill an entire incursion fleet. But that is committing numbers and can be noticed on D-scan. With these destroyers, they can kill a whole fleet in ~5 seconds. With one ship. Tell me how that is not overpowered. I don't care what your thoughts are on incursion runners, that is not the point here. One ship, in high sec, should not be able to effectively kill 10 others illegally in 5 seconds. PvP fleets are fit to take down PvP ships. A PvE fleet is not designed nor intended to engage a PvP target, especially a destroyer sized target with battleship targeting. So bring a SeBod HIC. It's not exactly hard to stop these. Maybe, >gasp< you need to adapt your fittings. The horror. But again, what this comes down to is "MAH ISK/HOUR!!!!!"
I don't care about incursions, I don't run them.
The bigger point is that ONE ship can, without much warning or notice, wreck an entire incursion fleet. Currently, you need to provide a level of trust (joining a fleet for fleet warps), do something to become a legal target (suspect/killright), or be specifically targeted to lose your ship.
If this class of ship is allowed to use its MJD in high sec, then bombs should be allowed, as they are as indiscriminate and provide at least 10 seconds of warning for ships to get out of the way.
This isn't about who's fun is more important, incursion or gankers. Its recognizing player trends and possible usage cases and ensuring that there is a level playing field for PvP.
You want to kill an incursion fleet, put some effort into it and not 5 seconds to glory. Risk = reward. And 5 seconds is not nearly long enough for the billions from a dead incursion fleet.
|
Liam Inkuras
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
1623
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:08:33 -
[128] - Quote
Nice
I wear my goggles at night.
Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone
|
Terra Chrall
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
57
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:09:19 -
[129] - Quote
Querns wrote:Question: will MJFG use show up on killmails? Yes, in the same column as webifiers, logi, painters, points, and bubbles. Oh wait..... then that would be a no. Killmail have always only shown those that did damage to the ship, not the support around those damage dealing ships. |
SaB0TaG3
TYR. Exodus.
10
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:11:39 -
[130] - Quote
Does the spool-up have an obvious effect we can see in-space or do we have to zoom in on every ship to look for MJD? The current problem with MJDs is you can't both look for MJD effect and pilot your ship properly. |
|
ROSSLINDEN0
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
294
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:12:07 -
[131] - Quote
So you can mjd people into a pos but can you mjd people out of a pos? |
Owen Levanth
Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration
419
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:15:08 -
[132] - Quote
I love both the new ships and the new modules.
But: Excluding them from HighSec is a bad idea. Excluding them because of Incursions? Seriously?
Two easy solutions:
1. End all incursions in HighSec. (The harsh one)
2. Tell incursion runners that scrams exist, show them pictures etc. (The mild one)
Problem solved, now HighSec can have them, too! |
Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
214
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:18:38 -
[133] - Quote
Owen Levanth wrote: 2. Tell incursion runners that scrams exist, show them pictures etc. (The mild one)
Scramming whites in hisec, really?
Even if we forgo jumping non-aggressed players, there's still an option to daisychain a trigger NPC into the sunset without any possibility for the victim to retaliate. |
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers Goonswarm Federation
269
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:23:38 -
[134] - Quote
Quindaster wrote:Omg...new crazy drug idea from CCP...
It wasn't enough to see here uncatchable t3 destroyers, now we will see fleets of 50 frigs or destroyers jumping on 100+100+100km every 10 seconda and back, and till you try to lock them - they jump out. Zero kills, but CCP happy - they can show to EVE-Online owners "how they work hard...".
Most of people will not even undock to fight with frigs or destroyrs - it's boring for most of players who more then 2 years old, even crusers. No reason to risk own ships for this cheap destroyers or crusers, no one will undock for them, except some crazy noobs in zero space.
Would be better if CCP start to think how to bring back old middle scale fight in EVE, because most of old players leave EVE and I bored of it too and will leave too for other more intresting games, because after 8 years of gaming CCP did nothing for old players - always just nerf-nerf-nerf and CCP only play in database modifications and they call it "new patch" cheap and easy way to do nothing for CCP.
We have 100 different ships now in dock, but we do not use them, becauase 90% of them - useless now. Most of them I still didn't refite after most of stupid CCP patches, because noone have power to refit 200 ships and change they's fitting after each new patch in 50 different systems and stations. If CCP this we have nothing to do and will do it - they are WRONG !
Even if clever people try to give some ideas for CCP how to change this boring docking game - CCP never listen, for this people leave and most of clever and old players stop to write on foruns, because we all know it's useless spending of own time.
This fight in EVE more and more short, you spend hours on waiting and 2-5 min fighting. CCP think it FUN and nerf ships HP...not, it's not fun. Fun when you can spend 5 min on waiting and 30 minute fighting.
Where is walking in stations? Fighting in stations? Where is building cities on planets like in ANNO 2070? Where is Tech 2 capitals, supercapitals? Where is different type of weapons for big ships? Where is T3 BS ? Where is fighting arena where anyone can join from station and fight with random people? and so on and so on. CCP did NOTHING in last 3 years, absolutely nothing. They do now this kind of things which they was need to do 7 years ago, like adding to direct scan that ray on map where you can see where you scanning. But no, CCP show this things like something awesome and NEW in 2015... CCP - voke up. it's not 1999 out there ! This things was fun 16 years ago, but even in 1999 we had better games.
He's right for the majority of it. Especially concerning middle scale combat. Long gone are the thorax roams. If you do catch anything mid tier its the same ships, cyna or Ishtar. Everything has concentrated on the ADD we need candy now meta. Everytime CCP makes a change to middle grade ships (BC's recently) they nerf it quickly with these small ships. It does make me wonder why I trained or maintain the sub when I am unable to make effective use of the majority of my SP. Many of my peers of same age or older only resub for a month if a Major scale fight will hit then its back on the shelf and talking on facebook to em again. :(
But Quin, that is Todays EVE my friend. They don't want the good battles of old. They want 1-2 min skirmishes and make EVE into a form of Space DoTA, they mention many times about eSporting it. It will be amusing at least statewide as eSports are falling under doping regs. How many of eves player base are willingly to get **** tested and blood drawn at an eSport event for say EVE vegas? Just to push CCPs future meta. Guess a new location outside of Nevada will have to be used.
|
Vic Vorlon
Aideron Robotics
39
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:24:27 -
[135] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Arline Kley wrote:CCP Rise wrote:When it finishes. Doesn't matter what happens during spool up. What about chaining spools? So CD#1 starts to spool up, and then just before it fires CD#2 starts to spool its one up This works, can't wait to see what's possible with it.
I expect Rooks and Kings to be all over this like smart-bombing Rohks on a gate. |
Tosawa Komarui
No Vacancies
5
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:25:47 -
[136] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Cephei Kells wrote:Please tell me I'm not the only one who sees this as another way to attempt to limit fleet sizes/tactics? More than any module/mechanic I've worked on, this is an attempt to expand fleet sizes and tactics, not limit them. I believe (as long as the numbers end up somewhat balanced) this is one of the most promising 'sandbox' module/ship additions we've done recently and the fact that we have no idea what players will do with it feels really great and exciting.
is there any chance the mjd cycles range can be modified, say a few scrips for 30-60-80km? |
Mostlyharmlesss
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
220
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:26:34 -
[137] - Quote
This is going to further kill battleship doctrines since they will most likely not be able to hit the Destoyers until the spool up time have finished and by then the battleships will be MJD'ed away from the logi and picked off one by one.
It goes hand-in-hand with kiting doctrines that CCP has worked towards essentially meaning everything slow will essentially die.
This is going to lead to a lot of frustration from people who will not be able to do anything to counter it and by now we know frustrated players don't speak up, they quit the game.
Follow me on Twitter for the latest regarding GoonSwarm Federation and our recruitment drives!
|
Azure and Or
Venus Brokerage
0
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:28:39 -
[138] - Quote
Will the mjd bubble module give players a weapons timer? Since CCP is embracing the spirit of having t2 ships somewhat mirror their t1 counterparts will the flycatcher be transitioning to a rail platform? It seems a bit boring to have all of the shiny caldari destroyers spitting out missiles. |
Terra Chrall
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
57
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:30:06 -
[139] - Quote
handige harrie wrote:One of the most interesting additions to eve in a long time, I don't think Highsec should be excluded however.
There already is counterplay to the module everywhere in eve and that is not being close together. Since Incursion fleets are not static, they are just as able to spread out as anyone else is. Just add that as soon as you activate the module you go blinky and can be shot without concord interfering in highsec and give a penalty to the activation spool up, so instead of 9 seconds, it'll take like 30 in highsec for it to activate.
Now as an incursion pilot you have time and opportunity to defend yourself. A bit more risk and need to pay attention while earning the highest isk/hour per pilot in highsec by far is not a bad thing.
Because the module doesn't stop the affected ship from doing what it's doing, like aligning/moving or anything else, getting your industrial moved 100km shouldn't be too big of a deal really and with 30 seconds before activation you have plenty of time to react anyway. I was trying to think of ways to allow this into High Sec, and I considered adding time to the spool up like you suggest, but then realized it would be easily circumvented. Since they can be daisy chained, you could take 3 CDs 200k away spool up the timers with 2 sec between each and when the group lands on their target it would jump away in a couple of seconds with it's prey.
I think it would be cool to have it in high sec even for friendly use, but it could set up so many cases for abuse that I completely understand CCP's decision. I can see it being used to grief all sorts of non pvp activities. Jump that kiting mission runner right into NPCs. Jump that AB fit BS 100km from the gate he needs to use in deadspace.
Unless you can scram yourself, the N+1 makes these uncounterable for a solo ship against multiple CDs. And the current High Sec game play is not built around equipping for PvP.
Now if you made using a MJFG in highsec a CONCORD offense, then using it to suicide gank could have interesting game play. But having it leave the ComDesie unaffected by CONCORD response leaves it open to griefing and abuse. |
Verse Askold
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
6
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:32:06 -
[140] - Quote
awesome thingy :D especially for WH pvp where a lot of times a whole fleet sits at 0km on a WH which is easily within the 6km range also highsec connection campers can be blinged off uh uh, can we have new visual/audio effects for those and not the same as MJD-¦s CCPLS
for the highsec issue, i would love to see them in highsec as well since wardeccers could benefit from this module as well i totally understand the problem with blinking a ship out of logi range in 5sec and that this 5sec are not enough time to react propperly maybe this could be solved with the MJFG(i hope that right^^) giving a general suspect timer when the module is fitted on a ship and is online, that way people who dont inted to use it in highsec but want to buy it there and fly it into lowsec could fit it and offline it to not get a suspect timer make onlining it take 99.9% cap, that way the ship has to wait some time to be able to activate it after onlining it(i know cap boosters would solve that, but it would definitely give some more time to react)
aaand i-¦m really looking forward to blink some geckos out of control range and scoop them or take with me most of the dps of a gila fleet
mwahahaha, those things gonna be awesome
|
|
Samsara Nolte
Random Thinking Union Random Thinking
30
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:32:56 -
[141] - Quote
I-¦m quite sure those new Ships will offer a whole lot of new tactical possibilites for fleets of all sizes - and im quite thrilled to see them in action - but there is also concern.
Have you considered what this ship is gonna do for the Wormhole Resident especially during sieges of your homesystem ? It is gonna become really hard to fight under the guns of your Citadel because your fleet can be split apart in all directions and unlike elsewhere a lost ship and a lost capsule means, when under sieges that you are out of the fight (and therefore most likely the whole siege) for good. We can-¦t just clone jump back in our wormhole - Deciding over the succes or failure of a siege is one decisive battle where the defender is in generall throwing everything they have in the ring - knowing when they are pod killed there is gonna be no redo - than an attacker knowing what they are doing won-¦t ever allow you back in if they have a say in it.
I for one don-¦t think it is a good idea to let those new destroyers decide the fate of such fights, and therefore the fate of all the stored assets in it, by a simple cycle of their module and perhaps some lucky falcon jam preventing you from scraming it, and therefore from using this module. You have to remember, most of the time the only Defenders advantage in j-space is, that you get to use the big ships (bigger ships than the aggresor - and those things are awfully bad at locking something) and your, in the future, manned citadel removing both those advantages through the introduction of one ship is awful.
So i urge you to considere a zone around citadels where this module is prohibited from use, or at least consider somekind of field around Citadels greatly increasing the cycle time of them - giving the defender some well needed edge in those fights. Because for Wormhole Corps, a fight over a citadel is gonna be a fight for their survival and that is by no means and exaggeration. |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
242
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:34:59 -
[142] - Quote
Terra Chrall wrote:Querns wrote:Question: will MJFG use show up on killmails? Yes, in the same column as webifiers, logi, painters, points, and bubbles. Oh wait..... then that would be a no. Killmail have always only shown those that did damage to the ship, not the support around those damage dealing ships.
only logi and bubbles out of your example don't get on kills |
MukkBarovian
Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion
44
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:36:46 -
[143] - Quote
Does the, "95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links," apply to command processors as well? |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
2276
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:37:23 -
[144] - Quote
Terra Chrall wrote:Querns wrote:Question: will MJFG use show up on killmails? Yes, in the same column as webifiers, logi, painters, points, and bubbles. Oh wait..... then that would be a no. Killmail have always only shown those that did damage to the ship, not the support around those damage dealing ships. Except for the fact that points, webs, target painters, and bubbles all show up on killmails. Logi is the odd man out.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
214
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:37:34 -
[145] - Quote
Lady Rift wrote: only logi and bubbles out of your example don't get on kills
Bubbles do, but only if the victim tries to initiate warp when inside your bubble. |
Capqu
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
1187
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:37:54 -
[146] - Quote
any thought towards giving them the most powerful single link possible?
something like a 5% per lvl instead of 2%, since they are limited to 1
would mean you could run one link instead of the standard 4/5 in a wc/fc spot and focus on significantly buffing one specific area of your fleet
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
Sanders Schmittlaub
New Jovian Exploration Department A Band Apart.
15
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:38:42 -
[147] - Quote
Samsara Nolte wrote:I-¦m quite sure those new Ships will offer a whole lot of new tactical possibilites for fleets of all sizes - and im quite thrilled to see them in action - but there is also concern.
Have you considered what this ship is gonna do for the Wormhole Resident especially during sieges of your homesystem ? It is gonna become really hard to fight under the guns of your Citadel because your fleet can be split apart in all directions and unlike elsewhere a lost ship and a lost capsule means, when under sieges that you are out of the fight (and therefore most likely the whole siege) for good. We can-¦t just clone jump back in our wormhole - Deciding over the succes or failure of a siege is one decisive battle where the defender is in generall throwing everything they have in the ring - knowing when they are pod killed there is gonna be no redo - than an attacker knowing what they are doing won-¦t ever allow you back in if they have a say in it.
I for one don-¦t think it is a good idea to let those new destroyers decide the fate of such fights, and therefore the fate of all the stored assets in it, by a simple cycle of their module and perhaps some lucky falcon jam preventing you from scraming it, and therefore from using this module. You have to remember, most of the time the only Defenders advantage in j-space is, that you get to use the big ships (bigger ships than the aggresor - and those things are awfully bad at locking something) and your, in the future, manned citadel removing both those advantages through the introduction of one ship is awful.
So i urge you to considere a zone around citadels where this module is prohibited from use, or at least consider somekind of field around Citadels greatly increasing the cycle time of them - giving the defender some well needed edge in those fights. Because for Wormhole Corps, a fight over a citadel is gonna be a fight for their survival and that is by no means and exaggeration.
Scrams. They are called scrams.
Us scary wormhole people use them liberally. They turn off MJFG. |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
242
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:39:00 -
[148] - Quote
Torgeir Hekard wrote:Lady Rift wrote: only logi and bubbles out of your example don't get on kills
Bubbles do, but only if the victim tries to initiate warp when inside your bubble.
thanks for the info. dont do much in space where bubbles are allowed. |
Zockhandra
Jewish Zeppelin Mafia
20
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:41:09 -
[149] - Quote
Capqu wrote:any thought towards giving them the most powerful single link possible?
something like a 5% per lvl instead of 2%, since they are limited to 1
would mean you could run one link instead of the standard 4/5 in a wc/fc spot and focus on significantly buffing one specific area of your fleet
Whilst i get where your coming from, when these go into wormholes (lets use a C3 armor bonus one for example) will you be happy fighting a 40k ehp armor dessie? (okay figures are off but you get the idea) , or imagine boosts like that on specific types of T3 dessies. (svipul for example)
I think the current stats are a nice lead up to the battlecruiser level command vessels imo. |
Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
315
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:50:12 -
[150] - Quote
Does this mean that attack battlecruisers will now be able to use the Medium Micro Jump Drive module since now they will able to micro jump with the command destroyers now anyway? |
|
Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
341
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:50:12 -
[151] - Quote
Any particular reason the magus has more grid than the pontifex? It's flipped around with these compared to the tech 1 counterparts.....the dragoon has more grid than the algos. |
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers Goonswarm Federation
271
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:50:22 -
[152] - Quote
Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote:Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote:
There is instant counterplay.
You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time.
Again, if you can expect combat fleets to do this, you can JUST as easily expect incursion fleets to do this.
ed: And it should only go suspect, imo.
Problem is, in high sec, a gank attempt targets one ship. Yes with a large enough suicide fleet, you can kill an entire incursion fleet. But that is committing numbers and can be noticed on D-scan. With these destroyers, they can kill a whole fleet in ~5 seconds. With one ship. Tell me how that is not overpowered. I don't care what your thoughts are on incursion runners, that is not the point here. One ship, in high sec, should not be able to effectively kill 10 others illegally in 5 seconds. PvP fleets are fit to take down PvP ships. A PvE fleet is not designed nor intended to engage a PvP target, especially a destroyer sized target with battleship targeting. So bring a SeBod HIC. It's not exactly hard to stop these. Maybe, >gasp< you need to adapt your fittings. The horror. But again, what this comes down to is "MAH ISK/HOUR!!!!!" I don't care about incursions, I don't run them. The bigger point is that ONE ship can, without much warning or notice, wreck an entire incursion fleet. Currently, you need to provide a level of trust (joining a fleet for fleet warps), do something to become a legal target (suspect/killright), or be specifically targeted to lose your ship. If this class of ship is allowed to use its MJD in high sec, then bombs should be allowed, as they are as indiscriminate and provide at least 10 seconds of warning for ships to get out of the way. This isn't about who's fun is more important, incursion or gankers. Its recognizing player trends and possible usage cases and ensuring that there is a level playing field for PvP. You want to kill an incursion fleet, put some effort into it and not 5 seconds to glory. Risk = reward. And 5 seconds is not nearly long enough for the billions from a dead incursion fleet.
Hi-sec was not intended to be this big mass safety zone. It was intended that if you were bad, Concord punished you. I see more of CCP playing this role lately then Concord itself. Player engagement is what established this game, what grew this game. More and more this is removed due to safety nets needing to be put in place. You know whats a constant trend since eve got safer and player friendly? Less players. An amazing trend that started since the NPE and increased protections around all classes of space was the reduction of active players, of subscribed players, of fleets filling quick, of guys and gals to do content with.
May we stop this shyt and go back to what made eve popular in the days that filled its server? The days that filled fleets and voice channels? Stop holding everyones hand and let the players engage. It's what made EVE. Let the players relearn how to protect their ships. Let us relearn how to safeguard our assets. Get your filthy dev hand off mine and let me get ganked in my Blingdicator while chasing a mothership. If I got caught obviously my group wasnt watching the area. We didnt have gates or stations scouted, or warpins guarded. EVE is about choice, and risk, stop taking it away damnit.
I want the damn rush I had playing this game. I fight enough to log in. I used to get excited mining, there was risk. Gankers always were around, you paid attention in local , you slipped attention an extra twenty bucks when you had to go bio, hoped attention had you back while you were gone. You rushed that damn bathroom also. You had no safety switch, no warning for pvp. You had a decision to make, ruins someday or show humanity. That was your choice in EVE. You did not have to cross check the TOS, EULA, FORUMS, Reddit to make sure your combat wasnt going to be petitioned and be handed a 30 day vacation, because suddenly it was considered Griefing someone if you shot them while they were in the bathroom in the middle of the third shake. What you had to worry mercs were sent after you, or there corp. Bring back the days of players policing themselves. Bring back player engagement and actual risk. Give back the blood rush people kept thru the day. Kill off the monotony we now face. Let us go back to playing the game and stop deciding how it should be. That was never your selling point. Get the adults out of my sandbox!
|
Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
315
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:56:17 -
[153] - Quote
Incursions will be nerfed in the near future so they won't have to worry about their precious Incursion fleets. |
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers Goonswarm Federation
271
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:56:19 -
[154] - Quote
Samsara Nolte wrote:I-¦m quite sure those new Ships will offer a whole lot of new tactical possibilites for fleets of all sizes - and im quite thrilled to see them in action - but there is also concern.
Have you considered what this ship is gonna do for the Wormhole Resident especially during sieges of your homesystem ? It is gonna become really hard to fight under the guns of your Citadel because your fleet can be split apart in all directions and unlike elsewhere a lost ship and a lost capsule means, when under sieges that you are out of the fight (and therefore most likely the whole siege) for good. We can-¦t just clone jump back in our wormhole - Deciding over the succes or failure of a siege is one decisive battle where the defender is in generall throwing everything they have in the ring - knowing when they are pod killed there is gonna be no redo - than an attacker knowing what they are doing won-¦t ever allow you back in if they have a say in it.
I for one don-¦t think it is a good idea to let those new destroyers decide the fate of such fights, and therefore the fate of all the stored assets in it, by a simple cycle of their module and perhaps some lucky falcon jam preventing you from scraming it, and therefore from using this module. You have to remember, most of the time the only Defenders advantage in j-space is, that you get to use the big ships (bigger ships than the aggresor - and those things are awfully bad at locking something) and your, in the future, manned citadel removing both those advantages through the introduction of one ship is awful.
So i urge you to considere a zone around citadels where this module is prohibited from use, or at least consider somekind of field around Citadels greatly increasing the cycle time of them - giving the defender some well needed edge in those fights. Because for Wormhole Corps, a fight over a citadel is gonna be a fight for their survival and that is by no means and exaggeration.
If your a womrhole resident your chuckling at this. What wormholer isnt scram fit/ PVP fit? How would you not see this coming into your territory? Defensive bubbles, Long hic scram, arazu, proteus, any scram, all kill it, It's a 6k range, your point is 9k. If you cant stop this, you never belonged in the wormhole.
Get out of the wasteland deary, it's a lil rough here. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2416
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 16:59:29 -
[155] - Quote
Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote:Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote:
There is instant counterplay.
You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time.
Again, if you can expect combat fleets to do this, you can JUST as easily expect incursion fleets to do this.
ed: And it should only go suspect, imo.
Problem is, in high sec, a gank attempt targets one ship. Yes with a large enough suicide fleet, you can kill an entire incursion fleet. But that is committing numbers and can be noticed on D-scan. With these destroyers, they can kill a whole fleet in ~5 seconds. With one ship. Tell me how that is not overpowered. I don't care what your thoughts are on incursion runners, that is not the point here. One ship, in high sec, should not be able to effectively kill 10 others illegally in 5 seconds. PvP fleets are fit to take down PvP ships. A PvE fleet is not designed nor intended to engage a PvP target, especially a destroyer sized target with battleship targeting. So bring a SeBod HIC. It's not exactly hard to stop these. Maybe, >gasp< you need to adapt your fittings. The horror. But again, what this comes down to is "MAH ISK/HOUR!!!!!" I don't care about incursions, I don't run them. The bigger point is that ONE ship can, without much warning or notice, wreck an entire incursion fleet. Currently, you need to provide a level of trust (joining a fleet for fleet warps), do something to become a legal target (suspect/killright), or be specifically targeted to lose your ship. If this class of ship is allowed to use its MJD in high sec, then bombs should be allowed, as they are as indiscriminate and provide at least 10 seconds of warning for ships to get out of the way. This isn't about who's fun is more important, incursion or gankers. Its recognizing player trends and possible usage cases and ensuring that there is a level playing field for PvP. You want to kill an incursion fleet, put some effort into it and not 5 seconds to glory. Risk = reward. And 5 seconds is not nearly long enough for the billions from a dead incursion fleet.
And one ship can stop it. Put the effort in only applies to one side though, right? |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1246
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:00:30 -
[156] - Quote
these could have some value in high sec in relatively low skill small gangs with frig logi, but with only 1 link each its questionable, too be useful on their raw stats would require D3's getting a big nerf especially on their tank and dps too make these even vaguely competitive with D3's, but either way D3's need a big nerf anyway.
T3's need to be versatile not have T2 resists, OP dps and tank obsoleting T2 ships entirely.
ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 highslots for droneboats
Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
|
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising Decayed Orbit
115
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:00:55 -
[157] - Quote
Terra Chrall wrote:Querns wrote:Question: will MJFG use show up on killmails? Yes, in the same column as webifiers, logi, painters, points, and bubbles. Oh wait..... then that would be a no. Killmail have always only shown those that did damage to the ship, not the support around those damage dealing ships.
my hyena is on my kill mails with not a single bit of damage. |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
3696
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:02:41 -
[158] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Arline Kley wrote:CCP Rise wrote:When it finishes. Doesn't matter what happens during spool up. What about chaining spools? So CD#1 starts to spool up, and then just before it fires CD#2 starts to spool its one up This works, can't wait to see what's possible with it. So if we stuffed 170 CDs in the jump area, the group could move at 100 km/sec, indefinably.
Know a Frozen fan? Check this out
Frozen fanfiction
|
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising Decayed Orbit
115
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:05:14 -
[159] - Quote
Capqu wrote:any thought towards giving them the most powerful single link possible?
something like a 5% per lvl instead of 2%, since they are limited to 1
would mean you could run one link instead of the standard 4/5 in a wc/fc spot and focus on significantly buffing one specific area of your fleet
they arent limited to 1 |
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers Goonswarm Federation
271
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:08:11 -
[160] - Quote
Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote:Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote:
There is instant counterplay.
You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time.
Again, if you can expect combat fleets to do this, you can JUST as easily expect incursion fleets to do this.
ed: And it should only go suspect, imo.
Problem is, in high sec, a gank attempt targets one ship. Yes with a large enough suicide fleet, you can kill an entire incursion fleet. But that is committing numbers and can be noticed on D-scan. With these destroyers, they can kill a whole fleet in ~5 seconds. With one ship. Tell me how that is not overpowered. I don't care what your thoughts are on incursion runners, that is not the point here. One ship, in high sec, should not be able to effectively kill 10 others illegally in 5 seconds. PvP fleets are fit to take down PvP ships. A PvE fleet is not designed nor intended to engage a PvP target, especially a destroyer sized target with battleship targeting. So bring a SeBod HIC. It's not exactly hard to stop these. Maybe, >gasp< you need to adapt your fittings. The horror. But again, what this comes down to is "MAH ISK/HOUR!!!!!" I don't care about incursions, I don't run them. The bigger point is that ONE ship can, without much warning or notice, wreck an entire incursion fleet. Currently, you need to provide a level of trust (joining a fleet for fleet warps), do something to become a legal target (suspect/killright), or be specifically targeted to lose your ship. If this class of ship is allowed to use its MJD in high sec, then bombs should be allowed, as they are as indiscriminate and provide at least 10 seconds of warning for ships to get out of the way. This isn't about who's fun is more important, incursion or gankers. Its recognizing player trends and possible usage cases and ensuring that there is a level playing field for PvP. You want to kill an incursion fleet, put some effort into it and not 5 seconds to glory. Risk = reward. And 5 seconds is not nearly long enough for the billions from a dead incursion fleet.
You dont want to lose your incursion fleet in 5 seconds of glory? Put some effort into it and defend it. Risk = reward. A few ships to counter this is no where near the cost of the billions to replace a dead incursion fleet |
|
Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
342
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:09:10 -
[161] - Quote
OH and a question about the new MJD...........scram turns it off.........but assuming it's not scrammed, will it pull scrammed ships with it? |
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers Goonswarm Federation
271
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:11:30 -
[162] - Quote
Mostlyharmlesss wrote:This is going to further kill battleship doctrines since they will most likely not be able to hit the Destoyers until the spool up time have finished and by then the battleships will be MJD'ed away from the logi and picked off one by one.
It goes hand-in-hand with kiting doctrines that CCP has worked towards, essentially meaning everything slow will die.
This is going to lead to a lot of frustration from people who will not be able to do anything to counter it and by now we know frustrated players don't speak up, they quit the game.
I thought BS doctrines rolled with support fleets? Would not keeping a few pilots close in scram fit frigs or ceptors solve this easily? |
Second Strike
Moira. Villore Accords
0
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:13:02 -
[163] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Mr Grape Drink wrote:Does a scram shut it off like a regular MJD? Yes, scram will shut off an active MJFG and will also keep any targets in range of one that fires from taking the jump. I was hoping this would be the case. Goodbye logi anchors, otherwise it's a simple matter of scram 1 while you jump the others out of rep range |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
3696
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:17:26 -
[164] - Quote
Question: What happens if I am accelerating to warp speed when I am hit by a MJFG? Will I continue accelerating, and warp as normal? What if the micro jump causes my ship to be no longer aligned to my warp target (because I was warping just 300 km, so the jump changed the angle)?
Second Strike wrote:CCP Rise wrote:Mr Grape Drink wrote:Does a scram shut it off like a regular MJD? Yes, scram will shut off an active MJFG and will also keep any targets in range of one that fires from taking the jump. I was hoping this would be the case. Goodbye logi anchors, otherwise it's a simple matter of scram 1 while you jump the others out of rep range
You can always scram your own fleet, continuously, as a counter.
Know a Frozen fan? Check this out
Frozen fanfiction
|
Virion Stoneshard
Death By Design Did he say Jump
2
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:18:05 -
[165] - Quote
For those of you worried about a counter - take in mind, for an enemy command destroyer to MJD your group away, it needs to be within 6km of the target. Which means it can easily be countered with a scram in your fleet. |
Terra Chrall
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
57
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:21:20 -
[166] - Quote
Virion Stoneshard wrote:For those of you worried about a counter - take in mind, for an enemy command destroyer to MJD your group away, it needs to be within 6km of the target. Which means it can easily be countered with a scram in your fleet. Daisy chaining makes this much harder. Since 1 CD can jump another CD close to you and have a pre-spooled MJFD that goes off 1-2 seconds after landing. It will take some good skill and coordination to pull off, but will be almost impossible to counter unless you scram your fleetmates. |
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising Decayed Orbit
115
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:21:32 -
[167] - Quote
Templar Dane wrote:OH and a question about the new MJD...........scram turns it off.........but assuming it's not scrammed, will it pull scrammed ships with it?
no |
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
634
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:22:33 -
[168] - Quote
Im sure these will be fun and introduce new tactics into EVE. That is great news and I applaud the devs.
That being said, why was this bonus provided to destroyers of all things? Sure, command destroyers would have made a good addition by themselves. Why not put this tech in a class of ships that actually need a better niche? Like BS, or BC? MJD was founded with those ship classes in mind. Now with CD it will apply the same affect to small ships including the destroyer.
The Bifrost and Stork are going to be kiters with their speed and missiles which now have an MJD. The limiting factor with BC/BS is they were slowish. Now we will have speedy missile kiters with MJD. Short of the uber scram HIC, there isnt much to reliably counter that.
This patch is just bursting at the seams of small ship meta. A ship class that is the healthiest its ever been and now we are adding more? I know i dont speak for everyone, but there are some of us who like to fly bigger ships and it seems in most patches you are preventing bigger ships from getting a foothold.
Recap:
T3D were released Navy EWAR frigs coming Expedition Frigate coming Logi frigs coming Command Destroyers coming UBER scram HICs (which are going to be the norm for gaytecampers)
Some havelittle to no effect on the bigger ship meta (navy frigs/expedition frig) others are replacing or countering roles that BC/BS once had. Then the final breaking point are the new uber HIC scram. I dont see much hope for big ships in the future. Are you planning on any kind of rebalance/additions for things that dont fit in the frigate/destroyer sized box?
Yes BCs were rebalanced but these upcoming changes are going to make that a moot point.
Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
|
Rosal Milag
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
10
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:23:26 -
[169] - Quote
As was pointed out earlier, daisy-chaining two CD into your incursion fleet leaves no counterplay. Unless you are advocating that there should be a fleet on the gate to suicide on destroyers? Or to follow the destroyers inside the complex? How is this providing your "intense hand shaking game play" to be babysitting an incursion gate?
Or maybe you think the incursion fleet should have a group of ships sitting in the landing zone? Then what? Chase the destroyers? What about the tank of those ships? Odds are the rats are not going to ignore any ship in the complex. Do you want two ships sitting inside the complex away from the fleet, pulling aggro and getting the rats out of range of your guns?
What about the payouts? If incursions are now going to run with more people, then the payouts will need to be adjusted to reflect this, depending on what CCP decides is appropriate. If the current rewards for 10 people is "CCP approved" then adding two people to the fleet who cannot do anything else but anti-gank means 12 people is now what incursions are adjusted to maintain the status quo.
Keeping the MJFG out of Hi Sec is no more hand holding than joining the Imperium and flying massive blobs. When you are part of the largest coalition in the game and complain that EVE is no longer the cut-throat game it once was, you are part of the problem. Want faster pace game play? Get out of the blue doughnut.
Point is, in an incursion environment, there are methods to remove all counterplay aside from using suicide ships on the Command Destroyers, which by the way, is not going to be well received by anyone. |
Terra Chrall
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
57
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:24:39 -
[170] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:Question: What happens if I am accelerating to warp speed when I am hit by a MJFG? Will I continue accelerating, and warp as normal? What if the micro jump causes my ship to be no longer aligned to my warp target (because I was warping just 300 km, so the jump changed the angle)? Second Strike wrote:CCP Rise wrote:Mr Grape Drink wrote:Does a scram shut it off like a regular MJD? Yes, scram will shut off an active MJFG and will also keep any targets in range of one that fires from taking the jump. I was hoping this would be the case. Goodbye logi anchors, otherwise it's a simple matter of scram 1 while you jump the others out of rep range You can always scram your own fleet, continuously, as a counter. Once you are in warp you are immune thus unaffected by the device, but during your ramp up time you are still aligning and getting to speed. If you are jumped while in the warp ramp up phase, then you will likely continue once landed but with the added time of any alignment adjustments. |
|
Luscius Uta
181
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:29:19 -
[171] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Alyssia Benar wrote:Still no answer to whether we can jump Caps or not. :( You cannot jump caps. Sorry I missed that in the OP, it's added now.
Does that include Orcas and Freighters? What about bastioned Marauders?
Drifters have arrived - The End is nigh!
|
Owen Levanth
Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration
421
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:31:24 -
[172] - Quote
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote:Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote:
There is instant counterplay.
You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time.
Again, if you can expect combat fleets to do this, you can JUST as easily expect incursion fleets to do this.
ed: And it should only go suspect, imo.
Problem is, in high sec, a gank attempt targets one ship. Yes with a large enough suicide fleet, you can kill an entire incursion fleet. But that is committing numbers and can be noticed on D-scan. With these destroyers, they can kill a whole fleet in ~5 seconds. With one ship. Tell me how that is not overpowered. I don't care what your thoughts are on incursion runners, that is not the point here. One ship, in high sec, should not be able to effectively kill 10 others illegally in 5 seconds. PvP fleets are fit to take down PvP ships. A PvE fleet is not designed nor intended to engage a PvP target, especially a destroyer sized target with battleship targeting. So bring a SeBod HIC. It's not exactly hard to stop these. Maybe, >gasp< you need to adapt your fittings. The horror. But again, what this comes down to is "MAH ISK/HOUR!!!!!" I don't care about incursions, I don't run them. The bigger point is that ONE ship can, without much warning or notice, wreck an entire incursion fleet. Currently, you need to provide a level of trust (joining a fleet for fleet warps), do something to become a legal target (suspect/killright), or be specifically targeted to lose your ship. If this class of ship is allowed to use its MJD in high sec, then bombs should be allowed, as they are as indiscriminate and provide at least 10 seconds of warning for ships to get out of the way. This isn't about who's fun is more important, incursion or gankers. Its recognizing player trends and possible usage cases and ensuring that there is a level playing field for PvP. You want to kill an incursion fleet, put some effort into it and not 5 seconds to glory. Risk = reward. And 5 seconds is not nearly long enough for the billions from a dead incursion fleet. You dont want to lose your incursion fleet in 5 seconds of glory? Put some effort into it and defend it. Risk = reward. A few ships to counter this is no where near the cost of the billions to replace a dead incursion fleet
Exactly, CCP could even throw a softball at them and make an in-system message appear when someone uses the new module in HighSec. Something like "CONCORD Warning: Micro Jump Generator Activation Detected". This way the guys guarding the incursion fleet would have some precious forewarning before the command destroyers arrive. |
Darian en Chasteaux
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
92
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:34:35 -
[173] - Quote
Minmatar Bifrost Missiles???
With a 6km range for pulling this is obsurd; Minmatar ships need GUNS not missiles; let the Caldari use them; UNLESS the role for these command dessies is purely defensive in nature (except for one obvious role); not good for soloing either; these single role ships are probly useless.
In a small fleet it's another story; am I missing something here? I am mostly a solo player; are these ships designed more for fleet action?
In a defensive role missiles may be okay; defender missiles? pretty limited.
Darian |
Ripard Teg
Snuff Box Snuffed Out
1228
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:36:06 -
[174] - Quote
Do you get jumped when HIC pointed?
Do you get jumped when standard pointed?
Do you get jumped when bubbled?
Do you get jumped when moored (when mooring becomes a thing)?
You said capitals are immune. Are freighters and jump freighters also immune? What about Orcas? (Their status as capitals/not capitals is unclear.)
I'm a little bit uneasy about allowing this mod in low-sec for reasons I can't quite justify. Maybe it's just because it's only the second area-of-effect attack allowable in low-sec, after smart bombs. Did you consider making it null-sec only during the "let's see what players do with this" phase?
aka Jester, who apparently was once Deemed Worthy To Wield The Banhammer to good effect.
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
242
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:37:10 -
[175] - Quote
Owen Levanth wrote:
Exactly, CCP could even throw a softball at them and make an in-system message appear when someone uses the new module in HighSec. Something like "CONCORD Warning: Micro Jump Generator Activation Detected". This way the guys guarding the incursion fleet would have some precious forewarning before the command destroyers arrive.
just make a ship with this mod equipped be suspect all the time in high sec. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
2276
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:41:21 -
[176] - Quote
Ripard Teg wrote: Do you get jumped when moored (when mooring becomes a thing)?
Mooring is never going to be a thing. Tethering, on the other hand, is.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Rosal Milag
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
10
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:41:30 -
[177] - Quote
Ripard Teg wrote:Do you get jumped when HIC pointed?
Do you get jumped when standard pointed?
Do you get jumped when bubbled?
Do you get jumped when moored (when mooring becomes a thing)?
You said capitals are immune. Are freighters and jump freighters also immune? What about Orcas? (Their status as capitals/not capitals is unclear.)
I'm a little bit uneasy about allowing this mod in low-sec for reasons I can't quite justify. Maybe it's just because it's only the second area-of-effect attack allowable in low-sec, after smart bombs. Did you consider making it null-sec only during the "let's see what players do with this" phase?
Did you read the OP? Scrams keep you from being jumped and the HIC is getting a scram to its focused point. Its been repeated for the past 9 pages as well as "Can't jump capitals"
TL;DR OP: If you could use a mobile MJD, you will be jumped by the destroyer. |
Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
342
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:42:03 -
[178] - Quote
Lady Rift wrote:Owen Levanth wrote:
Exactly, CCP could even throw a softball at them and make an in-system message appear when someone uses the new module in HighSec. Something like "CONCORD Warning: Micro Jump Generator Activation Detected". This way the guys guarding the incursion fleet would have some precious forewarning before the command destroyers arrive.
just make a ship with this mod equipped be suspect all the time in high sec.
It doesn't work in highsec. The OP says so and there are like 100 comments about it not working in highsec.
|
Invisusira
The Rising Stars Tactical Narcotics Team
323
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:47:30 -
[179] - Quote
Sounds awesome! But UHG Dragoon, so ugly
EVE Music
|
FT Cold
The Scope Gallente Federation
33
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:48:06 -
[180] - Quote
I noticed a mention towards the reworking of gang links, how soon can we expect insight into how they are being changed? A leadership alt is a serious investment for most of us, and some changes (like on grid links) have the potential to affect the value of owning such an investment, especially for solo players. |
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
242
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:51:03 -
[181] - Quote
Templar Dane wrote:Lady Rift wrote:Owen Levanth wrote:
Exactly, CCP could even throw a softball at them and make an in-system message appear when someone uses the new module in HighSec. Something like "CONCORD Warning: Micro Jump Generator Activation Detected". This way the guys guarding the incursion fleet would have some precious forewarning before the command destroyers arrive.
just make a ship with this mod equipped be suspect all the time in high sec. It doesn't work in highsec. The OP says so and there are like 100 comments about it not working in highsec.
i suggest reading the entire comment chain i was replying to. |
non ficti0n
Space Travel is Boring
11
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:52:47 -
[182] - Quote
Can you jump sieged dreads? |
Ripard Teg
Snuff Box Snuffed Out
1228
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 17:54:48 -
[183] - Quote
Rosal Milag wrote:Ripard Teg wrote:Do you get jumped when HIC pointed?
Do you get jumped when standard pointed?
Do you get jumped when bubbled?
Do you get jumped when moored (when mooring becomes a thing)?
You said capitals are immune. Are freighters and jump freighters also immune? What about Orcas? (Their status as capitals/not capitals is unclear.)
I'm a little bit uneasy about allowing this mod in low-sec for reasons I can't quite justify. Maybe it's just because it's only the second area-of-effect attack allowable in low-sec, after smart bombs. Did you consider making it null-sec only during the "let's see what players do with this" phase? Did you read the OP? Scrams keep you from being jumped and the HIC is getting a scram to its focused point. Yep, that's a good point, thanks. I'd forgotten the HIC point will include a scram now. The other questions remain, though.
aka Jester, who apparently was once Deemed Worthy To Wield The Banhammer to good effect.
|
Terra Chrall
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
57
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:03:45 -
[184] - Quote
Ripard Teg wrote:Rosal Milag wrote:Ripard Teg wrote:Do you get jumped when HIC pointed?
Do you get jumped when standard pointed?
Do you get jumped when bubbled?
Do you get jumped when moored (when mooring becomes a thing)?
You said capitals are immune. Are freighters and jump freighters also immune? What about Orcas? (Their status as capitals/not capitals is unclear.)
I'm a little bit uneasy about allowing this mod in low-sec for reasons I can't quite justify. Maybe it's just because it's only the second area-of-effect attack allowable in low-sec, after smart bombs. Did you consider making it null-sec only during the "let's see what players do with this" phase? Did you read the OP? Scrams keep you from being jumped and the HIC is getting a scram to its focused point. Yep, that's a good point, thanks. I'd forgotten the HIC point will include a scram now. The other questions remain, though. 1. Standard -1 point , yes you get jumped. 2. Yes you can MJD MJFD while in a bubble. 3. No. Tethering makes you invulnerable, and you cannot be jumped while invulnerable. 4. Not sure, waiting on CCP to clarify. |
Moraguth
Ranger Corp Vae. Victis.
165
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:06:48 -
[185] - Quote
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 got a Feature Added!
Stop calling an Abaddon "abba-dawn". It is "uh-bad-in"
dictionary.com/abaddon
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2417
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:07:10 -
[186] - Quote
Rosal Milag wrote:As was pointed out earlier, daisy-chaining two CD into your incursion fleet leaves no counterplay. Unless you are advocating that there should be a fleet on the gate to suicide on destroyers? Or to follow the destroyers inside the complex? How is this providing your "intense hand shaking game play" to be babysitting an incursion gate?
Garbage.
Onyx locks to 110km with a basic a wing commander.
If they are more than 200km away, even an ABing guardian can get clear of the landing zone.
Rosal Milag wrote:What about the payouts? If incursions are now going to run with more people, then the payouts will need to be adjusted to reflect this, depending on what CCP decides is appropriate. If the current rewards for 10 people is "CCP approved" then adding two people to the fleet who cannot do anything else but anti-gank means 12 people is now what incursions are adjusted to maintain the status quo.
Ah the crux of it, MAH ISK/HOUR
Rosal Milag wrote:Point is, in an incursion environment, there are methods to remove all counterplay aside from using suicide ships on the Command Destroyers, which by the way, is not going to be well received by anyone.
Point is, you're wrong, you just aren't willing to make the effort.
Again, this is the very thinnest of veils over MAH ISK/HOUR MUST BE PROTECTED BY MECHANICS AND NOT ME.
Effort is for everyone else but the blingmobile guys, right? |
Moac Tor
Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation
317
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:16:01 -
[187] - Quote
afkalt wrote:There is instant counterplay.
You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time. Clutching at straws to justify implementing a bad mechanic as usual I see AFK, you did enough of that already in the HIC thread, one might think you have a hidden agenda. It is obvious this won't be allowed in highsec for more reasons that incursion fleets.
As for the ship, they look really interesting, looking forward to finding out how they are going to be used. I also really like that you are moving links to a smaller class of ship to help small roaming gangs.
Also I'm looking forward to the RnK video involving these at some point... *chuckles*
Modulated ECM Effects
An Alternative to Skill Trading
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2418
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:18:42 -
[188] - Quote
Moac Tor wrote:afkalt wrote:There is instant counterplay.
You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time. Clutching at straws to justify implementing a bad mechanic as usual I see AFK, you did enough of that already in the HIC thread, one might think you have a hidden agenda. It is obvious this won't be allowed in highsec for more reasons that incursion fleets. As for the ship, they look really interesting, looking forward to finding out how they are going to be used. I also really like that you are moving links to a smaller class of ship to help small roaming gangs. Also I'm looking forward to the RnK video involving these at some point... *chuckles*
Oh do buzz off if you've no argument other than 'I don't like it'.
We shouldn't be disallowing interesting mechanics to pander to people's laziness. |
Moac Tor
Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation
317
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:20:29 -
[189] - Quote
Luscius Uta wrote:CCP Rise wrote:Alyssia Benar wrote:Still no answer to whether we can jump Caps or not. :( You cannot jump caps. Sorry I missed that in the OP, it's added now. Does that include Orcas and Freighters? What about bastioned Marauders? Good point, I'd suggest this definitely shouldn't work on a Bastioned Marauder either.
Modulated ECM Effects
An Alternative to Skill Trading
|
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers Goonswarm Federation
271
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:21:50 -
[190] - Quote
Darian en Chasteaux wrote:Minmatar Bifrost Missiles???
With a 6km range for pulling this is obsurd; Minmatar ships need GUNS not missiles; let the Caldari use them; UNLESS the role for these command dessies is purely defensive in nature (except for one obvious role); not good for soloing either; these single role ships are probly useless.
In a small fleet it's another story; am I missing something here? I am mostly a solo player; are these ships designed more for fleet action?
In a defensive role missiles may be okay; defender missiles? pretty limited.
Darian
its not a solo ship mate. It wasnt designed for it. |
|
Andre Vauban
Quantum Cats Syndicate Spaceship Bebop
436
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:23:30 -
[191] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Alyssia Benar wrote:Still no answer to whether we can jump Caps or not. :( You cannot jump caps. Sorry I missed that in the OP, it's added now.
What ships are considered "capitals"? Freighters? Jump Freighters? Rorqual? Orca? I assume carriers, dreads, supers, and Titans are considered capitals, but I'm not sure about the other capital ship classes?
Also, can a ship be jumped that is in the process of docking? In other words, between the period the invulnerability ends and the docking request actually happens? There is usually a few seconds between the two. I just see this ship class as a counter to the current mechanic of ******** station games, but at the same time I don't want them to open a new door of ******** station games. They close the door on ships that cannot dock due to a weapons timer, but they could also open the door to making every single ship that undocks vulnerable to a gank if they can be caught between the dock request and docking accepted.
If you had several of these things with a 9 second timer, you could start spooling up about 1 second apart about 1 second after the target undocked, do a reverse scram line (ie first one scrams the next and so on to prevent the following guys from jumping) and presto, the target ship will always be jumped away from station. This would even catch insta-warpers that waited too long to warp.
.
|
Owen Levanth
Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration
422
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:23:55 -
[192] - Quote
Templar Dane wrote:Lady Rift wrote:Owen Levanth wrote:
Exactly, CCP could even throw a softball at them and make an in-system message appear when someone uses the new module in HighSec. Something like "CONCORD Warning: Micro Jump Generator Activation Detected". This way the guys guarding the incursion fleet would have some precious forewarning before the command destroyers arrive.
just make a ship with this mod equipped be suspect all the time in high sec. It doesn't work in highsec. The OP says so and there are like 100 comments about it not working in highsec.
And we're disagreeing with that and trying to find ways to make CCP change it's mind, random stranger who didn't take the time to read all the posts in this sub-discussion. |
Danny John-Peter
Semicompetence Online
579
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:24:24 -
[193] - Quote
My only thought would be to push the Link Number to 2, 1 Link means people will still likely fall back on other options 2 on the other hand allows say Speed/Tackle Range or Siege/Speed or Armour/Tackle range.
Makes running just a command dessie more practical. |
Moac Tor
Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation
317
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:24:25 -
[194] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Moac Tor wrote:afkalt wrote:There is instant counterplay.
You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time. Clutching at straws to justify implementing a bad mechanic as usual I see AFK, you did enough of that already in the HIC thread, one might think you have a hidden agenda. It is obvious this won't be allowed in highsec for more reasons that incursion fleets. As for the ship, they look really interesting, looking forward to finding out how they are going to be used. I also really like that you are moving links to a smaller class of ship to help small roaming gangs. Also I'm looking forward to the RnK video involving these at some point... *chuckles* Oh do buzz off if you've no argument other than 'I don't like it'. We shouldn't be disallowing interesting mechanics to pander to people's laziness. I actually like the command destroyer as you seem to have completely missed in my post which you quoted. I just don't like your terrible idea of allowing them to use the MMJD in high sec for VERY obvious reasons.
Modulated ECM Effects
An Alternative to Skill Trading
|
Aurthes
M. Corp Engineering Executive Outcomes
61
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:26:20 -
[195] - Quote
Can you please update with the native resists? I didn't see it in the spreadsheet or posts. |
Kasia en Tilavine
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
56
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:27:27 -
[196] - Quote
Sweet.
I know this may not be your speciality. But now that B.I.A.B. has been launched, what limitations are we looking at for having command processors applying to purples on grid rather than fleet members in system? The ability to have command dessies warping to and from grids when and where certain link bonus's are needed sounds amazing. l |
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers Goonswarm Federation
271
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:28:59 -
[197] - Quote
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. |
Terra Chrall
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
57
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:29:25 -
[198] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Moac Tor wrote:afkalt wrote:There is instant counterplay.
You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time. Clutching at straws to justify implementing a bad mechanic as usual I see AFK, you did enough of that already in the HIC thread, one might think you have a hidden agenda. It is obvious this won't be allowed in highsec for more reasons that incursion fleets. As for the ship, they look really interesting, looking forward to finding out how they are going to be used. I also really like that you are moving links to a smaller class of ship to help small roaming gangs. Also I'm looking forward to the RnK video involving these at some point... *chuckles* Oh do buzz off if you've no argument other than 'I don't like it'. We shouldn't be disallowing interesting mechanics to pander to people's laziness. High Security space has for a long time held a different standard for the purpose of allowing different play styles in different regions. Certain capital ships are banned, Bombs are banned, Bubbles are banned, etc. Adding any of these to high sec would add interesting game play. But they would change what High sec currently is.
Would use of MJF be interesting game play in high sec? Yes
Would it alter the high sec play style? Probably yes. And thus it will likely fall into the same banned category as those other things for now.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2421
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:32:19 -
[199] - Quote
Terra Chrall wrote:afkalt wrote:Moac Tor wrote:afkalt wrote:There is instant counterplay.
You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time. Clutching at straws to justify implementing a bad mechanic as usual I see AFK, you did enough of that already in the HIC thread, one might think you have a hidden agenda. It is obvious this won't be allowed in highsec for more reasons that incursion fleets. As for the ship, they look really interesting, looking forward to finding out how they are going to be used. I also really like that you are moving links to a smaller class of ship to help small roaming gangs. Also I'm looking forward to the RnK video involving these at some point... *chuckles* Oh do buzz off if you've no argument other than 'I don't like it'. We shouldn't be disallowing interesting mechanics to pander to people's laziness. High Security space has for a long time held a different standard for the purpose of allowing different play styles in different regions. Certain capital ships are banned, Bombs are banned, Bubbles are banned, etc. Adding any of these to high sec would add interesting game play. But they would change what High sec currently is. Would use of MJF be interesting game play in high sec? Yes Would it alter the high sec play style? Probably yes. And thus it will likely fall into the same banned category as those other things for now.
And yet the only reason presented thus far has been
MAH ISK/HOUR
So let's man up and list some others, who knows maybe you'll change my mind.
But if the best you have is protecting isk/hour you're on the road to nowhere. |
Rosal Milag
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
12
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:32:56 -
[200] - Quote
afkalt wrote:
Garbage.
Onyx locks to 110km with a basic a wing commander.
If they are more than 200km away, even an ABing guardian can get clear of the landing zone.
Ah the crux of it, MAH ISK/HOUR
Point is, you're wrong, you just aren't willing to make the effort.
Again, this is the very thinnest of veils over MAH ISK/HOUR MUST BE PROTECTED BY MECHANICS AND NOT ME.
Effort is for everyone else but the blingmobile guys, right?
Should I link all my API's to show I don't do incursions? I don't care about their isk/hour.
Think outside your own bubble of 'fun' and see how the whole sandbox ripples with your changes.
Onyx can't scram past 37km. Less than a second on the MJD when it lands and fleets dead. Can't even point in time because of server tics. Btw, onyx and guardian have no business being in the same incursion fleet.
How can a guardian clear the landing zone? At 200km, a minor course correction can compensate for 800 m/s.
You are devising elaborate counters, multi-ship counters, multi-module counters for the victim. Where the ganker has only to press one button to profit. How is this equal game play?
If CCP wants incursion runners to fit for PvP, this is a poor way of doing it.
Mechanics must be equally applied and fair to everyone involved. The command destroyers have a potential to tilt the field in their favor by simply existing in high security space with these modules. You are arguing for mechanics to protect your ganking, not for an equal field.
|
|
Andre Vauban
Quantum Cats Syndicate Spaceship Bebop
436
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:33:11 -
[201] - Quote
Can we pretty pretty please fix FW standing issues for aggression against fleet mates? It seems like a nice counter to these things is to fit a scram to ships that don't want to be jumped (ie logi will now also scram in a chain just like cap). However, FW people get totally screwed and cannot use this tactic due to the standing hit.
.
|
Moac Tor
Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation
317
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:35:15 -
[202] - Quote
Terra Chrall wrote:afkalt wrote:Moac Tor wrote:afkalt wrote:There is instant counterplay.
You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time. Clutching at straws to justify implementing a bad mechanic as usual I see AFK, you did enough of that already in the HIC thread, one might think you have a hidden agenda. It is obvious this won't be allowed in highsec for more reasons that incursion fleets. As for the ship, they look really interesting, looking forward to finding out how they are going to be used. I also really like that you are moving links to a smaller class of ship to help small roaming gangs. Also I'm looking forward to the RnK video involving these at some point... *chuckles* Oh do buzz off if you've no argument other than 'I don't like it'. We shouldn't be disallowing interesting mechanics to pander to people's laziness. High Security space has for a long time held a different standard for the purpose of allowing different play styles in different regions. Certain capital ships are banned, Bombs are banned, Bubbles are banned, etc. Adding any of these to high sec would add interesting game play. But they would change what High sec currently is. Would use of MJF be interesting game play in high sec? Yes Would it alter the high sec play style? Probably yes. And thus it will likely fall into the same banned category as those other things for now. Precisely. If you want to introduce stuff like this into high sec then you can't on a whim suddenly decide I want a game breaking mechanic introduced whilst barring all the others. High sec would need a complete rethink from the ground up. I'm not opposed to it myself although I don't use high sec much, and it seems to cater for a lot of players according to the statistics who would need to be considered.
That being said I'm all for nerfing high sec incursion fleets (perhaps move them to low sec?), although coming up with a poorly though out mechanic that adversely affects the whole of high sec just to try and nerf incursions fleets is clearly not the way to do it.
Modulated ECM Effects
An Alternative to Skill Trading
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2421
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:41:13 -
[203] - Quote
Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote:
Garbage.
Onyx locks to 110km with a basic a wing commander.
If they are more than 200km away, even an ABing guardian can get clear of the landing zone.
Ah the crux of it, MAH ISK/HOUR
Point is, you're wrong, you just aren't willing to make the effort.
Again, this is the very thinnest of veils over MAH ISK/HOUR MUST BE PROTECTED BY MECHANICS AND NOT ME.
Effort is for everyone else but the blingmobile guys, right?
Should I link all my API's to show I don't do incursions? I don't care about their isk/hour. Think outside your own bubble of 'fun' and see how the whole sandbox ripples with your changes. Onyx can't scram past 37km. Less than a second on the MJD when it lands and fleets dead. Can't even point in time because of server tics. Btw, onyx and guardian have no business being in the same incursion fleet. How can a guardian clear the landing zone? At 200km, a minor course correction can compensate for 800 m/s. You are devising elaborate counters, multi-ship counters, multi-module counters for the victim. Where the ganker has only to press one button to profit. How is this equal game play? If CCP wants incursion runners to fit for PvP, this is a poor way of doing it. Mechanics must be equally applied and fair to everyone involved. The command destroyers have a potential to tilt the field in their favor by simply existing in high security space with these modules. You are arguing for mechanics to protect your ganking, not for an equal field.
If I can't scram it, nothing will jump with it. The joy of the ticks.
So then, if not isk/hour - let's talk about other downsides. Go on, I might change my mind. |
Moraguth
Ranger Corp Vae. Victis.
165
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:43:11 -
[204] - 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, I don't really know who you are or why the hostility.
1. Yes, I did read it. 2. Flags are important in low sec, too. 3. That seems to be an interesting assumption as to the basis for my question, but it is wrong. 3. Fair point about concord, I didn't really think that one through. Good catch. I'll modify the question to say drifters instead. I was really just thinking about powerful NPCs. Will drifters be moved, and will that make them mad?
Personal attacks online are pretty silly.
I got a Feature Added!
Stop calling an Abaddon "abba-dawn". It is "uh-bad-in"
dictionary.com/abaddon
|
Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
214
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:43:14 -
[205] - Quote
afkalt wrote: And yet the only reason presented thus far has been
MAH ISK/HOUR
I'm inclined to call you a write-only _forbidden_word_ due to your apparent inability to actually read the thread, but I'll be nice and spell it out more understandable this time.
It has too much potential for griefing, incursions notwithstanding. The only available counterplay in hisec is reactive. Proactive counterplay in hisec involves criminal status flags and is called suicide.
While in low/null/wh you can shoot a dessie on sight, in hisec you have to patiently wait for it to finish flinging you/NPC out into the void before having a reasonable way to deal with the consequences (assuming it even gets any kind of flag for the trouble). You can't really suicide every command destroyer you meet out of probability it being after you. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
2276
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:48:39 -
[206] - Quote
Torgeir Hekard wrote: While in low/null/wh you can shoot a dessie on sight, in hisec you have to patiently wait for it to finish flinging you/NPC out into the void before having a reasonable way to deal with the consequences (assuming it even gets any kind of flag for the trouble). You can't really suicide every command destroyer you meet out of probability it being after you.
Or, the MJFG could create a Suspect Flag upon activation. Pre-target any that land inside your dungeon, and if they go suspect, apply the Warp Scrambler. Then, switch targets, and take it to the MURDERZONE.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2422
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:51:57 -
[207] - Quote
Querns wrote:Torgeir Hekard wrote: While in low/null/wh you can shoot a dessie on sight, in hisec you have to patiently wait for it to finish flinging you/NPC out into the void before having a reasonable way to deal with the consequences (assuming it even gets any kind of flag for the trouble). You can't really suicide every command destroyer you meet out of probability it being after you.
Or, the MJFG could create a Suspect Flag upon activation. Pre-target any that land inside your dungeon, and if they go suspect, apply the Warp Scrambler. Then, switch targets, and take it to the MURDERZONE.
There's literally no other way it COULD work. Flags happen on module activation, not effect.
It's almost as if people don't understand how things work...... |
Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
214
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:52:18 -
[208] - Quote
Querns wrote: Or, the MJFG could create a Suspect Flag upon activation. Pre-target any that land inside your dungeon, and if they go suspect, apply the Warp Scrambler. Then, switch targets, and take it to the MURDERZONE.
Can be circumvented by daisychaining. Admittedly, aiming would be a bit more difficult, but not impossible. |
Rosal Milag
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
12
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:54:36 -
[209] - Quote
afkalt wrote:
If I can't scram it, nothing will jump with it. The joy of the ticks.
So then, if not isk/hour - let's talk about other downsides. Go on, I might change my mind.
Aside from the obvious difference in difficulty and preparation that the ganker and victim must do? Okay.
Mission runners will be able to be harassed in new and 'fun' ways without being able to fire back. Oh look, a battleship with a 10 second lock time is trying to run a mission. Would be 'fun' to blink his target npc away from him, without any risk to me. Or blink him closer to the rats when he is distance tanking.
Are you arguing that high sec players need to be pvp fit all the time with 5 second lock time and scrams equipped to avoid being harassed or victimized? High sec is not currently a PvP first zone. To suggest otherwise would be foolish and changing the underpinnings of the game.
A bump from a mach sends a miner flying, but still in range of his asteroid for the first bump. A mach also takes more than 6 seconds to land, align for a bump and send him flying. Barges take about 10 seconds to align and warp. Longer if bumped. So highsec mining becomes a playground for gankers. Especially as, as you suggested, it only gives them a suspect tag. If CCP is holding on their ganking and bumping policies despite the complaints from victims, do you think giving gankers a free harassment tool that is easier to use, more affordable, less time to set up, is going to help gankers keep favor with CCP?
Ships will have issues docking, as a stream of 'gank' ships will keep players from being able to dock unless using insta-dock bookmarks in weird places. Good luck trying to dock on Jita 4-4.
All these complaints are from two factors. The ease of use for the ganker and the lack of consequences. A suspect tag for this level of interference? Honey please. At minimum, the use of this module on a neutral or illegal target in high sec should grant a criminal flag. If a target painter or tracking disruptor will get you concorded, the blink should as well. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
2279
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 18:57:36 -
[210] - Quote
Torgeir Hekard wrote:Querns wrote: Or, the MJFG could create a Suspect Flag upon activation. Pre-target any that land inside your dungeon, and if they go suspect, apply the Warp Scrambler. Then, switch targets, and take it to the MURDERZONE.
Can be circumvented by daisychaining. Admittedly, aiming would be a bit more difficult, but not impossible. Given that acceleration gates always dump all players in the same spot and cannot be used to warp at range, this would be quite a trick indeed.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
216
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 19:00:21 -
[211] - Quote
Querns wrote: Given that acceleration gates always dump all players in the same spot and cannot be used to warp at range, this would be quite a trick indeed.
I assume such things as using your own propulsion modules to manually navigate on grid are unheard of amongst the warriors of fleetwarp and knights of the jump bridge. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
2279
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 19:03:07 -
[212] - Quote
Torgeir Hekard wrote:Querns wrote: Given that acceleration gates always dump all players in the same spot and cannot be used to warp at range, this would be quite a trick indeed.
I assume such things as using your own propulsion modules to manually navigate on grid is unheard of amongst the warriors of fleetwarp and knights of the jump bridge. If you don't understand how to use this property of acceleration gates to safeguard yourself against MJFG trickery, then I am not sure what else to tell you.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2424
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 19:04:48 -
[213] - Quote
Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote:
If I can't scram it, nothing will jump with it. The joy of the ticks.
So then, if not isk/hour - let's talk about other downsides. Go on, I might change my mind.
Aside from the obvious difference in difficulty and preparation that the ganker and victim must do? Okay. Mission runners will be able to be harassed in new and 'fun' ways without being able to fire back. Oh look, a battleship with a 10 second lock time is trying to run a mission. Would be 'fun' to blink his target npc away from him, without any risk to me. Or blink him closer to the rats when he is distance tanking.
Confirming being shootable by any and everyone is "risk free".
Also confirming battleships can't fit MJDs thus cannot adapt.
And that no mission boat would possibly be able to lock and shoot at 101km.
Any interference allows the ship to be shot freely. That's far from risk free.
Quote:Are you arguing that high sec players need to be pvp fit all the time with 5 second lock time and scrams equipped to avoid being harassed or victimized? High sec is not currently a PvP first zone. To suggest otherwise would be foolish and changing the underpinnings of the game.
Or, you know. A prop mod. I know, I know, it's a big ask to get a ship over 1.1km/s
Quote:A bump from a mach sends a miner flying, but still in range of his asteroid for the first bump. A mach also takes more than 6 seconds to land, align for a bump and send him flying. Barges take about 10 seconds to align and warp. Longer if bumped. So highsec mining becomes a playground for gankers. Especially as, as you suggested, it only gives them a suspect tag. If CCP is holding on their ganking and bumping policies despite the complaints from victims, do you think giving gankers a free harassment tool that is easier to use, more affordable, less time to set up, is going to help gankers keep favor with CCP?
Ships will have issues docking, as a stream of 'gank' ships will keep players from being able to dock unless using insta-dock bookmarks in weird places. Good luck trying to dock on Jita 4-4.
Doesn't work if invulnerable, which you are for 99.99% of the docking animation. BAd luck might get a few people, but a few at most.
I seriously doubt it is more affordable. Especially since I can shoot the thing.
Quote:All these complaints are from two factors. The ease of use for the ganker and the lack of consequences. A suspect tag for this level of interference? Honey please. At minimum, the use of this module on a neutral or illegal target in high sec should grant a criminal flag. If a target painter or tracking disruptor will get you concorded, the blink should as well.
And see you're only looking at this one way.
What about people white knighting? Blink the catalysts away from the target?
What about killing station gamers?
What about saving your friend from a bumper?
What about jumping neutral logi away from war targets?
What about jumping that sniping nado away from the undock so you can move freely?
People will NOT easily be able to abuse a 3 minute cooldown mod. How many bumps can one do in 3 minutes?
If swarms of people make a concerted effort to cause mayhem well....that is rather what the game is about, is it not? |
Protector X
The Xziles The Wraithguard.
10
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 19:11:05 -
[214] - Quote
I really fear that the release of these ships further puts assault frigates at a disadvantage. I fear the death of the assault frigate with the release of the T3D's and now these. I dont see a niche for assault frigates, so I feel that a re-visit on assault frigates may be in order.
Regarding these command destroyers, I forsee very interesting gameplay happening, good job CCP with the creativity on this one, 2 thumbs up. |
Nou Mene
Out of Focus Odin's Call
13
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 19:20:19 -
[215] - Quote
Stop crying. I hate when ppl talk about the sandbox this and the sandbox that and is not able to accept the new tactics and strategies that could born out of this. I'm for one completely in favor of asking more and more of individual piloting.
To CCP: - Loving the idea, at the very least release this as presented now. - Why armor ones have drones and shield ones have missiles. Rethink flycatcher/heretic or add rails/lasers here. Also neut/nos bonus on dragoon? - Active tank bonuses could be interesting to add more options between shield/armor types.
I love how: - this can be used to counter bombers - this can be used against station games - this can be used to "slice" bigger fleets into more manageable fleet sizes - this gives piloting skill more value
great work. |
Rosal Milag
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
13
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 19:21:24 -
[216] - Quote
afkalt wrote:
Confirming being shootable by any and everyone is "risk free".
Also confirming battleships can't fit MJDs thus cannot adapt.
And that no mission boat would possibly be able to lock and shoot at 101km.
Any interference allows the ship to be shot freely. That's far from risk free.
Or, you know. A prop mod. I know, I know, it's a big ask to get a ship over 1.1km/s
Doesn't work if invulnerable, which you are for 99.99% of the docking animation. BAd luck might get a few people, but a few at most.
I seriously doubt it is more affordable. Especially since I can shoot the thing.
And see you're only looking at this one way.
What about people white knighting? Blink the catalysts away from the target?
What about killing station gamers?
What about saving your friend from a bumper?
What about jumping neutral logi away from war targets?
What about jumping that sniping nado away from the undock so you can move freely?
People will NOT easily be able to abuse a 3 minute cooldown mod. How many bumps can one do in 3 minutes?
If swarms of people make a concerted effort to cause mayhem well....that is rather what the game is about, is it not?
Battleship MJD is much longer than the new destroyer one, by several seconds.
A mission boat that is sitting at 70km from the target rat and is now 170km? That's not something anyone plans for.
A battleship, which btw is the most common level 4 mission boat, going over 1km/s are you insane? Have you ever tried running a level 4 in anything other than a pirate ship? Most fit an AB or MJD for maneuvering as a MWD kills cap. Equipping both a MJD and MWD is impossible on some ships, as that takes up a ton of grid. And an extra slot, indirectly nerfing the shield battleship that now has to equip four more mods to counter your one, MWD, MJD, warp scrambler, sebo.
Yes, every mission runner dreams of shooting suspect ships. They are totally confident that their specialized fit for the mission they are on can totally tank someone specialized to kill them once engagable. /s
The docking animation is not 99% invulnerable. You land in a 2,500 radius bubble on the edge of the docking ring. Which means 50% of the time, you are slowboating to the docking point. Unless you have an insta-dock point. And even then, a cluster of ships will be waiting. Odds are, if you are in the landing spot of a ship coming out of warp and cycle your MJFG right when you see them, they will be blinked the instant they land for an easy gank.
White knighting? Yes, I want to move all the catalysts away from their illegal target and instead have them around a now legal target, me. Which hasn't stopped the gank, only delayed it as the mach is still bumping.
Shooting it makes little difference. A suspect tag for a PvP fit player means they are ready for combat and will respond accordingly. Asking all players to fly pvp fit changes the game for the worse, as it ruins creativity.
Despite all the good uses you listed for players to avoid ganks, the downsides are much, much worse. Bubbles would be good for anti-ganking. Lay down defensive bubbles in mining belts. Drop a bubble on the catalysts as they undock.
Additionally, most people using these to gank will be valid targets from their security status, rendering a suspect timer irrelevant. Which means there is no consequence for use of the ship to blink someone. |
Tornii
Infinite Point DARKNESS.
76
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 19:21:24 -
[217] - Quote
The MJFG mechanic sounded too random and gimmicky to me, but I thought maybe these new ships would at least look cool. Then I read they're going to be based on existing models. Meh.
Socialism must eradicate capitalism before capitalism eradicates civilisation
|
Saisin
Chao3's Rogue Operatives Corp Chao3 Alliance
304
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 19:23:33 -
[218] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Aebe Amraen wrote:Does the 6km radius on the MJFG apply to
1) All ships/etc. that are within 6km when you activate the module (i.e. when spoolup starts)
or
2) All ships/etc. that are within 6km when spoolup finishes
or
3) Something else? 2. When it finishes. Doesn't matter what happens during spool up.
So if I am scrammed during the spoolup but manage to get the scram off when it finishes, it will still kick-in?
Also, once it finishes when I am scrammed, will it have to go through its "reload" time, or can it be started again immediately as soon as I am not scrammed anymore, as it did not get to fire off anyway?
"surrender your ego, be free". innuendo.
solo? There is a new hope...
|
Rosal Milag
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
13
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 19:25:41 -
[219] - Quote
Nou Mene wrote:
- Loving the idea, at the very least release this as presented now. - Why armor ones have drones and shield ones have missiles. Rethink flycatcher/heretic or add rails/lasers here. Also neut/nos bonus on dragoon? - Active tank bonuses could be interesting to add more options between shield/armor types.
great work.
Active tank bonuses aren't that great where these will be getting the majority of use, null. Personally, I don't want to see this line of ships go the way of the interdictor. What is flown in null? Sabres. And only sabres. Anything else and you will be told to reship or get shot at by blues. Making these ships perform very similar means that pilots have more freedom to chose as there is no clear 'best' choice.
Flycatcher/heretic make sense as rails/lasers as they follow the pedigree.
Please no neut/nos bonus. Don't need a more tanky version of dragoon and sentinel. |
Jessica Danikov
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
454
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 19:26:30 -
[220] - Quote
As per reddit, the Stork would be better off named the Magpie. Otherwise, lookin' good. |
|
Amarisen Gream
Divine Demise Apocalypse Now.
156
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 19:28:12 -
[221] - Quote
Though I love the idea - ships are to cookie cutter, like every other ship in this game. To many stats are the same from faction to faction. I stopped playing amother MMO because it became a every class is the same b/c we want every person to feel welcome. I wouldn't have a problem with that, but here's the kicker. There is only one of me, and I don't want a copy.
I understand for balance you have to cookie cutter like everything, but there should be another way. Each Empire has like 5-10 strengths based in their lore, but we never seem to see it in the ships. I.e - Amarr should always have the best over all armor and armor resist, while Gallente should always have to best armor reps and hull resist.
"The Lord loosed upon them his fierce anger
All of his fury and rage.
He dispatched against them a band of Avenging Angels"
- The Scriptures, Book II, Apocalypse 10:1
DIDE- is open to new members
|
Saisin
Chao3's Rogue Operatives Corp Chao3 Alliance
304
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 19:28:42 -
[222] - Quote
Cool ship concept! I really like the potential... Can't wait to drop this on carebear's Higgs equipped battleships trying to close their WH to rat in peace!
Did CCP consider something increasing their warfare link bonuses by an extra 1% for example when they are on grid with the other fleet ships?
"surrender your ego, be free". innuendo.
solo? There is a new hope...
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2426
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 19:31:13 -
[223] - Quote
Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote:
Confirming being shootable by any and everyone is "risk free".
Also confirming battleships can't fit MJDs thus cannot adapt.
And that no mission boat would possibly be able to lock and shoot at 101km.
Any interference allows the ship to be shot freely. That's far from risk free.
Or, you know. A prop mod. I know, I know, it's a big ask to get a ship over 1.1km/s
Doesn't work if invulnerable, which you are for 99.99% of the docking animation. BAd luck might get a few people, but a few at most.
I seriously doubt it is more affordable. Especially since I can shoot the thing.
And see you're only looking at this one way.
What about people white knighting? Blink the catalysts away from the target?
What about killing station gamers?
What about saving your friend from a bumper?
What about jumping neutral logi away from war targets?
What about jumping that sniping nado away from the undock so you can move freely?
People will NOT easily be able to abuse a 3 minute cooldown mod. How many bumps can one do in 3 minutes?
If swarms of people make a concerted effort to cause mayhem well....that is rather what the game is about, is it not?
Battleship MJD is much longer than the new destroyer one, by several seconds. A mission boat that is sitting at 70km from the target rat and is now 170km? That's not something anyone plans for. A battleship, which btw is the most common level 4 mission boat, going over 1km/s are you insane? Have you ever tried running a level 4 in anything other than a pirate ship? Most fit an AB or MJD for maneuvering as a MWD kills cap. Equipping both a MJD and MWD is impossible on some ships, as that takes up a ton of grid. And an extra slot, indirectly nerfing the shield battleship that now has to equip four more mods to counter your one, MWD, MJD, warp scrambler, sebo.
Any one of those mods will do fine, you do not need them all and nor does and MWD need run for more than 6 seconds.
Again, you're refusing to adapt to a POSSIBILITY, in the name of isk/hour.
Rosal Milag wrote:Yes, every mission runner dreams of shooting suspect ships. They are totally confident that their specialized fit for the mission they are on can totally tank someone specialized to kill them once engagable. /s
So don't. But don't pretend the choice isnt there, or that changing fit to be,*gasp* less efficient is not an option.
Rosal Milag wrote:The docking animation is not 99% invulnerable. You land in a 2,500 radius bubble on the edge of the docking ring. Which means 50% of the time, you are slowboating to the docking point. Unless you have an insta-dock point. And even then, a cluster of ships will be waiting. Odds are, if you are in the landing spot of a ship coming out of warp and cycle your MJFG right when you see them, they will be blinked the instant they land for an easy gank.
If you're bad an don't use instas, maybe.
Good lord you have a hardon for ganking huh? There are simpler and easier ways. If I can blink it, I can alpha it in a nado. You think a suspect destroyer will last long at 4-4? Ho ho ho.
Rosal Milag wrote:White knighting? Yes, I want to move all the catalysts away from their illegal target and instead have them around a now legal target, me. Which hasn't stopped the gank, only delayed it as the mach is still bumping.
Except they have concord already coming for their asses. My lord you're really clutching at straws here aren't you?
>Gankers land and a dessie is there, do they kill it, pulling concord and losing members? Do they roll the dice and see if they can kill the target in 5 seconds? See if they can chew through the dessie and the target before concord eats them up? Does the bumper get removed from play?
It is ironic you complain about a lack of creativity, yet steadfastly refuse to try to employ any to defend from these ships. |
Faltzs
Thundercats The Initiative.
19
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 19:33:48 -
[224] - Quote
These ships are far to tanky, its easy to fit the Pontifex (with rigs) with 2x 400mm plate, mwd, add on 2x drone links and just perma mwd kite then dive in to force-mjd the hostiles, the poor ishkur and other AF's are definetly in need of some love. And then there is the Bifrost, just an amazing light missile kite boat, a just improved talwar, loosing some range in exchange for tank and more mids for utilities. These ships ideally need to focus on a support role rather than being strong damage platforms, either allow 2 links or give boost to items like remote seboGÇÖs. |
Zappity
Black Aces I N F A M O U S
2569
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 19:43:08 -
[225] - Quote
Good job ccpCCP. I wmostly worried that the pull range would be too short (2km) but I think 6km is the sweet spot.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Rosal Milag
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
13
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 19:47:08 -
[226] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Any one of those mods will do fine, you do not need them all and nor does and MWD need run for more than 6 seconds. Again, you're refusing to adapt to a POSSIBILITY, in the name of isk/hour. Rosal Milag wrote:Yes, every mission runner dreams of shooting suspect ships. They are totally confident that their specialized fit for the mission they are on can totally tank someone specialized to kill them once engagable. /s So don't. But don't pretend the choice isnt there, or that changing fit to be,*gasp* less efficient is not an option. Rosal Milag wrote:The docking animation is not 99% invulnerable. You land in a 2,500 radius bubble on the edge of the docking ring. Which means 50% of the time, you are slowboating to the docking point. Unless you have an insta-dock point. And even then, a cluster of ships will be waiting. Odds are, if you are in the landing spot of a ship coming out of warp and cycle your MJFG right when you see them, they will be blinked the instant they land for an easy gank. If you're bad an don't use instas, maybe. Good lord you have a hardon for ganking huh? There are simpler and easier ways. If I can blink it, I can alpha it in a nado. You think a suspect destroyer will last long at 4-4? Ho ho ho. Rosal Milag wrote:White knighting? Yes, I want to move all the catalysts away from their illegal target and instead have them around a now legal target, me. Which hasn't stopped the gank, only delayed it as the mach is still bumping. Except they have concord already coming for their asses. My lord you're really clutching at straws here aren't you? >Gankers land and a dessie is there, do they kill it, pulling concord and losing members? Do they roll the dice and see if they can kill the target in 5 seconds? See if they can chew through the dessie and the target before concord eats them up? Does the bumper get removed from play? It is ironic you complain about a lack of creativity, yet steadfastly refuse to try to employ any to defend from these ships.
Just fitting an MWD kills cap and cap is much more important for a mission runner.
Being less efficient isn't an option for some missions. If changing one mod means I have to warp off to recover my hp/cap, I'm suddenly not just a little less efficient, its a massive time difference now.
A suspect destroyer will last long enough to blink a juicy target. Especially if you want to keep the wreck from the vultures at 4-4.
If a catalyst is criminal, it doesn't necessarily have another 6 seconds of life. Which means a blink does not do much. To actually save a gank victim, you need to blink the ships out before they attack. And now you are surrounded 100km from any help, with a suspect tag. Good luck. And you didn't get the bumping ship? They kill you, warp to a ping, and start again.
>Gankers land and a dessie is there. They wait for it to blink them and kill it. Then warp back to the target being bumped.
You don't need a mach to keep bumping once the gank fleet shows up. 10 catalysts can bump just fine. And with the CD in the picture, why would the mach risk getting jumped if the catalysts can bump to?
I refuse to employ new methods to defend as it completely changes the rest of the game around one ship that 'might' appear. Putting a tank on a miner, easy enough as it reduces yield by 10% or so. Putting a PvP capability or defense against a command destroyer on a mission ship is more than this 10% reduction. It is potentially removing several ships from seeing use at all.
If CCP wants to change the way the entire game plays, thats fine. But there are better methods of making High Sec more dangerous and interesting than something like this. If CCP intended the high sec meta to adapt to this ship, they would play it up more as a lot of people have been screaming for it to shift. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2397
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 19:51:53 -
[227] - Quote
afkalt wrote:
Any one of those mods will do fine, you do not need them all and nor does and MWD need run for more than 6 seconds.
Again, you're refusing to adapt to a POSSIBILITY, in the name of isk/hour.
Good luck getting a lock on the destroyer and landing a scram on him in less than 5 seconds without at least 2 slots being used for SeBos. Any lock time over 4 seconds will jump you before you can apply your scram on the next tick. |
D'Kmal
Variables Unlimited Void..
15
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 19:55:16 -
[228] - Quote
Will this, if you have the most insane sense of timing, pull in-space travelling missiles? |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2426
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 19:55:54 -
[229] - Quote
Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote:Any one of those mods will do fine, you do not need them all and nor does and MWD need run for more than 6 seconds. Again, you're refusing to adapt to a POSSIBILITY, in the name of isk/hour. Rosal Milag wrote:Yes, every mission runner dreams of shooting suspect ships. They are totally confident that their specialized fit for the mission they are on can totally tank someone specialized to kill them once engagable. /s So don't. But don't pretend the choice isnt there, or that changing fit to be,*gasp* less efficient is not an option. Rosal Milag wrote:The docking animation is not 99% invulnerable. You land in a 2,500 radius bubble on the edge of the docking ring. Which means 50% of the time, you are slowboating to the docking point. Unless you have an insta-dock point. And even then, a cluster of ships will be waiting. Odds are, if you are in the landing spot of a ship coming out of warp and cycle your MJFG right when you see them, they will be blinked the instant they land for an easy gank. If you're bad an don't use instas, maybe. Good lord you have a hardon for ganking huh? There are simpler and easier ways. If I can blink it, I can alpha it in a nado. You think a suspect destroyer will last long at 4-4? Ho ho ho. Rosal Milag wrote:White knighting? Yes, I want to move all the catalysts away from their illegal target and instead have them around a now legal target, me. Which hasn't stopped the gank, only delayed it as the mach is still bumping. Except they have concord already coming for their asses. My lord you're really clutching at straws here aren't you? >Gankers land and a dessie is there, do they kill it, pulling concord and losing members? Do they roll the dice and see if they can kill the target in 5 seconds? See if they can chew through the dessie and the target before concord eats them up? Does the bumper get removed from play? It is ironic you complain about a lack of creativity, yet steadfastly refuse to try to employ any to defend from these ships. Just fitting an MWD kills cap and cap is much more important for a mission runner. Being less efficient isn't an option for some missions. If changing one mod means I have to warp off to recover my hp/cap, I'm suddenly not just a little less efficient, its a massive time difference now. A suspect destroyer will last long enough to blink a juicy target. Especially if you want to keep the wreck from the vultures at 4-4. If a catalyst is criminal, it doesn't necessarily have another 6 seconds of life. Which means a blink does not do much. To actually save a gank victim, you need to blink the ships out before they attack. And now you are surrounded 100km from any help, with a suspect tag. Good luck. And you didn't get the bumping ship? They kill you, warp to a ping, and start again. >Gankers land and a dessie is there. They wait for it to blink them and kill it. Then warp back to the target being bumped. You don't need a mach to keep bumping once the gank fleet shows up. 10 catalysts can bump just fine. And with the CD in the picture, why would the mach risk getting jumped if the catalysts can bump to? I refuse to employ new methods to defend as it completely changes the rest of the game around one ship that 'might' appear. Putting a tank on a miner, easy enough as it reduces yield by 10% or so. Putting a PvP capability or defense against a command destroyer on a mission ship is more than this 10% reduction. It is potentially removing several ships from seeing use at all. If CCP wants to change the way the entire game plays, thats fine. But there are better methods of making High Sec more dangerous and interesting than something like this. If CCP intended the high sec meta to adapt to this ship, they would play it up more as a lot of people have been screaming for it to shift.
I must have dreamt the MWD on my machariel
Cap stability in a mission boat is a fools errand and the only exception to that rule (and it is a rule, by they way) is undersized reppers on marauders for people who worry about a DC.
Warping out doesn't make the mission impossible - although it is a pretty good tell your skills and fit were not up to snuff.
PS: Mobile depots are a thing. No-one is asking you to run with a perma-"gimped" (and I use the term VERY loosely) fit. Or is sticking some options in your hold also "too much effort"?
You don't even know how ganking works for goodness sakes, it's on a knife edge - any disruption ruins it badly. And if you think nados won't be out to alpha flashy yellow small things which can't manage transversal I don't know what to tell you. |
Catherine Laartii
Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate
621
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 19:57:27 -
[230] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:MAGUSGallente Destroyer Per Level: 10% Bonus to Drone Damage 4% bonus to armor resists Command Destroyer Per Level: 2% to Armor and Skirmish Warfare link effectiveness 5% reduction in MJFG spool up time Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators Role: Can fit one Warfare Link PONTIFEXAmarr Destroyer per Level: 10% Bonus to Drone Damage 4% bonus to Armor Resistances Command Destroyer per Level: 2% to Armor and Information Warfare link effectiveness 5% reduction in MJFG spool up time Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators Role: Can fit one Warfare Link STORKCaldari Destroyer per Level: 10% to Rocket and Light Missile Damage 4% Bonus to Shield Resistances Command Destroyer per Level: 2% to Siege and Information link effectiveness per level 5% reduction in MJFG spool up time Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators Role: Can fit one Warfare Link BIFROSTMinmatar Destroyer per Level: 10% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile Damage 4% bonus to shield resists Command Destroyer per Level: 2% to Siege and Skirmish Warfare link effectiveness 5% reduction in MJFG spool up time Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators Role: Can fit one Warfare Link And for their attributes I'm using a google doc this time for better readability: ATTRIBUTESThanks ! Ok, so several things stand out to me here as alarming and needing immediate change.
1. The Stork? Seriously? That's the BEST animal/bird name you could come up with? Did you swindled by a Caldari merchant as a child or something?
2. If these are getting full resists, then the Gallente and Minmatar Command dessies should get an active tanking bonus like the command ships, which do just fine with active tanking (especially the sleipnir).
3. Give the Magus and Pontifex 4 turrets (while removing the launchers), and apply bonuses as listed below.
4. The MJFG field is completely redundant and wastes a bonus to the ship; you can either increase the spool-up reduction into the skill itself or remove it and leave it as-is. Here is what you should replace it with on each ship: -Magus gets 10% bonus hybrid turret damage per level -Pontifex gets 10% bonus to laser turret damage per level -Stork (gag PLEASE choose another name) gets 10% to missile velocity per level -Bifrost gets 10% to missile velocity per level
5. Change PG values to -Magus and Bifrost get 60 base PG each -Stork (again, change the ******* name) gets 65 base pg -Pontifix gets 75 base pg
6. The speed values are really weird. Magus and Stork (or whatever else it's going to get its name changed to) should get their max speed values exchanged, and Magus and Bifrost should get their total mass amounts exchanged.
Please consider these. ESPECIALLY RENAMING THE STORK. |
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2426
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 19:58:24 -
[231] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:afkalt wrote:
Any one of those mods will do fine, you do not need them all and nor does and MWD need run for more than 6 seconds.
Again, you're refusing to adapt to a POSSIBILITY, in the name of isk/hour.
Good luck getting a lock on the destroyer and landing a scram on him in less than 5 seconds without at least 2 slots being used for SeBos. Any lock time over 4 seconds will jump you before you can apply your scram on the next tick.
I wouldn't scram it in a mission ship. I'd just MJD myself back to where I came from. Well, I would, if I wouldn't be in bastion, but on the rare occasion I'm not in a marauder, I'd just MJD it.
Or I'd burn my machariel back...except, again I wouldn't because it'll burn out of the effective range before it spools up. Same with the navy raven.
Oh the sacrifices I would have to make for that. Oh my, the humanity
Oh wait, there are basically none. I suppose using a mobile depot does raise the :effort: bar if I want to maintain efficiency......won't someone think of the.....children? No...the bears?...the...something. |
Nou Mene
Out of Focus Odin's Call
13
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:00:33 -
[232] - Quote
why is ppl discussing hs uses of it when ccp said it was banned from hs?
also missions needs to be scanned, from the moment you get there to when the dessie would be bothering you, you have a couple minutes (if that player is completely focused on ruining you), if you taking much more than that to run one mission (L4) then i'll get worried about my isk/hr in some other aspects (i used to run L4 in a pvp drake in LS, and/or t2 mach in HS, and it cant get any easier) |
Mr Hyde113
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
191
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:01:10 -
[233] - Quote
As much as the bittervet in me has a knee-jerk negative reaction to crazy mechanics changes like this MJFG, and HIC Point acting like scrams, ect...I'm going to ignore that instinct and say that these are certainly going to shake things up, and and that will be an interesting and content-generating challenge to deal with and utilize. It's sightly sad that something that was exclusive to BS and BCs is being expanded to smaller ships and potentially everyone, but I hope it will lead to more explosions and less risk aversion
I see plenty of potential for abuse, but it will make for some hilarious videos at the very least.
Questions:
If these function similarly to MJDs, will scrams and the future Hic Points turn off/prevent them from successfully activating? Will MJDing another ship create an aggression timer or suspect timer? For those of us that like big (REAL ) ships, are there any plans to expand MJFG to command ships in the future? Will the MJFG also create a sig bloom similar to MJDs? will the % amount be increased given then Destroyer hull's smaller base signature to give larger ships a chance to lock and react within the short spool up time?
. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2426
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:07:00 -
[234] - Quote
Nou Mene wrote:why is ppl discussing hs uses of it when ccp said it was banned from hs?
also missions needs to be scanned, from the moment you get there to when the dessie would be bothering you, you have a couple minutes (if that player is completely focused on ruining you), if you taking much more than that to run one mission (L4) then i'll get worried about my isk/hr in some other aspects (i used to run L4 in a pvp drake in LS, and/or t2 mach in HS, and it cant get any easier)
Because the reason cited by Rise for HS not being allowed were terrible; it boiled down to "incursion players can't be arsed" |
Rosal Milag
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
13
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:07:23 -
[235] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:afkalt wrote:
Any one of those mods will do fine, you do not need them all and nor does and MWD need run for more than 6 seconds.
Again, you're refusing to adapt to a POSSIBILITY, in the name of isk/hour.
Good luck getting a lock on the destroyer and landing a scram on him in less than 5 seconds without at least 2 slots being used for SeBos. Any lock time over 4 seconds will jump you before you can apply your scram on the next tick. I wouldn't scram it in a mission ship. I'd just MJD myself back to where I came from. Well, I would, if I wouldn't be in bastion, but on the rare occasion I'm not in a marauder, I'd just MJD it. Or I'd burn my machariel back...except, again I wouldn't because it'll burn out of the effective range before it spools up. Same with the navy raven. Oh the sacrifices I would have to make for that. Oh my, the humanityOh wait, there are basically none. I suppose using a mobile depot does raise the :effort: bar if I want to maintain efficiency......won't someone think of the.....children? No...the bears?...the... something.
Because a Mach is going to outrun a destroyer?
And sitting with 0 m/s on a depot is a great way to run a mission.
Warping out doesn't mean the mission is impossible or lost. Only that you now have a huge chunk of time you could have been in the mission. Warp out and back, is at least 3-4 minutes to repair tank and cap up. That's no longer a slight difference in efficiency.
Looks like we can only run missions in Machs and they are the only ships that can do everything you think a battleship can do for missions.
You still haven't addressed someone not even targetting you and blinking your mission npc 100 km away from you. Or a gang daisy chaining it away. You know, the one you needed the drop from? Mission failed. And saying that mission runners have to blitz or have to carry MTU's and focus the target NPC stifles creativity and choice. |
Rivr Luzade
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
2109
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:08:48 -
[236] - 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 :( There is no need to add new things to High sec. The more things/toys/tools that are exclusively available in Low and Null sec, the more drag there is for people to venture at least once into these areas to test these things. That should be encouraged.
UI Improvement Collective
My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
|
Daugan
Scope Works Psychotic Tendencies.
11
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:12:59 -
[237] - Quote
Any thoughts to potentially resetting the bomb timer after launch when the bomb is mmjd'd?
Give battleships some chance :( |
Onslaughtor
Perkone Caldari State
161
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:13:56 -
[238] - Quote
I absolutely love these things. I have a few questions tho about them which I haven't seen answered yet.
Does the pwg reduction for links apply to command possessors as well?
Can it jump/blink a marauders in bastion? If so that sees a little unfair, and could we get a reasoning for it?
Battleships will have a very hard time countering these things, even with support , could a special active module be made to allow battleships to self scramble? Thoughts?
Apart from those questions most of the other ones have been answered. These things are by far the most powerful tool you have given players in a long long time. As it was put to me they have a very high skill ceiling in terms of actual player skill and the effects of that skill has the potential to wipe out entire fleets. It also adds a level of chaos to the field of battle as these things will create unpredictable effects on gangs of all sizes. I do feel based on the numbers I have calculated that the damaged for these might be a little strong. More so in the alpha department than the dps but its something to watch for considering their tank and speed. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2426
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:14:59 -
[239] - Quote
Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:afkalt wrote:
Any one of those mods will do fine, you do not need them all and nor does and MWD need run for more than 6 seconds.
Again, you're refusing to adapt to a POSSIBILITY, in the name of isk/hour.
Good luck getting a lock on the destroyer and landing a scram on him in less than 5 seconds without at least 2 slots being used for SeBos. Any lock time over 4 seconds will jump you before you can apply your scram on the next tick. I wouldn't scram it in a mission ship. I'd just MJD myself back to where I came from. Well, I would, if I wouldn't be in bastion, but on the rare occasion I'm not in a marauder, I'd just MJD it. Or I'd burn my machariel back...except, again I wouldn't because it'll burn out of the effective range before it spools up. Same with the navy raven. Oh the sacrifices I would have to make for that. Oh my, the humanityOh wait, there are basically none. I suppose using a mobile depot does raise the :effort: bar if I want to maintain efficiency......won't someone think of the.....children? No...the bears?...the... something. Because a Mach is going to outrun a destroyer? And sitting with 0 m/s on a depot is a great way to run a mission. Warping out doesn't mean the mission is impossible or lost. Only that you now have a huge chunk of time you could have been in the mission. Warp out and back, is at least 3-4 minutes to repair tank and cap up. That's no longer a slight difference in efficiency. Looks like we can only run missions in Machs and they are the only ships that can do everything you think a battleship can do for missions. You still haven't addressed someone not even targetting you and blinking your mission npc 100 km away from you. Or a gang daisy chaining it away. You know, the one you needed the drop from? Mission failed. And saying that mission runners have to blitz or have to carry MTU's and focus the target NPC stifles creativity and choice.
I swear I'm being trolled.
I do not need to outrun it, I need to move further than 6km away when the dessie is LOCKED to a vector. That's simple. Do you even know how MJDs work for gods sakes?
So..uh...don't be a bad and don't sit on the depot? Jesus god, I would have thought it was obvious but no, apparently not. Drop it if you get jumped, refit to MJD, jump back. Give no more f**ks. Good lord you're hard of thinking.
I'm not even going near the BUT MAH ISK/HOUR garbage you keep bleating about.
So you have a problem with a GANG of people being able to interfere with a SOLE player? Oh god no, not in an MMO, not on my watch!!!
Or kill that target first. Or MJD after it, if it is a solo guy (see above for a gang of people). It is absolutely NO DIFFERENT to someone popping that ship and nicking the drop. Not at all. They even go flashy too. Mission running as a profession hasn't died out, last I looked. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2426
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:15:46 -
[240] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote: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 :( There is no need to add new things to High sec. The more things/toys/tools that are exclusively available in Low and Null sec, the more drag there is for people to venture at least once into these areas to test these things. That should be encouraged.
That's literally the best reason I've seen for putting it to low and below only.
+1 |
|
Odracir Atosc
The Legion of Spoon Curatores Veritatis Alliance
12
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:16:13 -
[241] - Quote
Suitonia wrote:Super cool
So you complain about OOG boosts and then you say super cool?
|
Edward Olmops
DUST Expeditionary Team Good Sax
316
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:18:02 -
[242] - 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 :(
C'mon... Why can't THEY scramble each other? Just a slight nerf. Incursion fleets are OP anyway... ;-) |
Catherine Laartii
Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate
621
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:19:16 -
[243] - Quote
Querns wrote:Torgeir Hekard wrote: While in low/null/wh you can shoot a dessie on sight, in hisec you have to patiently wait for it to finish flinging you/NPC out into the void before having a reasonable way to deal with the consequences (assuming it even gets any kind of flag for the trouble). You can't really suicide every command destroyer you meet out of probability it being after you.
Or, the MJFG could create a Suspect Flag upon activation. Pre-target any that land inside your dungeon, and if they go suspect, apply the Warp Scrambler. Then, switch targets, and take it to the MURDERZONE. Or you could read the part in the thread where it states explicitly that MJFG are banned from activation in hisec...
|
Arla Sarain
700
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:19:23 -
[244] - Quote
Faltzs wrote:These ships ideally need to focus on a support role rather than being strong damage platforms, either allow 2 links or give boost to items like remote seboGÇÖs. Have you even bothered looking at the damage...? Both the corax and talwar have more effective turrets than the Stork or Bifrost.
The armor ones lack the drone HP bonus and will actually be easy to counter by the commonly advised "just shoot the drones" strategy |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2426
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:20:57 -
[245] - Quote
Catherine Laartii wrote:Querns wrote:Torgeir Hekard wrote: While in low/null/wh you can shoot a dessie on sight, in hisec you have to patiently wait for it to finish flinging you/NPC out into the void before having a reasonable way to deal with the consequences (assuming it even gets any kind of flag for the trouble). You can't really suicide every command destroyer you meet out of probability it being after you.
Or, the MJFG could create a Suspect Flag upon activation. Pre-target any that land inside your dungeon, and if they go suspect, apply the Warp Scrambler. Then, switch targets, and take it to the MURDERZONE. Or you could read the part in the thread where it states explicitly that MJFG are banned from activation in hisec...
Or you could read the comments out of context and debate at hand.... |
Rosal Milag
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
13
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:24:56 -
[246] - Quote
afkalt wrote: I swear I'm being trolled.
I do not need to outrun it, I need to move further than 6km away when the dessie is LOCKED to a vector. That's simple. Do you even know how MJDs work for gods sakes?
So..uh...don't be a bad and don't sit on the depot? Jesus god, I would have thought it was obvious but no, apparently not. Drop it if you get jumped, refit to MJD, jump back. Give no more f**ks. Good lord you're hard of thinking.
I'm not even going near the BUT MAH ISK/HOUR garbage you keep bleating about.
So you have a problem with a GANG of people being able to interfere with a SOLE player? Oh god no, not in an MMO, not on my watch!!!
Or kill that target first. Or MJD after it, if it is a solo guy (see above for a gang of people). It is absolutely NO DIFFERENT to someone popping that ship and nicking the drop. Not at all. They even go flashy too. Mission running as a profession hasn't died out, last I looked.
Alright. List all the battleships that can go 1+km/s from a dead stop. With only a MWD and no other prop mods.
If you get jumped, how are you able to refit to a MJD? Why can't the gankers reinforce your depot? Its only a suspect timer.
ISK/HOUR is a relevant argument when adjusting to the change handicaps it excessively. 10% Fine. 20% a bit rough. One ship and module causing your ISK/HOUR to drop by 30% or more? Love how the game is now designed around one ship and one module.
Jumping the target NPC away does a few things. One, it keeps it out of range of the mission runner to give him more time to work on it. Two, his buddies can warp directly to him and keep daisychaining it.
You are demanding answers of why it should not be allowed in high sec. The simplest one, the one I keep returning to is, this changes everything. Everything has to respond to it and be prepared for it. There has never been one module to have such an effect in the game's history in high security space.
Is it possible to prepare for? Yes. In hundreds of ways. Is it cheap to do so, yes. Is it something people could adapt to, yes. Same could be said for bombs, bubbles, and capitals. But the addition of the jump or any of these others fundamentally changes the way the game plays in high security and CCP doesn't want to shift the HS meta that much right now, in this way. |
Catherine Laartii
Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate
621
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:25:54 -
[247] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Catherine Laartii wrote:Querns wrote:Torgeir Hekard wrote: While in low/null/wh you can shoot a dessie on sight, in hisec you have to patiently wait for it to finish flinging you/NPC out into the void before having a reasonable way to deal with the consequences (assuming it even gets any kind of flag for the trouble). You can't really suicide every command destroyer you meet out of probability it being after you.
Or, the MJFG could create a Suspect Flag upon activation. Pre-target any that land inside your dungeon, and if they go suspect, apply the Warp Scrambler. Then, switch targets, and take it to the MURDERZONE. Or you could read the part in the thread where it states explicitly that MJFG are banned from activation in hisec... Or you could read the comments out of context and debate at hand.... Why wouldn't i? It's not like the devs take anything in these release threads seriously anyway, why should I? |
Kaelynne Rose
WTB Somalians
48
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:40:49 -
[248] - 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 :( Where as currently incursion fleets are basically immune and have zero risk while printing plexes.
Risk=reward.
Incursion fleets NEED risk introduced man. You cant tell me with a straight face they dont/have balanced risk/reward man. |
Midori Tsu
Evolution Northern Coalition.
142
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:43:32 -
[249] - Quote
The lack of real counter game play is kind of worrying. Having to fit scrams on every ship is not going to be interesting. This is way too powerful to be put on a throwaway ship (i'm assuming these are going to be cheap because they're t2 destroyers). There needs to be some massive penalities to using this. |
DeadDuck
The Legion of Spoon Curatores Veritatis Alliance
184
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:45:25 -
[250] - Quote
I can't imagine nothing worst to kill the small gangs roaming in deep hostile areas where your only way to survive is kitting then watch a cloud of intys instantly jump 100km and be on top of you.
And to make it even easier the only guy that has to be aligned to the target is the command dessie... orbit at 500m and wait for the dessie to activate the module. |
|
Align Planet1
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
91
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:45:41 -
[251] - Quote
Do like the concept.
Do not like the name "Stork." Everyone will just call it the "Stroke." +1 to Random McNally for "Shrike." |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2426
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:48:09 -
[252] - Quote
Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote: I swear I'm being trolled.
I do not need to outrun it, I need to move further than 6km away when the dessie is LOCKED to a vector. That's simple. Do you even know how MJDs work for gods sakes?
So..uh...don't be a bad and don't sit on the depot? Jesus god, I would have thought it was obvious but no, apparently not. Drop it if you get jumped, refit to MJD, jump back. Give no more f**ks. Good lord you're hard of thinking.
I'm not even going near the BUT MAH ISK/HOUR garbage you keep bleating about.
So you have a problem with a GANG of people being able to interfere with a SOLE player? Oh god no, not in an MMO, not on my watch!!!
Or kill that target first. Or MJD after it, if it is a solo guy (see above for a gang of people). It is absolutely NO DIFFERENT to someone popping that ship and nicking the drop. Not at all. They even go flashy too. Mission running as a profession hasn't died out, last I looked.
Alright. List all the battleships that can go 1+km/s from a dead stop. With only a MWD and no other prop mods.
Unfit, even an abaddon can. I'm not sure there is one that can't, actually.
Rosal Milag wrote:If you get jumped, how are you able to refit to a MJD? Why can't the gankers reinforce your depot? Its only a suspect timer.
Oh so now there's a gang? Way to move the goalposts. Why are they not just ganking the mission bear? Maybe because....no-one will use T2 ships for that, plus there is not a single reason to move ANYONE in a mission for a gank. Not one.
And these mission runners, not watching for probes? Not seeing an armada incoming and can't warp out? Right. Ok.
You are clutching at straws and moving the goalposts when caught out.
Rosal Milag wrote:ISK/HOUR is a relevant argument when adjusting to the change handicaps it excessively. 10% Fine. 20% a bit rough. One ship and module causing your ISK/HOUR to drop by 30% or more? Love how the game is now designed around one ship and one module.
One module on a ship you may never even see. Carry an alternate fitting, it's not rocket science. It doesn't handicap a damn thing any more than me warping out when I see a dozen thrashers on a short scan.
It's only a handicap if you ALLOW it to be, or are generally just bad.
They could put these in the game tomorrow and my high sec mission income would not even move. Not an inch.
Rosal Milag wrote:Jumping the target NPC away does a few things. One, it keeps it out of range of the mission runner to give him more time to work on it. Two, his buddies can warp directly to him and keep daisychaining it.
Only in an ungated mission and honestly, people won't do that, it's simpler and easier to pop the rat and steal the loot. Something only really done in cosmos missions these days. Point is, this is doable TODAY with the same ramifications but with less exposure.
It changes very little for the bad. It rewards the prepared, this is good. It rewards cooperation, this is good and it punishes the sloppy, the lazy and the feckless. This is also good. It creates options for dealing with otherwise impossible situations (docking games, for one) this is also good.
You've made a plethora of bad excuses revolving around isk/hour and absolute edge cases, demonstrated a terrible understanding of game mechanics from ganking to missions and constantly assumed the "victim" is utterly brain dead and not remotely competent whilst painting the gankers as superhuman monsters who can elegant interweave both alignment and server ticks 100% perfectly, can go from one guy to a fleet when it suits.
Honestly, it's a pretty poor show, you've basically got nothing beyond (a wildly hyperbolic) "don't take away my isk/hour". Which is fine, but that's not a reason to not introduce a mod. |
Allison A'vani
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
171
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:51:19 -
[253] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote: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 :( It's not over the top. It's hilarious and moreover, some needed risk to that community. When there is no counterplay, its over the top. Specifically referring to the ability of these destroyers to warp into an incursion fight, activate without anyone stopping them and killing the fleet as the logi is now 100km away and useless. In low and null, as soon as the destroyer lands, its able to be killed. In high sec, you get concorded. Even a criminal timer when it activates isn't enough, both for the fleet to kill it or for it to activate before concord kills it in certain systems. There is instant counterplay. You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time. Again, if you can expect combat fleets to do this, you can JUST as easily expect incursion fleets to do this. ed: And it should only go suspect, imo.
There is zero counter play to this. Have you ever tried to lock a saber or an interceptor while under 10% TiDi? You can't, unless the pilot is completely ********. Unless this module massively blooms your sig, this will be a huge detriment to large fights.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2426
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:55:17 -
[254] - Quote
Allison A'vani wrote:
There is zero counter play to this. Have you ever tried to lock a saber or an interceptor while under 10% TiDi? You can't, unless the pilot is completely ********. Unless this module massively blooms your sig, this will be a huge detriment to large fights.
Well considering all the other mjds do....why would it not? |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
244
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:58:30 -
[255] - Quote
Kaelynne Rose wrote: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 :( Where as currently incursion fleets are basically immune and have zero risk while printing plexes. Risk=reward. Incursion fleets NEED risk introduced man. You cant tell me with a straight face they dont/have balanced risk/reward man.
They are balanced the way CCP wants them to be. |
Rivr Luzade
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
2109
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 20:59:20 -
[256] - Quote
Kaelynne Rose wrote:Where as currently incursion fleets are basically immune and have zero risk while printing plexes.
Risk=reward.
Incursion fleets NEED risk introduced man. You cant tell me with a straight face they dont/have balanced risk/reward man. A couple of Thrashers can wreck any incursion ship inside the incursion sites. A Blackbird can jeopardize an entire fleet if they jam the logis just long enough. Don't confuse your own lack of imagination and knowledge with facts and make people believe that risk-inducing activities are not applied on the server.
UI Improvement Collective
My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2426
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 21:00:14 -
[257] - Quote
Lady Rift wrote:Kaelynne Rose wrote: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 :( Where as currently incursion fleets are basically immune and have zero risk while printing plexes. Risk=reward. Incursion fleets NEED risk introduced man. You cant tell me with a straight face they dont/have balanced risk/reward man. They are balanced the way CCP wants them to be.
Yeah but so were a lot of things, until they weren't. |
Moac Tor
Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation
319
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 21:00:31 -
[258] - Quote
Onslaughtor wrote:I absolutely love these things. I have a few questions tho about them which I haven't seen answered yet.
Does the pwg reduction for links apply to command possessors as well?
Can it jump/blink a marauders in bastion? If so that sees a little unfair, and could we get a reasoning for it?
Battleships will have a very hard time countering these things, even with support , could a special active module be made to allow battleships to self scramble? Thoughts? Perhaps battleships and BCs could have a module which has an AEO scramble affect. I'm all for adding unique BS and BC modules and that would be super useful not only as a counter to these command destroyers, but also in general.
Modulated ECM Effects
An Alternative to Skill Trading
|
Rosal Milag
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
13
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 21:05:12 -
[259] - Quote
Quote:
Only in an ungated mission and honestly, people won't do that, it's simpler and easier to pop the rat and steal the loot. Something only really done in cosmos missions these days. Point is, this is doable TODAY with the same ramifications but with less exposure.
It changes very little for the bad. It rewards the prepared, this is good. It rewards cooperation, this is good and it punishes the sloppy, the lazy and the feckless. This is also good. It creates options for dealing with otherwise impossible situations (docking games, for one) this is also good.
You've made a plethora of bad excuses revolving around isk/hour and absolute edge cases, demonstrated a terrible understanding of game mechanics from ganking to missions and constantly assumed the "victim" is utterly brain dead and not remotely competent whilst painting the gankers as superhuman monsters who can elegant interweave both alignment and server ticks 100% perfectly, can go from one guy to a fleet when it suits.
Honestly, it's a pretty poor show, you've basically got nothing beyond (a wildly hyperbolic) "don't take away my isk/hour". Which is fine, but that's not a reason to not introduce a mod.
Then why not look at the newbie? High sec is consensual pvp with the exception suicide ganks and MTU/depots. This action clearly is a PvP action and should be counted as a criminal action. The net effect is equivalent to applying a web to someone, but still gets you concorded.
If jumping anyone not a valid target gives you a criminal timer, I'd be all for it. Similar to smartbomb use in High Sec. As that would require coordination and sacrifice on the part of the ganker and not just jumps for the lulz.
My arguments about ganking revolve mainly around the miniluv and code freighter ganks. If they will kill empty T1 freighters, a white knight command destroyer isn't going to save any ship they target. Especially in light of hyperdunking history. The regen of shields on a freighter is so low that you can gank a ship with under critical numbers and just keep bumping it away. Granted it leaves more time for someone to white knight. But hitting a target with fewer ships than necessary to pop the target doesn't mean its a failed gank. Just means a reset and reattack.
Please make a good argument for a suspect only timer. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2428
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 21:19:25 -
[260] - Quote
Rosal Milag wrote:Quote:
Only in an ungated mission and honestly, people won't do that, it's simpler and easier to pop the rat and steal the loot. Something only really done in cosmos missions these days. Point is, this is doable TODAY with the same ramifications but with less exposure.
It changes very little for the bad. It rewards the prepared, this is good. It rewards cooperation, this is good and it punishes the sloppy, the lazy and the feckless. This is also good. It creates options for dealing with otherwise impossible situations (docking games, for one) this is also good.
You've made a plethora of bad excuses revolving around isk/hour and absolute edge cases, demonstrated a terrible understanding of game mechanics from ganking to missions and constantly assumed the "victim" is utterly brain dead and not remotely competent whilst painting the gankers as superhuman monsters who can elegant interweave both alignment and server ticks 100% perfectly, can go from one guy to a fleet when it suits.
Honestly, it's a pretty poor show, you've basically got nothing beyond (a wildly hyperbolic) "don't take away my isk/hour". Which is fine, but that's not a reason to not introduce a mod.
Then why not look at the newbie? High sec is consensual pvp with the exception suicide ganks and MTU/depots. This action clearly is a PvP action and should be counted as a criminal action. The net effect is equivalent to applying a web to someone, but still gets you concorded. If jumping anyone not a valid target gives you a criminal timer, I'd be all for it. Similar to smartbomb use in High Sec. As that would require coordination and sacrifice on the part of the ganker and not just jumps for the lulz. My arguments about ganking revolve mainly around the miniluv and code freighter ganks. If they will kill empty T1 freighters, a white knight command destroyer isn't going to save any ship they target. Especially in light of hyperdunking history. The regen of shields on a freighter is so low that you can gank a ship with under critical numbers and just keep bumping it away. Granted it leaves more time for someone to white knight. But hitting a target with fewer ships than necessary to pop the target doesn't mean its a failed gank. Just means a reset and reattack. Please make a good argument for a suspect only timer.
Hyperdunking or undermanned ganking would still use bumpers because of the headcount, the MJD cooldown timer, the fact the bumper is protected by concord and the dessies would not be. Hell ganking as a whole will still use bumpers, it's a 3 minute cooldown on MJD mods, that's an eternity, you would need a fair few to make that work. More efficient, safer and predictable to continue using bumping machs.
As for suspect: Because criminal is binary, it doesn't really create good interaction opportunities.
It also basically kills all the nifty uses of this I already listed.
When you think about it, there are most of equivalents these in game already. Not all, but most and they have suspect/no flagging attached.
>Nicking mission rats/items is analogous to ninja looting and that is suspect.
>Moving ships around against their will is essentially bumping which carries no flagging at all (albeit the reasons may be mechanical rather than intention). No problem with a "mass bump" carrying a flag, that is reasonable.
Most important thing is, it's a dial that can be turned. It could start suspect then go criminal if it was really bad or LATER removed from highsec if that was still not enough. Banning it outright, out of the gate means we will never know and an opportunity is lost. |
|
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers Goonswarm Federation
272
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 21:22:03 -
[261] - Quote
Catherine Laartii wrote:CCP Rise wrote:MAGUSGallente Destroyer Per Level: 10% Bonus to Drone Damage 4% bonus to armor resists Command Destroyer Per Level: 2% to Armor and Skirmish Warfare link effectiveness 5% reduction in MJFG spool up time Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators Role: Can fit one Warfare Link PONTIFEXAmarr Destroyer per Level: 10% Bonus to Drone Damage 4% bonus to Armor Resistances Command Destroyer per Level: 2% to Armor and Information Warfare link effectiveness 5% reduction in MJFG spool up time Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators Role: Can fit one Warfare Link STORKCaldari Destroyer per Level: 10% to Rocket and Light Missile Damage 4% Bonus to Shield Resistances Command Destroyer per Level: 2% to Siege and Information link effectiveness per level 5% reduction in MJFG spool up time Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators Role: Can fit one Warfare Link BIFROSTMinmatar Destroyer per Level: 10% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile Damage 4% bonus to shield resists Command Destroyer per Level: 2% to Siege and Skirmish Warfare link effectiveness 5% reduction in MJFG spool up time Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators Role: Can fit one Warfare Link And for their attributes I'm using a google doc this time for better readability: ATTRIBUTESThanks ! Ok, so several things stand out to me here as alarming and needing immediate change. 1. The Stork? Seriously? That's the BEST animal/bird name you could come up with? Did you swindled by a Caldari merchant as a child or something? 2. If these are getting full resists, then the Gallente and Minmatar Command dessies should get an active tanking bonus like the command ships, which do just fine with active tanking (especially the sleipnir). 3. Give the Magus and Pontifex 4 turrets (while removing the launchers), and apply bonuses as listed below. 4. The MJFG field is completely redundant and wastes a bonus to the ship; you can either increase the spool-up reduction into the skill itself or remove it and leave it as-is. Here is what you should replace it with on each ship: -Magus gets 10% bonus hybrid turret damage per level -Pontifex gets 10% bonus to laser turret damage per level -Stork (gag PLEASE choose another name) gets 10% to missile velocity per level -Bifrost gets 10% to missile velocity per level 5. Change PG values to -Magus and Bifrost get 60 base PG each -Stork (again, change the ******* name) gets 65 base pg -Pontifix gets 75 base pg 6. The speed values are really weird. Magus and Stork (or whatever else it's going to get its name changed to) should get their max speed values exchanged, and Magus and Bifrost should get their total mass amounts exchanged. Please consider these. ESPECIALLY RENAMING THE STORK. +100 |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2428
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 21:24:40 -
[262] - Quote
In fact, this should MOST DEFINITELY carry a suspect flag so I can't bounce a fleet off a lowsec gate under gate gun protection.
They should be able to shoot me without angering the gate guns if I'm about to port their fleet, or part of it, away. |
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers Goonswarm Federation
273
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 21:30:31 -
[263] - Quote
Nou Mene wrote:why is ppl discussing hs uses of it when ccp said it was banned from hs?
also missions needs to be scanned, from the moment you get there to when the dessie would be bothering you, you have a couple minutes (if that player is completely focused on ruining you), if you taking much more than that to run one mission (L4) then i'll get worried about my isk/hr in some other aspects (i used to run L4 in a pvp drake in LS, and/or t2 mach in HS, and it cant get any easier)
Because the only reason this new module cant be used in hi-sec is due to a niche crowd. The rest who use hi-sec have to be cut off. As you can see from the incursion runner posts, they are incapable of adjusting to game changes and have prior secured RISE's assistance via secret financial aide to secure future additions to the game do not affect their game play. As long as Incursion runners continue to back Rise. Hi-sec will suffer and be denied future additions like this to the game. As he said, this cant be allowed due to Incursion runners. |
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers Goonswarm Federation
273
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 21:33:26 -
[264] - Quote
Catherine Laartii wrote:afkalt wrote:Catherine Laartii wrote:Querns wrote:Torgeir Hekard wrote: While in low/null/wh you can shoot a dessie on sight, in hisec you have to patiently wait for it to finish flinging you/NPC out into the void before having a reasonable way to deal with the consequences (assuming it even gets any kind of flag for the trouble). You can't really suicide every command destroyer you meet out of probability it being after you.
Or, the MJFG could create a Suspect Flag upon activation. Pre-target any that land inside your dungeon, and if they go suspect, apply the Warp Scrambler. Then, switch targets, and take it to the MURDERZONE. Or you could read the part in the thread where it states explicitly that MJFG are banned from activation in hisec... Or you could read the comments out of context and debate at hand.... Why wouldn't i? It's not like the devs take anything in these release threads seriously anyway, why should I?
That is true, they do pay more attention to reddit. the final adjustments to the ships almost always from from /r/eve discussions. It's their preferred communications platform. |
Rosal Milag
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
15
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 21:47:33 -
[265] - Quote
afkalt wrote:
Hyperdunking or undermanned ganking would still use bumpers because of the headcount, the MJD cooldown timer, the fact the bumper is protected by concord and the dessies would not be. Hell ganking as a whole will still use bumpers, it's a 3 minute cooldown on MJD mods, that's an eternity, you would need a fair few to make that work. More efficient, safer and predictable to continue using bumping machs.
As for suspect: Because criminal is binary, it doesn't really create good interaction opportunities.
It also basically kills all the nifty uses of this I already listed.
When you think about it, there are most of equivalents these in game already. Not all, but most and they have suspect/no flagging attached.
>Nicking mission rats/items is analogous to ninja looting and that is suspect.
>Moving ships around against their will is essentially bumping which carries no flagging at all (albeit the reasons may be mechanical rather than intention). No problem with a "mass bump" carrying a flag, that is reasonable.
Most important thing is, it's a dial that can be turned. It could start suspect then go criminal if it was really bad or LATER removed from highsec if that was still not enough. Banning it outright, out of the gate means we will never know and an opportunity is lost.
Moving someone without their consent, (fleet warps have consent as you accepted the fleet invitation and then the allow fleet warps option) shouldn't result in a scenario they are immediately destroyed or helpless to escape. A bump will not result in your ship being tackled by NPCs and subsequently destroyed. A MJD jump can. By removing the logi from the incursion group, ships melt and anyone tackled can't warp off. By moving a missioner into the dead center of a spawn normally means they will be tackled and killed by the NPCs. A bump for ganking doesn't necessarily mean you are done and helpless, as there is significant counterplay.
As far as dials go, high sec isn't the place to introduce new modules and tactics. Start in null and work your way to high sec. Something that would carry this much consequence for the victims should not begin usage in the largest concentration of new players in the game. Titan doomsdays were only just allowed into low sec. Disruptive technology should not be released in a distributed manner without seeing how the community uses it. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1950
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 21:53:32 -
[266] - Quote
DeadDuck wrote:I can't imagine nothing worst to kill the small gangs roaming in deep hostile areas where your only way to survive is kitting then watch a cloud of intys instantly jump 100km and be on top of you. And to make it even easier the only guy that has to be aligned to the target is the command dessie... orbit at 500m and wait for the dessie to activate the module.
You are right, this is going to make for awesome gameplay.
In your example, the only person who actually gets caught is someone microwarpdriving straight away from a gang that is 30km from him. If he stays in a straight line, they can land on top of him. But if he is further away than that, they can only land on him if he is stationary at 100km. The kiting pilot would simply have to manually change direction every so often. So, it benefits skilled pilots who can manually pilot and dodge this device. I exempt myself from that category (skilled pilots).
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2431
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 21:57:46 -
[267] - Quote
Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote:
Hyperdunking or undermanned ganking would still use bumpers because of the headcount, the MJD cooldown timer, the fact the bumper is protected by concord and the dessies would not be. Hell ganking as a whole will still use bumpers, it's a 3 minute cooldown on MJD mods, that's an eternity, you would need a fair few to make that work. More efficient, safer and predictable to continue using bumping machs.
As for suspect: Because criminal is binary, it doesn't really create good interaction opportunities.
It also basically kills all the nifty uses of this I already listed.
When you think about it, there are most of equivalents these in game already. Not all, but most and they have suspect/no flagging attached.
>Nicking mission rats/items is analogous to ninja looting and that is suspect.
>Moving ships around against their will is essentially bumping which carries no flagging at all (albeit the reasons may be mechanical rather than intention). No problem with a "mass bump" carrying a flag, that is reasonable.
Most important thing is, it's a dial that can be turned. It could start suspect then go criminal if it was really bad or LATER removed from highsec if that was still not enough. Banning it outright, out of the gate means we will never know and an opportunity is lost.
Moving someone without their consent, (fleet warps have consent as you accepted the fleet invitation and then the allow fleet warps option) shouldn't result in a scenario they are immediately destroyed or helpless to escape. A bump will not result in your ship being tackled by NPCs and subsequently destroyed. A MJD jump can. By removing the logi from the incursion group, ships melt and anyone tackled can't warp off. By moving a missioner into the dead center of a spawn normally means they will be tackled and killed by the NPCs. A bump for ganking doesn't necessarily mean you are done and helpless, as there is significant counterplay.
Precisely, this is why bumping has no flags but this should.
Lets leave incursion out of it since we've already demonstrated fairly clearly that it is a) trivial to stop and b) boils down to a question of isk/hour.
Missions only have tackle in frigates, and they get to you fairly quickly. It's highly, HIGHLY unlikely you can be MJDd into tackle frigates with no counterplay. I cannot think of a single one (to be fair I ignore faction kill missions) where that would even be possible. Unless the missioner MJD himself away at the start, in which case he will have 100km of deadspace for the dessie to burn before he can align and warp - basically impossible.
Indeed, I can think of but a handful of missions where the rats start at 100km away and none where they're actually a threat at that range.
Plus remember there's nothing stopping the rats from deciding to vaporize the destroyer, either. It's a hell of a punt for the small ship which (if you are correct and you somehow do manage to land it in tackle) might get webbed and die horribly.
Significant counterplay AFTER a bump? Are you mad? There is exactly ONE play and one play alone - get an alt/friend out ahead of you and hope you get the align right for a warp to them. This would also work just fine for these mods, so....not seeing the issue.
Or perhaps you mean the pre-emptive counterplay of webbing, or scouting and not jumping if known bad 'uns are around? Well, scouting is still viable and simply replace "web", with "scram" and the protection is entirely unchanged.
Rosal Milag wrote:As far as dials go, high sec isn't the place to introduce new modules and tactics. Start in null and work your way to high sec. Something that would carry this much consequence for the victims should not begin usage in the largest concentration of new players in the game. Titan doomsdays were only just allowed into low sec. Disruptive technology should not be released in a distributed manner without seeing how the community uses it.
Again it only carries consequences to the unprepared and the unwilling to adapt. People getting regularly stomped by this need to reassess their behaviour every bit as much as a 50 billion autopiloting freighter does. |
Moac Tor
Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation
319
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 21:59:20 -
[268] - Quote
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:That is true, they do pay more attention to reddit. the final adjustments to the ships almost always from from /r/eve discussions. It's their preferred communications platform.
Topic has been completely derailed by a stupid discussion about MMJD being used in high sec which isn't going to happen. No wonder Devs refer to reddit despite the fact I think the contributions to eve forums are generally better and more well informed.
Modulated ECM Effects
An Alternative to Skill Trading
|
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
294
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 22:01:41 -
[269] - Quote
+1 to renaming the Stork. Don't let such an awesome looking ship have such a lame name! Shrike would be much better :)
As for the ship stats. They sound fun and interesting, not read enough to comment on balance though. When they are released can the balance be closely watched so we don't end up with a repeat of what has happened with other recent new ships (T3Ds) being released OP and not getting reigned in for a long time? |
Michael Oskold
Collapsed Out Pandemic Legion
15
|
Posted - 2015.11.17 22:16:04 -
[270] - Quote
the leaqs in this thread are delicious. |
|
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 ~~
|
|
Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
344
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 02:12:40 -
[301] - Quote
Alexis Nightwish wrote: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 just cynoed to. "Why would Concord be involved?" The one correct one! "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.
One jump isn't going to get out of gate gun range, and if the complaint is about multiple command destroyers........it's possible to tank gate guns in an AF. Gate guns are trivial.
If they're using multiple ships to pull a ship off a gate in order to avoid gate guns........you can do that with 2 cheaper ships right now. T3D + logi cruiser.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
1311
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 02:14:55 -
[302] - Quote
How are you preventing groups from using thus to create deep safes If these jumps can be chained what keeps ppl from getting 250 or more of these and jumping?
Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3? Corp Stasis
|
Alexis Nightwish
348
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 02:18:03 -
[303] - Quote
Will the MJFG blink NPC ships (Sleepers, Drifters, Incursion rats, faction navy, etc.)? If yes, all or just some? If just some, which ones?
Will activation of the MJFG force your ship to accelerate to its top speed like the current MJDs do?
Will activation of the MJFG lock your ship's vector like the current MJDs do?
Will the MJFG give signature bloom to the CD? If not, it needs to or large ships (BC, BS) will have no way to counter this. :(
From what I've read, ANY ship that is scrammed, will NOT be pulled along by a CD? Is that correct? I just want to be 100% clear on this.
Will the MJFG affect Marauders in Bastion, or ships lighting a cyno?
Do you have any concerns regarding the ease with which these could break entosis links, or do you feel there is enough counterplay available?
CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Fixing bombs, not the bombers
|
Alexis Nightwish
348
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 02:21:28 -
[304] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:How are you preventing groups from using thus to create deep safes If these jumps can be chained what keeps ppl from getting 250 or more of these and jumping? Space is really really big. Even if you could fit 250 destroyers into a 12km diameter sphere, and even if they were all jumping as fast as possible it would still take literal years to cover an AU. I'd rather use a superbounce.
CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Fixing bombs, not the bombers
|
Alexis Nightwish
348
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 02:25:16 -
[305] - Quote
Templar Dane wrote:Alexis Nightwish wrote: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 just cynoed to. "Why would Concord be involved?" The one correct one! "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. One jump isn't going to get out of gate gun range, and if the complaint is about multiple command destroyers........it's possible to tank gate guns in an AF. Gate guns are trivial. If they're using multiple ships to pull a ship off a gate in order to avoid gate guns........you can do that with 2 cheaper ships right now. T3D + logi cruiser. The NPC ones are pretty trivial, true, but when we can build our own they may not be. Also if you bite off more than you can chew with your blink, the gate guns may seal your fate when added to the DPS of the ships you snagged.
How does a T3D and logi forcibly move another ship away from a gate? Are T3Ds really good bumpers or am I missing something?
CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Fixing bombs, not the bombers
|
Suitonia
Furnace Thermodynamics
676
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 02:31:54 -
[306] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:How are you preventing groups from using thus to create deep safes If these jumps can be chained what keeps ppl from getting 250 or more of these and jumping?
it will take you literally years to make a deep safe using this method 250x 100km is still only 25,000km
Contributer to Eve is Easy:
https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos
Solo PvP is possible with a 20 day old character! :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvOB4KXYk-o
|
sytaqe violacea
Circus of midnight
40
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 02:58:26 -
[307] - Quote
I thought of two different usages of MJFG. They are possible?
1. station camping break Instalocking Loki has 100k~EHP and nearly invulnerable to ganking unless ganker has bridging Titan. I want kick it out of docking range with MJFG. However surviving seconds in front of the camper is a bit difficult for small ships. Then I thought of the way to evade risk. Can I use a trick below?
Step1: Prepare 2 Command Destroyers with MJFG. Step2: Warp at 100km from the Loki and align to it. Step3: One Command Destroyer activate MJFG , and another one activate MJFG one tick later. Step4: First MJFG ignites. Now 2 Command Destroyers are on the Loki. Step5: Second MJFG ignites. 2 Command Destroyers and Loki are 100km away from station.
Ofcourse, Loki pilot can avoid this trick using "scramming" alt.
2. LP theif LP theif isn't known well by non-FW people. It's one of the most risk averse farming in low sec. A theif enters the plex run by same faction millitia men at end of timer and steal half of LP reward. It's very annoying because shooting theif will ruin faction standing. Can I use MJFG to kick out theif from beacon without standing loss? |
Kasia en Tilavine
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
56
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 03:22:01 -
[308] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:How are you preventing groups from using thus to create deep safes If these jumps can be chained what keeps ppl from getting 250 or more of these and jumping?
LOL
although, that does bring up jump chaining BS and maybe capitals into dead space pockets..... I am looking forward to seeing a Kronos shredding some Burner missions. Sure, it won't be efficient Isi/hour, but think of the lulz!!! |
Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
344
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 03:30:42 -
[309] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:How are you preventing groups from using thus to create deep safes If these jumps can be chained what keeps ppl from getting 250 or more of these and jumping?
That's 1,495,980 jumps for 1 AU.
|
Chessur
Wilderness
618
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 03:48:07 -
[310] - Quote
I ******* love the idea of these MJD units. So many great possibilities with these!
Thew only thing that i would be curious to know, is why does eve need more destroyers? What abour BCs ? BSs? Why did you choose another small hull?
|
|
Sgt Ocker
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
775
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 03:59:01 -
[311] - Quote
Cephei Kells wrote:CCP Rise wrote:
More than any module/mechanic I've worked on, this is an attempt to expand fleet sizes and tactics, not limit them. I believe (as long as the numbers end up somewhat balanced) this is one of the most promising 'sandbox' module/ship additions we've done recently and the fact that we have no idea what players will do with it feels really great and exciting.
The problem that I'm seeing is that anchoring in a fleet doctrine which isn't specifically a fast moving/kiting doctrine is pretty much dead now as this new AOE MJD has the ability to remove your ships from logistical rep range and with the addition of RR falloff you have a much tighter bubble to where you can turtle with a doctrine meaning its easier than ever for a single person to MJD all your dudes off and force them to warp off and back to the fight. Rewarping to the fight is a moot point if its your logistics who get blinked as everything will be dead by the time they return. The point I'm getting at is there needs to be a counter to this which is not just killing the ship attempting to do this as the simple counter to that is to fling 5-6 of these at a hostile fleet and watch them scatter while not being able to do anything about it. Please do not release this without there being a competent counter because this will honestly kill all fleet combat which isn't cerbs and ishtars. Sorry but there are several very effective counters to this.
:- Man up and stop flying in keep at range 500 blobs. :- Use the blob your hiding in to kill the Tactical Destroyers in the opposing fleet. (If your blob is unable to kill a destroyer before it gets close enough to you to separate your logi from the fleet, your doing something wrong) :- Chances are, your blob will have some of these in fleet, use your 1st.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
Why can't CCP see the obvious - Large dominating groups are bad for Eve.
|
Azure and Or
Venus Brokerage
0
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 05:15:13 -
[312] - 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 :(
Please elaborate on why it would be a bad thing for people to be able to disrupt low risk isk printing? Even your own numbers show how disproportionate incursion isk is (ask CCP Quant if you missed the stats). |
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
1582
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 05:26:49 -
[313] - Quote
Azure and Or wrote: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 :( Please elaborate on why it would be a bad thing for people to be able to disrupt low risk isk printing? Even your own numbers show how disproportionate incursion isk is (ask CCP Quant if you missed the stats).
Regardless of gain, having the ability to completely troll a entire organized community with a cheapish single ship is a bit abusive. It's like giving a person the ability to enter a dungeon run of another group, teleport their healer to the entrance of the dungeon just so you can to watch the entire group die.
I see the issues here.
(Begins building incursion fu ooc jump drive alt).
Yaay!!!!
|
Moraguth
Ranger Corp Vae. Victis.
167
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 05:31:12 -
[314] - Quote
Alexis Nightwish wrote:Templar Dane wrote:Alexis Nightwish wrote:Captain StringfellowHawk wrote: 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 just cynoed to. "Why would Concord be involved?" The one correct one! "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. One jump isn't going to get out of gate gun range, and if the complaint is about multiple command destroyers........it's possible to tank gate guns in an AF. Gate guns are trivial. If they're using multiple ships to pull a ship off a gate in order to avoid gate guns........you can do that with 2 cheaper ships right now. T3D + logi cruiser. The NPC ones are pretty trivial, true, but when we can build our own those may not be. Also if you bite off more than you can chew with your blink, the gate guns may seal your fate when added to the DPS of the ships you snagged. How does a T3D and logi forcibly move another ship away from a gate? Are T3Ds really good bumpers or am I missing something?
Hey, thanks for the backup /brofist. yeah, i messed up with the concord question, i've since edited it to say drifters (and more importantly, will it **** them off).
Really my post is just a request for information from CCP, I don't really need the peanut gallery (and trolls) to tell me why i'm wrong or dumb or anything like that. They don't know the answers, and neither do we. I'd rather be able to start forming strategies and defenses sooner than later.
I got a Feature Added!
Stop calling an Abaddon "abba-dawn". It is "uh-bad-in"
dictionary.com/abaddon
|
Tanya Deering
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 06:20:28 -
[315] - Quote
Maybe one idea for the pot. If you could have activating the micro jump field generator either create a suspect timer or hostile timer when used in highsec - when it is initiated on neutral ships - not when the spool is completed. |
Aiyshimin
Fistful of Finns Paisti Syndicate
589
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 06:35:50 -
[316] - Quote
Lauren Vaille wrote: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.
Why would you fly a BS when you can MJD cruisers? |
Feledain
Elmsfeuer
61
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 07:39:19 -
[317] - Quote
As to the whole Incursion debate going on here:
I regulary fly as a Logi in incursion fleets. At first i was glad that this module would be banned from highsec, exactly for the reason of not wanting to be jumped 100km, or more, away and having to see the fleet die while i try to burn in range.
But the argument for the pro highsec side convinced me that it is better for the game and my fun to allow them. The main reason is that for ASS and HQ fleets we have most of the time an designatet Logi anchor, most of the time also the sniper anchor. This guy could easily fit a scram. A nice true sansha one + the information link = plenty of range.
Only things that i would change that the whole thing is not OP: MJFG can-¦t jumps anchored ships, marauder in bastion as an example MJFG spool up anchors the ship, no 1sec daisy chain and of course the suspect timer on activation
this way a pre lock is easy, as soon as the MJFG spools up the ship is dead cloak is counterable with containers from all ships during anchor point approach + larger logi orbit if one is spotted if 1 or 2 logi get jumped, this is manageabel for a short duration
Jumping the sansha around? Good luck with that, they tend to shoot ships. Annoying? Maybe, but also a good laugh on coms. Jumping the CQC? Same as logi anchor. Civi picker or other stuff, maybe a different positioning is in order. Vanguards? They are boring as hell anyway. |
George Gouillot
Black Fox Marauders
89
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 07:46:52 -
[318] - Quote
Will spool up reset when being bridged? |
Torei Dutalis
IceBox Inc.
37
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 07:53:19 -
[319] - Quote
Probably the best combination of ideas for a ship in the last decade or so to be honest. t2 command destroyers have been on my wish list for a long time now, thank you for delivering. These are definitely a step toward what on grid links should look like. |
Berendas
The Learning Curve.
988
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 08:03:28 -
[320] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:...but we expected to wait until after a rework of the ganglink mechanics...
What sort of time frame can we expect on this? |
|
Anthar Thebess
1376
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 08:09:40 -
[321] - Quote
Just an idea. Can we script MJD for command destroyers. Bigger range affected, for longer spin-up , or smaller area for faster jump.
Capital Remote AID Rebalance
Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.
|
PotterPig
Perkone Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 08:17:05 -
[322] - Quote
will there be a minimum distance to objects (stargates) like on Smartbombs? If not, gatecamping will get to a whole new level ... ( I like that ! ;) ) |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2721
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 08:26:58 -
[323] - Quote
Stork looks a bit overpowered. It towers over the competition with its high shield hit points and robust mid slots, a trait which is poorly balanced by its few weaknesses: it's much less agile but otherwise its attributes don't seem to line up right.
I suggest either cutting its shield hit points by 50 without giving it anything back in exchange, or reduce its max velocity a bit and cut its scan resolution further.
A way to add some racial flavor to these ships--change the damage skill bonuses slightly:
PONTIFEX Amarr Destroyer per Level: 12.5% Bonus to Drone EM Damage and 7.5% Bonus to Drone Thermal, Kinetic, and Explosive Damage
STORK Caldari Destroyer per Level: 12.5% Bonus to Missile Kinetic Damage and 7.5% Bonus to Missile EM, Thermal, and Explosive Damage
MAGUS Gallente Destroyer Per Level: 12.5% Bonus to Drone Thermal Damage and 7.5% Bonus to Drone EM, Kinetic, and Explosive Damage
BIFROST Minmatar Destroyer per Level: 12.5% Bonus to Missile Explosive Damage and 7.5% Bonus to Missile EM, Thermal, and Kinetic Damage
Pirate ship Nightmare, can you fathom
Larger but with smaller spikes than Phantasm
The Succubus looks meaner
But the Revenant cleaner
Seems as they get bigger, the smaller spikes they has'm
|
Carniflex
StarHunt Mordus Angels
340
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 08:54:57 -
[324] - Quote
Intriguing
2% command bonus per level is the same as T3's - as such I do not see much point in it as T3's are much much more viable for links considering the lesson learned over and over again over the history of EVE - price is not a balancing factor.
Only advantage over T3's for links I see is the warp speed, but that is very small niche considering that T3's can warp cloaked and can be nullified plus over your average warp distance of about 20 .. 50 AU the time difference is negligible for all practical purposes.
There is one more niche I can think of - links in frigate wormholes - although I do not live in WH's so I do not remember from top of my head if destroyers were able to go into these or not.
Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... THWONK!
GOT the bastard.
|
Carniflex
StarHunt Mordus Angels
340
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 08:58:03 -
[325] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:How are you preventing groups from using thus to create deep safes If these jumps can be chained what keeps ppl from getting 250 or more of these and jumping?
I do not think you are aware how many kilometers is in one AU (that is astronomical unit, light travels that distance a bit more than 8 minutes)
Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... THWONK!
GOT the bastard.
|
Carniflex
StarHunt Mordus Angels
340
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 09:00:13 -
[326] - Quote
Kasia en Tilavine wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:How are you preventing groups from using thus to create deep safes If these jumps can be chained what keeps ppl from getting 250 or more of these and jumping? LOL although, that does bring up jump chaining BS and maybe capitals into dead space pockets..... I am looking forward to seeing a Kronos shredding some Burner missions. Sure, it won't be efficient Isi/hour, but think of the lulz!!!
Smuggling larger ships into Burner pockets has been declared exploit as far as I'm aware.
Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... THWONK!
GOT the bastard.
|
Carniflex
StarHunt Mordus Angels
340
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 09:01:21 -
[327] - Quote
Tanya Deering wrote:Maybe one idea for the pot. If you could have activating the micro jump field generator either create a suspect timer or hostile timer when used in highsec - when it is initiated on neutral ships - not when the spool is completed.
If you read the devblog you will notice that this ability of these new destroyers can not be used in hi sec.
Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... THWONK!
GOT the bastard.
|
Marox Calendale
Human League
62
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 09:09:27 -
[328] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Here are the bonuses:
MAGUS ... 2% to Armor and Skirmish Warfare link effectiveness ... Role: Can fit one Warfare Link
PONTIFEX ... 2% to Armor and Information Warfare link effectiveness ... Role: Can fit one Warfare Link
STORK ... 2% to Siege and Information link effectiveness per level ... Role: Can fit one Warfare Link
BIFROST ... 2% to Siege and Skirmish Warfare link effectiveness ... Role: Can fit one Warfare Link You forgot the ship that will have additional effectiveness to Mining Gang Links!
|
Mhtsos
FRAPPE NATION Sons of Sylph
7
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 09:32:14 -
[329] - Quote
Will getting scrammed actually prevent you from being affected by this? Will we, for example, see logis scramming each other to prevent them from being pulled away from their fleet? |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2721
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 09:46:16 -
[330] - Quote
Mhtsos wrote:Will getting scrammed actually prevent you from being affected by this? Will we, for example, see logis scramming each other to prevent them from being pulled away from their fleet? Yes, warp scrambling a ship will cause it to not be pulled along. Also, warp scrambling the Command Destroyer will prevent it from using the jump field module.
Pirate ship Nightmare, can you fathom
Larger but with smaller spikes than Phantasm
The Succubus looks meaner
But the Revenant cleaner
Seems as they get bigger, the smaller spikes they has'm
|
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2435
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 09:55:59 -
[331] - Quote
afkalt wrote:In fact, this should MOST DEFINITELY carry a suspect flag so I can't bounce a fleet off a lowsec gate under gate gun protection.
They should be able to shoot me without angering the gate guns if I'm about to port their fleet, or part of it, away.
Quoting myself in case it is overlooked. |
Yun Kuai
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
285
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 09:58:06 -
[332] - Quote
Can we please type out the stats here on the forums. Not all us have access to Google docs, youtube, etc. because we happen to have moved to a country that blocks this stuff. Thanks
--------------------------------------------------------::::::::::::--:::-----:::---::::::::::::--------------:::----------:::----:::---:::----------------------:::::::-------:::---:::----::::::-------------------:::-----------:::--:::----:::---------------------::::::::::::----:::::::----:::::::::::::-------
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2721
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 10:05:54 -
[333] - Quote
Yun Kuai wrote:Can we please type out the stats here on the forums. Not all us have access to Google docs, youtube, etc. because we happen to have moved to a country that blocks this stuff. Thanks Done. Hope Imgur works for you because I am lazy.
I have to ask what country would censor Google docs?
Pirate ship Nightmare, can you fathom
Larger but with smaller spikes than Phantasm
The Succubus looks meaner
But the Revenant cleaner
Seems as they get bigger, the smaller spikes they has'm
|
Moac Tor
Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation
325
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 10:08:38 -
[334] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:#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. Yes I agree with this, in low sec activation of the module should invoke instant sentry gun aggression (on stations and on gates). Or else it will be too easy to pull people who have de-aggressed with no risk.
The kind of ships that benefit most from de-aggressing on gates in both null and low sec will be larger ships such as BCs and BSs who pretty much rely on it for the bulk of their PvP, so perhaps some module for them that allows for some extra counter-play. I mentioned an AOE scram module earlier.
Bear in mind you have done a lot with the HIC long scram and now this to nerf BCs and BSs in the overall meta, so if you want them to remain viable then you'll need to do a balance pass and give them so new abilities as soon as possible.
Modulated ECM Effects
An Alternative to Skill Trading
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2437
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 10:18:12 -
[335] - Quote
Moac Tor wrote: Bear in mind you have done a lot with the HIC long scram and now this to nerf BCs and BSs in the overall meta, so if you want them to remain viable then you'll need to do a balance pass and give them so new abilities as soon as possible.
Actually I'd be happy if they just took the activation time off the "real" modules and were done with it. Or made it so that at rank V it was instant making a "reactionary" scram impossible. |
Skinta
Tiana Enterprises Mortum Ravagers
9
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 11:13:44 -
[336] - Quote
If we don't call the use of these ships the 'Nightcrawler Doctrine' then we will have all lost out. |
Luscius Uta
182
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 11:35:59 -
[337] - Quote
I am not impressed by names of these ships. I'm going to mockingly refer to the Caldari one as "pork". I'm sure there's still few better names of birds of prey, mythical creatures, gods, religious terms and bladed weapons you could've used instead. But then, T1 ships whose hulls they use also have uber-crappy names.
Drifters have arrived - The End is nigh!
|
Jackaryas
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
105
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 12:08:22 -
[338] - Quote
I'm personally a bit on the fence with these, i really like the idea behind the mechanic and launching ishtar drone blobs around / pinging dictor bubbles away from tackled supers sounds amazing. However as has been mentioned i think it gives too much of an advantage to long range fleets.
As an alliance that flies all styles of doctrines i can see these things being amazing for tengus / cerbs or whatever but basically screwing over any sort of BS/Triage/AB Guardian gang that we can field.
Perhaps as a counter a HIC script could be introduced to cancel the effect of all MJD's within 10km or something, this would prevent a gang from MJD'ing itself but would also prevent 2 billion isk vindicators being pinged away from a triage carrier.
Suddenly Spaceships Youtube
Suddenly Spaceships Recruitment Thread
|
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
286
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 12:13:11 -
[339] - Quote
i'm sorry but i find those things way to strong.
so, except for scrambling each other there is no way you can prevent your 100 man bs/bc gang get scattered all over the field? yea, scrambling the thingy will stop him, well, good luck scrambling an entire squad/wing of those landing on your anchor in last than 5"
this is one of those ideas that looks very good on paper -small gang content/anti blob thing- but in actual game play will be abused to hell and back-you know, the trollceptor thingy ?
oh it's looks nice, splitting the blob and stuff, until you realize that the blob will always have more of this things than you... and don't even get me started about 130 km bomb runs |
Lynxovat Fujiwara
Red October. Red Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 12:17:31 -
[340] - Quote
If we take 2 command destroyers near each other and activate MJFG with interval of 1 sec, will second MJFG begin spoon up and then both will jump 2 times or second command destroyer will get error and it's MJFG cycle will stop, while it is in first destroyer's MJFG radius? |
|
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
286
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 12:28:22 -
[341] - Quote
Lynxovat Fujiwara wrote:If we take 2 command destroyers near each other and activate MJFG with interval of 1 sec, will second MJFG begin spoon up and then both will jump 2 times or second command destroyer will get error and it's MJFG cycle will stop, while it is in first destroyer's MJFG radius? they both jump: first one is jumping himself and the second, then the second one is jumping the first and himself |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1884
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 12:59:12 -
[342] - Quote
Virion Stoneshard wrote:For those of you worried about a counter - take in mind, for an enemy command destroyer to MJD your group away, it needs to be within 6km of the target. Which means it can easily be countered with a scram in your fleet.
This means some good piloting and timing needed then, approach target at a known speed and fire up the jumpat the correct range, second ship spools up it's mjfg to fire on landing before a scram lock hits. Like an mjfg bolas, one throws the other and vice versa, and with a scram you can lock down the logi you just jumped out with the pair and then hit it hard 100km away from the fleet it was with :D |
Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
315
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 12:59:37 -
[343] - Quote
Tornii wrote:Then I read they're going to be based on existing models. Meh.
Wow its almost as if they are based on existing tech 2 ships. My word!
|
Kithran
119
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 13:11:55 -
[344] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote:
There is instant counterplay.
You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time.
Again, if you can expect combat fleets to do this, you can JUST as easily expect incursion fleets to do this.
ed: And it should only go suspect, imo.
Problem is, in high sec, a gank attempt targets one ship. Yes with a large enough suicide fleet, you can kill an entire incursion fleet. But that is committing numbers and can be noticed on D-scan. With these destroyers, they can kill a whole fleet in ~5 seconds. With one ship. Tell me how that is not overpowered. I don't care what your thoughts are on incursion runners, that is not the point here. One ship, in high sec, should not be able to effectively kill 10 others illegally in 5 seconds. PvP fleets are fit to take down PvP ships. A PvE fleet is not designed nor intended to engage a PvP target, especially a destroyer sized target with battleship targeting. So bring a SeBod HIC. It's not exactly hard to stop these. Maybe, >gasp< you need to adapt your fittings. The horror. But again, what this comes down to is "MAH ISK/HOUR!!!!!"
No what it comes down to is you being stupid - an incursion fleet is a public fleet, everyone is in a different corp, you cannot therefore scram each other without being blown up by concord so that tactic is out.
The only possible tactic which you could use would be to lock him, shoot him and kill him in the 4 seconds you have before his mjd sends all your logi out of range with bs sized weapons.
Oh and the 4 seconds is not a typo - don't forget that thanks to server ticks you can't react until the server tells your client he has started.
And its not just incursion fleets either - bumping miners is annoying but at least you have to commit one ship per miner you wish to bump, if you allowed this module to be used you now bump a dozen at once in a way they can't counter, or you enter someone's mission and send the rat they have to kill to complete the mission 100km away - repeatedly. etc. etc.
There are lots of ways to either annoy people or kill people in high sec using one of these which cannot be countered thanks to high sec mechanics therefore it is perfectly logical to use the same high sec mechanics to stop them being used. Its no different to bubbles not being allowed in highsec.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2437
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 13:22:59 -
[345] - Quote
Kithran wrote:afkalt wrote:Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote:
There is instant counterplay.
You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time.
Again, if you can expect combat fleets to do this, you can JUST as easily expect incursion fleets to do this.
ed: And it should only go suspect, imo.
Problem is, in high sec, a gank attempt targets one ship. Yes with a large enough suicide fleet, you can kill an entire incursion fleet. But that is committing numbers and can be noticed on D-scan. With these destroyers, they can kill a whole fleet in ~5 seconds. With one ship. Tell me how that is not overpowered. I don't care what your thoughts are on incursion runners, that is not the point here. One ship, in high sec, should not be able to effectively kill 10 others illegally in 5 seconds. PvP fleets are fit to take down PvP ships. A PvE fleet is not designed nor intended to engage a PvP target, especially a destroyer sized target with battleship targeting. So bring a SeBod HIC. It's not exactly hard to stop these. Maybe, >gasp< you need to adapt your fittings. The horror. But again, what this comes down to is "MAH ISK/HOUR!!!!!" No what it comes down to is you being stupid - an incursion fleet is a public fleet, everyone is in a different corp, you cannot therefore scram each other without being blown up by concord so that tactic is out. The only possible tactic which you could use would be to lock him, shoot him and kill him in the 4 seconds you have before his mjd sends all your logi out of range with bs sized weapons. Oh and the 4 seconds is not a typo - don't forget that thanks to server ticks you can't react until the server tells your client he has started. And its not just incursion fleets either - bumping miners is annoying but at least you have to commit one ship per miner you wish to bump, if you allowed this module to be used you now bump a dozen at once in a way they can't counter, or you enter someone's mission and send the rat they have to kill to complete the mission 100km away - repeatedly. etc. etc. There are lots of ways to either annoy people or kill people in high sec using one of these which cannot be countered thanks to high sec mechanics therefore it is perfectly logical to use the same high sec mechanics to stop them being used. Its no different to bubbles not being allowed in highsec.
You know if you scram the DESTROYER the field shuts off right? That would be the point of a HIC, genius.
Oh wait....you didn't?!
CCP Rise wrote: Yes, scram will shut off an active MJFG and will also keep any targets in range of one that fires from taking the jump.
Maybe try and avoid being a smartass calling other people "stupid" when you're not in full possession of the facts eh? It makes you look like a proper asshat.
Seeing as you don't have the first idea about the topic you're being a smartass about, I went ahead and ignored the rest of your drivel. |
Obil Que
Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance
369
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 13:34:02 -
[346] - Quote
What, if any, effect do bubbles have on the landing zone?
- If there is a drag/catch bubble at the landing location, will the ship be dragged or caught by it?
- If there is a bubble essentially AT the landing location, will the group land on the edge or in the center of the bubble?
|
Ncc 1709
Fusion Enterprises Ltd Phoenix Company Alliance
220
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 14:14:52 -
[347] - Quote
Wow, the amount of people thinking orca and freighters / jf's can be affected by this... go read the first post... DOES NOT AFFECT CAPITALS...
orca and freighters are Capital ships... |
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
286
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 14:22:18 -
[348] - Quote
afkalt wrote:
words.. words ...words... something something highsec
.
really guys, what part of the big restrictions you need to know are that you cannot use this module in high sec you guys don't understand? this mod is banned from high sec, can you get the over it and move on? |
Odracir Atosc
The Legion of Spoon Curatores Veritatis Alliance
12
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 14:26:03 -
[349] - Quote
Chessur wrote:I ******* love the idea of these MJD units. So many great possibilities with these!
Thew only thing that i would be curious to know, is why does eve need more destroyers? What abour BCs ? BSs? Why did you choose another small hull?
Yeah . It means that your kiting days are over. |
Colt Blackhawk
bad InTentiOnZ senseless intentions
324
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 14:40:09 -
[350] - Quote
Maybe CCP should finally stop breaking the game even more by adding more and more and more new ships. Tech3 dessies are fun but let us face it they broke balancing horrible. Think these dessies with their abilities will make eve a mess.
Edit: YES WE HAVE ENOUGH SHIPS IN EVE!!!
[09:04:53] Ashira Twilight > Plant the f****** amarr flag and s*** on their smoking wrecks.
|
|
Moac Tor
Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation
325
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 14:41:10 -
[351] - Quote
Just a suggestion here, but perhaps prevent use of these if they are within a certain range of a Stargate or a Station. The reason being that this could potentially kill a lot of PvP.
Modulated ECM Effects
An Alternative to Skill Trading
|
Braden Fanguard
Jovian Labs Jovian Enterprises
27
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 14:42:47 -
[352] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:There's a lot of specifics to consider here but the big restrictions you need to know are that you cannot use this module in high sec.
Honestly CCP Rise, I would allow its use in high sec. You've got quite the anti-freighter bumping thread going on here and these destroyers could make for a very interesting solution to that problem. |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1246
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 14:53:38 -
[353] - Quote
Colt Blackhawk wrote:Maybe CCP should finally stop breaking the game even more by adding more and more and more new ships. Tech3 dessies are fun but let us face it they broke balancing horrible. Think these dessies with their abilities will make eve a mess.
Edit: YES WE HAVE ENOUGH SHIPS IN EVE!!!
would love too see T3 cruisers get fixed along with D3's over constant new ships that aren't very useful too half the games players.
T3's need to be versatile not have T2 resists, OP dps and tank obsoleting T2 ships entirely.
ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 highslots for droneboats
Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
|
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
287
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 14:59:39 -
[354] - Quote
Braden Fanguard wrote:CCP Rise wrote:There's a lot of specifics to consider here but the big restrictions you need to know are that you cannot use this module in high sec. Honestly CCP Rise, I would allow its use in high sec. You've got quite the anti-freighter bumping thread going on here and these destroyers could make for a very interesting solution to that problem.
yea, cose fixing broken stuff by breaking more stuff is the way to go... |
Sarah Flynt
134
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 15:16:33 -
[355] - Quote
Ncc 1709 wrote:Wow, the amount of people thinking orca and freighters / jf's can be affected by this... go read the first post... DOES NOT AFFECT CAPITALS...
orca and freighters are Capital ships... Well, freighters probably, although they don't need Capital Ships trained.
Orca is a different beast however: capital build process but uses large rigs and can't use capital modules (granted, that's a fitting limitation, not a class limitation). It also doesn't require Capital Ships trained. So what is it?
Sick of High-Sec gankers? Join the public channel Anti-ganking and the dedicated intel channel Gank-Intel !
|
Harry Forever
SpaceJunkys
1296
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 15:20:44 -
[356] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Here is a feedback thread for some awesome new ships, Command Destroyers! So here's the basics. We are adding a new line of Tech II destroyers based on the Algos, Dragoon, Corax and Talwar along with a new type of module called the Micro Jump Field Generator, which the new Destroyers will have exclusive access to. I'm going to go through some basic questions here at the top and then give you all the details after. First, why Command Destroyers? We have always wanted to do a line of smaller ships that could provide gang support, but we expected to wait until after a rework of the ganglink mechanics, but here we saw a perfect opportunity to bring you this awesome new module and combining the role with gang support seems ideal. We still want to rework links and think these will slot in perfectly to that rework when it happens, but in the mean time you guys get a few awesome new tools. Second, how exactly does the Micro Jump Field Generator work? This module is exactly like a Micro Jump Drive except that when it fires, it pulls any ships nearby along with it for the jump. There's a lot of specifics to consider here but the big restrictions you need to know are that you cannot use this module in high sec, you can not pull invulnerable targets (ships that have just undocked or just jumped through a gate and are still cloaked), you can not move capitals, and you can not jump into starbase shields. You CAN however do a lot of really crazy thing such as pull bombs that are midair, pull dictor bubbles or chain multiple jumps in a row using several Command Destroyers. As for numbers, we have a base spool up time of 9 seconds, a reactivation delay of 160 seconds, a pull radius of 6km from the ship and a jump distance of 100km. The module requires 5 PG and 31 CPU to fit and requires the same skill as normal MJDs to use. Now, for the ships themselves. We are aiming to have a set of destroyers that are both faster and more resilient than either their Tech I counterparts or Interdictors, but sacrifice offense. This should make the support role, whether with MJFG or links, easier to fill while leaving them vulnerable to abuse in combat. Their weapon systems will be missile or drone based, like their base hulls. Here are the bonuses: MAGUSGallente Destroyer Per Level: 10% Bonus to Drone Damage 4% bonus to armor resists Command Destroyer Per Level: 2% to Armor and Skirmish Warfare link effectiveness 5% reduction in MJFG spool up time Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators Role: Can fit one Warfare Link PONTIFEXAmarr Destroyer per Level: 10% Bonus to Drone Damage 4% bonus to Armor Resistances Command Destroyer per Level: 2% to Armor and Information Warfare link effectiveness 5% reduction in MJFG spool up time Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators Role: Can fit one Warfare Link STORKCaldari Destroyer per Level: 10% to Rocket and Light Missile Damage 4% Bonus to Shield Resistances Command Destroyer per Level: 2% to Siege and Information link effectiveness per level 5% reduction in MJFG spool up time Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators Role: Can fit one Warfare Link BIFROSTMinmatar Destroyer per Level: 10% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile Damage 4% bonus to shield resists Command Destroyer per Level: 2% to Siege and Skirmish Warfare link effectiveness 5% reduction in MJFG spool up time Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators Role: Can fit one Warfare Link And for their attributes I'm using a google doc this time for better readability: ATTRIBUTESAs always, we look forward to your feedback. With these ships I'm especially interested in any opinions or insights on the powergrid and CPU numbers, as the ships will probably get used a few different ways and I'm not positive we've accounted for all of them. If you have any questions or need clarifications please ask, and don't be surprised if there's a typo here and there that needs fixing :) Thanks !
what when I sit in one of those new destroyers, scram a target, and then use the micro jump field generator, will the target jump with me? or will it stay where it is because it was scramed by me?
Harry Forever vs. Goonswarm
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2437
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 15:26:15 -
[357] - Quote
gascanu wrote:afkalt wrote:
words.. words ...words... something something highsec
.
really guys, what part of the big restrictions you need to know are that you cannot use this module in high sec you guys don't understand? this mod is banned from high sec, can you get the over it and move on?
And some of us are challenging the reasons for that ban and suggesting it should be allowed.
These are both features & ideas as well as feedback thus are entirely appropriate. Very much like how people campaigned to remove MJDs from the ABCs which had it in the initial iteration.
You are, of course, at liberty to ignore the posts talking about them as you see fit. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1951
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 15:39:54 -
[358] - Quote
Harry Forever wrote:CCP Rise wrote:Here is a feedback thread for some awesome new ships, Command Destroyers! So here's the basics. We are adding a new line of Tech II destroyers based on the Algos, Dragoon, Corax and Talwar along with a new type of module called the Micro Jump Field Generator, which the new Destroyers will have exclusive access to. I'm going to go through some basic questions here at the top and then give you all the details after. First, why Command Destroyers? We have always wanted to do a line of smaller ships that could provide gang support, but we expected to wait until after a rework of the ganglink mechanics, but here we saw a perfect opportunity to bring you this awesome new module and combining the role with gang support seems ideal. We still want to rework links and think these will slot in perfectly to that rework when it happens, but in the mean time you guys get a few awesome new tools. Second, how exactly does the Micro Jump Field Generator work? This module is exactly like a Micro Jump Drive except that when it fires, it pulls any ships nearby along with it for the jump. There's a lot of specifics to consider here but the big restrictions you need to know are that you cannot use this module in high sec, you can not pull invulnerable targets (ships that have just undocked or just jumped through a gate and are still cloaked), you can not move capitals, and you can not jump into starbase shields. You CAN however do a lot of really crazy thing such as pull bombs that are midair, pull dictor bubbles or chain multiple jumps in a row using several Command Destroyers. As for numbers, we have a base spool up time of 9 seconds, a reactivation delay of 160 seconds, a pull radius of 6km from the ship and a jump distance of 100km. The module requires 5 PG and 31 CPU to fit and requires the same skill as normal MJDs to use. Now, for the ships themselves. We are aiming to have a set of destroyers that are both faster and more resilient than either their Tech I counterparts or Interdictors, but sacrifice offense. This should make the support role, whether with MJFG or links, easier to fill while leaving them vulnerable to abuse in combat. Their weapon systems will be missile or drone based, like their base hulls. Here are the bonuses: MAGUSGallente Destroyer Per Level: 10% Bonus to Drone Damage 4% bonus to armor resists Command Destroyer Per Level: 2% to Armor and Skirmish Warfare link effectiveness 5% reduction in MJFG spool up time Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators Role: Can fit one Warfare Link PONTIFEXAmarr Destroyer per Level: 10% Bonus to Drone Damage 4% bonus to Armor Resistances Command Destroyer per Level: 2% to Armor and Information Warfare link effectiveness 5% reduction in MJFG spool up time Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators Role: Can fit one Warfare Link STORKCaldari Destroyer per Level: 10% to Rocket and Light Missile Damage 4% Bonus to Shield Resistances Command Destroyer per Level: 2% to Siege and Information link effectiveness per level 5% reduction in MJFG spool up time Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators Role: Can fit one Warfare Link BIFROSTMinmatar Destroyer per Level: 10% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile Damage 4% bonus to shield resists Command Destroyer per Level: 2% to Siege and Skirmish Warfare link effectiveness 5% reduction in MJFG spool up time Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators Role: Can fit one Warfare Link And for their attributes I'm using a google doc this time for better readability: ATTRIBUTESAs always, we look forward to your feedback. With these ships I'm especially interested in any opinions or insights on the powergrid and CPU numbers, as the ships will probably get used a few different ways and I'm not positive we've accounted for all of them. If you have any questions or need clarifications please ask, and don't be surprised if there's a typo here and there that needs fixing :) Thanks ! what when I sit in one of those new destroyers, scram a target, and then use the micro jump field generator, will the target jump with me? or will it stay where it is because it was scramed by me?
It will stay where it was located, you will jump.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Khan Wrenth
Ore Oppression Prevention and Salvation
279
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 15:43:05 -
[359] - Quote
AFKALT brings up interesting points, there could be interesting gameplay to be had in highsec with this ship/module.
On the other hand, there is something else that the Dev failed to mention. There is a long-standing tradition of banning AOE weapons and equipment in highsec. That and that alone should be the reason it is not allowed to be used in highsec. Not incursions or whatnot, because nobody deserves special protection. But we've had this blanket law of "No AOE in HS" for as long as I've played.
Yes I know smartbombs are an odd exception, I don't know why.
If you want to have a discussion about that rule, then I'm sure it'll be an interesting conversation. But you cannot talk about this individual module because it falls under that rule and therefore will never be allowed, no matter how convincing your arguments (and they are convincing), as long as that rule holds. So your argument/discussion/debate is happening out of order. Your first order of business is to have that rule revisited. Until you do that, arguing for this module in highsec is moot.
Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
|
oohthey ioh
Republic University Minmatar Republic
30
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 15:47:44 -
[360] - Quote
Hehe players could chain bombs in the the grid, that would be fun. |
|
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
218
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 15:48:23 -
[361] - Quote
wow... when can we expect these ships?
[u]Carpe noctem[/u]
|
Ylein Kashuken
SQUIDS.
2
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 15:48:28 -
[362] - Quote
Can we activate this jump field directly at stations? This might be nightmare for JF and station links :D |
Alexis Nightwish
351
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 15:48:33 -
[363] - Quote
Yun Kuai wrote:Can we please type out the stats here on the forums. Not all us have access to Google docs, youtube, etc. because we happen to have moved to a country that blocks this stuff. Thanks Not very pretty but here you go.
Name Pontifex Stork Magus Bifrost Power Grid 55 63 59 58 CPU 220 280 210 250 High Slots 5 6 5 6 Mid Slots 3 6 4 5 Low Slots 5 2 4 3 Total Slots 13 14 13 14 Rig Slots 2 2 2 2 Calibration 400 400 400 400 Turret Hardpoints 3 0 3 0 Launcher Hardpoints 3 5 1 5 Shield HP 625 950 650 830 Armor HP 850 625 800 680 Hull HP 780 680 830 655 total hp 2255 2255 2280 2165 Capacitor 750 650 700 600 Cap Recharge 375000 325000 350000 300000 cap/s 2 2 2 2 Max Velocity 330 335 325 345 Agility 3.4 3.6 3.2 3.3 Base Mass 1250000 1300000 1150000 1235000 align time 5.89 6.49 5.1 5.65 MWD Speed 1744 1730 1802 1836 Warp Speed 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 Drone Bandwidth 25 0 35 0 Drone Bay 75 0 60 0 Target Range 50000 60000 55000 45000 Scan Resolution 525 475 500 550 Max Targets 7 7 7 7 Radar Strength 12 0 0 0 Ladar Strength 0 0 0 11 Magnetometric Strength 0 0 13 0 Gravimetric Strength 0 14 0 0 Signature Radius 64 69 67 60
CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Fixing bombs, not the bombers
|
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
637
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 15:52:57 -
[364] - Quote
Moac Tor wrote:Just a suggestion here, but perhaps prevent use of these if they are within a certain range of a Stargate or a Station. The reason being that this could potentially kill a lot of PvP.
I think there should be no restriction. The main reason is i want to see cowardly link alts who hug stations/gates to get killed as frequently as possible by MJDing them away from their 99% safe area and get wrecked.
Cant wait for links to be changed, lowsec is pure cancer right now because of this. To the point we have linked breachers and comets flying around. Ill happily take negative sec status and welp a few CD to kill these cowards hiding behind links.
Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
|
Terra Chrall
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
59
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 15:58:38 -
[365] - Quote
afkalt wrote:gascanu wrote:afkalt wrote:
words.. words ...words... something something highsec
.
really guys, what part of the big restrictions you need to know are that you cannot use this module in high sec you guys don't understand? this mod is banned from high sec, can you get the over it and move on? And some of us are challenging the reasons for that ban and suggesting it should be allowed. These are both features & ideas as well as feedback thus are entirely appropriate. Very much like how people campaigned to remove MJDs from the ABCs which had it in the initial iteration. You are, of course, at liberty to ignore the posts talking about them as you see fit.
Here are a few of the current issues I see allowing the module (as is) in HighSec: 1. In many situations you can't scram a fleet mate since you would get CONCORD response. 2. You can not preemptively attack or scram the CD since it is HighSec and you would get a CONCORD response. 3. It would force solo ships into games of keep away, trying to avoid CDs that are closing in on them. Otherwise that ship has to stop focusing on whatever it was doing and constantly watch for the MJF animation. A CD could cozy up to you for minutes waiting for you to let your guard down then activate their module.
What about the idea of adding a criminal or suspect flag? 1. MJF should not cause a flag for activating the module, since you would put yourself at risk using it on friendlies. 2. If it caused a flag upon jumping a neutral ship it would be too late for many victims. 3. Would require ship fits or fleet comps to change to counter this new module, and this would be a pretty broad and disruptive change just to use 1 new module in highsec.
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1621
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 16:08:21 -
[366] - Quote
Ylein Kashuken wrote:Can we activate this jump field directly at stations? This might be nightmare for JF and station links :D
Doesn't work on invulnerable ships. The undock timer and 'just jumped in' timer will give the JF plenty of time to jump or dock if the pilot's not an idiot. |
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
288
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 16:46:06 -
[367] - Quote
afkalt wrote:gascanu wrote:afkalt wrote:
words.. words ...words... something something highsec
.
really guys, what part of the big restrictions you need to know are that you cannot use this module in high sec you guys don't understand? this mod is banned from high sec, can you get the over it and move on? And some of us are challenging the reasons for that ban and suggesting it should be allowed. These are both features & ideas as well as feedback thus are entirely appropriate. Very much like how people campaigned to remove MJDs from the ABCs which had it in the initial iteration. You are, of course, at liberty to ignore the posts talking about them as you see fit.
and some of us see that allowing them in high sec will destroy the game: i get it you have a problem with incursion fleets, but those are just a very very small part of high sec: mission running, hauling, mining, all of it will be affected by this new mod;
you are always missing the part that this is not a single player game, and that we will always have the n+1 game; let me ask you something: how many scrams can you fit on your ship? ... do you get the idea?
it's not that your fleet cannot defend against one single destroyer, it's the fact that ppl will bring how many of these they need to do whatever they need to do; and, except for everyone scramming everyone in a fleet, there is no way to defend against this |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2439
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 16:49:01 -
[368] - Quote
I'm tired of arguing with people who think that "I can't do anything".
I-cant-be-arsed-looking-after-myself-villeGäó is over there. Oh, apparently it is high sec too . |
Terra Chrall
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
59
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 17:19:51 -
[369] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Here is a feedback thread for some awesome new ships, Command Destroyers!
Their weapon systems will be missile or drone based, like their base hulls.
Here are the bonuses:
MAGUS Gallente Destroyer Per Level: 10% Bonus to Drone Damage 4% bonus to armor resists
PONTIFEX Amarr Destroyer per Level: 10% Bonus to Drone Damage 4% bonus to Armor Resistances
STORK Caldari Destroyer per Level: 10% to Rocket and Light Missile Damage 4% Bonus to Shield Resistances
BIFROST Minmatar Destroyer per Level: 10% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile Damage 4% bonus to shield resists
Okay, Drones with no HP bonus as the primary weapon system on 2 of these bothers me. It gives good dps, but makes permanently removing that DPS fairly easy, and in the case of the MAGUS it does not even have room for 2 full sets (3 light 2 medium).
I would almost prefer unbonused or HP only bonused drones and a damage bonus to the racial turret, so small laser and hybrids respectively. At least that way when the drone are removed the ships can still have a meaningful contribution to the offense. It leaves the ship split weapon systems but strongly encourages the use of weapons in high slots over utility.
Could CCP comment on the removal of the standard HP bonus on a drone boat? |
elitatwo
Eve Minions The-Company
909
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 17:44:34 -
[370] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Stork looks a bit overpowered. It towers over the competition with its high shield hit points and robust mid slots, a trait which is poorly balanced by its few weaknesses: it's much less agile but otherwise its attributes don't seem to line up right.
I suggest either cutting its shield hit points by 50 without giving it anything back in exchange, or reduce its max velocity a bit and cut its scan resolution further.
A way to add some racial flavor to these ships--change the damage skill bonuses slightly:
PONTIFEX Amarr Destroyer per Level: 12.5% Bonus to Drone EM Damage and 7.5% Bonus to Drone Thermal, Kinetic, and Explosive Damage
STORK Caldari Destroyer per Level: 12.5% Bonus to Missile Kinetic Damage and 7.5% Bonus to Missile EM, Thermal, and Explosive Damage
MAGUS Gallente Destroyer Per Level: 12.5% Bonus to Drone Thermal Damage and 7.5% Bonus to Drone EM, Kinetic, and Explosive Damage
BIFROST Minmatar Destroyer per Level: 12.5% Bonus to Missile Explosive Damage and 7.5% Bonus to Missile EM, Thermal, and Kinetic Damage
Reaver, as much as I admire your enthusiasm can you give me a minute to take a look at them first?
Eve Minions is recruiting. Learn from about pvp, learn about ships and how to fly them correctly. Small gang and solo action in high, low and nullsec and w-space alike.
We will teach you everything you need and want to know.
|
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
244
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 18:28:07 -
[371] - Quote
Stitch Kaneland wrote:Moac Tor wrote:Just a suggestion here, but perhaps prevent use of these if they are within a certain range of a Stargate or a Station. The reason being that this could potentially kill a lot of PvP. I think there should be no restriction. The main reason is i want to see cowardly link alts who hug stations/gates to get killed as frequently as possible by MJDing them away from their 99% safe area and get wrecked. Cant wait for links to be changed, lowsec is pure cancer right now because of this. To the point we have linked breachers and comets flying around. Ill happily take negative sec status and welp a few CD to kill these cowards hiding behind links.
till you realize that these can fit 2-3 links and give the same bonuses as t3's thus its may be cheaper to have links in space. |
Mixu Paatelainen
Semicompetence Online
222
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 18:54:15 -
[372] - Quote
Late to this thread but just thought it was important I contributed:
asdfasdfasdfasdfasdfasdf so excite |
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
637
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 19:07:45 -
[373] - Quote
Lady Rift wrote:Stitch Kaneland wrote:Moac Tor wrote:Just a suggestion here, but perhaps prevent use of these if they are within a certain range of a Stargate or a Station. The reason being that this could potentially kill a lot of PvP. I think there should be no restriction. The main reason is i want to see cowardly link alts who hug stations/gates to get killed as frequently as possible by MJDing them away from their 99% safe area and get wrecked. Cant wait for links to be changed, lowsec is pure cancer right now because of this. To the point we have linked breachers and comets flying around. Ill happily take negative sec status and welp a few CD to kill these cowards hiding behind links. till you realize that these can fit 2-3 links and give the same bonuses as t3's thus its may be cheaper to have links in space.
Except T3s can fit 5-6 links and are slightly tankier, nullified and can cloak. Im going to assume fitting 2-3 links on one of these will mean 0 tank.
I like the fact that these will make the linked "elite pvpers" in lowsec rage when i jump their link boat off their safety gate/station and kill it when theyre in the middle of a fight. Best case scenario is their link boat dies, and then their ship dies too when they lose links.
If they move their link ship out into a safe, then it can combat probed and killed that way. Either way, the risk averse linked pansies will have to actually risk something now instead of relying on 99.9% safe links hugging a station/gate.
Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1952
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 19:32:22 -
[374] - Quote
Stitch Kaneland wrote:Lady Rift wrote:Stitch Kaneland wrote:Moac Tor wrote:Just a suggestion here, but perhaps prevent use of these if they are within a certain range of a Stargate or a Station. The reason being that this could potentially kill a lot of PvP. I think there should be no restriction. The main reason is i want to see cowardly link alts who hug stations/gates to get killed as frequently as possible by MJDing them away from their 99% safe area and get wrecked. Cant wait for links to be changed, lowsec is pure cancer right now because of this. To the point we have linked breachers and comets flying around. Ill happily take negative sec status and welp a few CD to kill these cowards hiding behind links. till you realize that these can fit 2-3 links and give the same bonuses as t3's thus its may be cheaper to have links in space. Except T3s can fit 5-6 links and are slightly tankier, nullified and can cloak. Im going to assume fitting 2-3 links on one of these will mean 0 tank. I like the fact that these will make the linked "elite pvpers" in lowsec rage when i jump their link boat off their safety gate/station and kill it when theyre in the middle of a fight. Best case scenario is their link boat dies, and then their ship dies too when they lose links. If they move their link ship out into a safe, then it can combat probed and killed that way. Either way, the risk averse linked pansies will have to actually risk something now instead of relying on 99.9% safe links hugging a station/gate.
This alone is worth the price of admission.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
244
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 19:34:00 -
[375] - Quote
Stitch Kaneland wrote:Lady Rift wrote:Stitch Kaneland wrote:Moac Tor wrote:Just a suggestion here, but perhaps prevent use of these if they are within a certain range of a Stargate or a Station. The reason being that this could potentially kill a lot of PvP. I think there should be no restriction. The main reason is i want to see cowardly link alts who hug stations/gates to get killed as frequently as possible by MJDing them away from their 99% safe area and get wrecked. Cant wait for links to be changed, lowsec is pure cancer right now because of this. To the point we have linked breachers and comets flying around. Ill happily take negative sec status and welp a few CD to kill these cowards hiding behind links. till you realize that these can fit 2-3 links and give the same bonuses as t3's thus its may be cheaper to have links in space. Except T3s can fit 5-6 links and are slightly tankier, nullified and can cloak. Im going to assume fitting 2-3 links on one of these will mean 0 tank. I like the fact that these will make the linked "elite pvpers" in lowsec rage when i jump their link boat off their safety gate/station and kill it when theyre in the middle of a fight. Best case scenario is their link boat dies, and then their ship dies too when they lose links. If they move their link ship out into a safe, then it can combat probed and killed that way. Either way, the risk averse linked pansies will have to actually risk something now instead of relying on 99.9% safe links hugging a station/gate.
links on one of these means it can jump back to station.
also 2 links fit with no fitting mods.
more people will be able to bring links is more what i was getting at. |
Xequecal
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
361
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 19:41:40 -
[376] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Ylein Kashuken wrote:Can we activate this jump field directly at stations? This might be nightmare for JF and station links :D Doesn't work on invulnerable ships. The undock timer and 'just jumped in' timer will give the JF plenty of time to jump or dock if the pilot's not an idiot.
It absolutely needs to not work on jump freighters. If it did, it would be fairly easy to gank JFs warping to the highsec gate after jumping into lowsec. All you have to do is time how long it takes for a JF to warp from the jump-in station to the highsec gate, and then just have a cloaked scout on the station grid call out the exact moment he enters warp. Spool up your command MJD 8 seconds before he arrives and you're pretty likely to drag him off. |
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
1324
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 20:06:37 -
[377] - Quote
Stitch Kaneland wrote:Im going to assume fitting 2-3 links on one of these will mean 0 tank.
By fitting 2-3 links, you've also beaten the hull trait of *can fit one warfare link*. |
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
640
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 20:20:47 -
[378] - Quote
Lloyd Roses wrote:Stitch Kaneland wrote:Im going to assume fitting 2-3 links on one of these will mean 0 tank. By fitting 2-3 links, you've also beaten the hull trait of *can fit one warfare link*.
Guess i need reading comprehension to 5 then. I was under the impression these were like t1 BCs. Oh well, even better then.
Lady Rift, these wont replace 5-6 link t3s anytime soon. Having a 1 link dessy vs a 6 linked nullified, cloaky t3 are 2 very different scenarios. 1 link does not create cancerous scenarios that we see in LS. Its the people with 5-6 linked CS/t3s that are the issue and give you a whole slew of bonuses that supplement each other.
I suppose you could have 6 of these dessies but that doesnt seem as efficient. I know most people who use links will ignore these for their t3s. Small gangs that want alil extra oomph will love these though.
Im mainly interested in the MJD feature.
Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
|
Catherine Laartii
Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate
623
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 20:31:49 -
[379] - 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 ? Best analogy i've heard all year lol |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1952
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 20:36:55 -
[380] - Quote
Lloyd Roses wrote:Stitch Kaneland wrote:Im going to assume fitting 2-3 links on one of these will mean 0 tank. By fitting 2-3 links, you've also beaten the hull trait of *can fit one warfare link*.
I thought it was made clear earlier on in this thread that they were like T1 Battlecruisers - they can fit one link. Theoretically, they could fit command processors to fit more links, but the fitting costs for command processors make that unlikely on these ships.
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
1952
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 20:38:14 -
[381] - Quote
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Im mainly interested in the MJD feature.
The link aspect of these ships appears to be very niche, at best (inside shattered WH's). These ships are going to be awesome purely because of the micro jump drive thingy.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1625
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 20:43:20 -
[382] - Quote
Xequecal wrote:It absolutely needs to not work on jump freighters. If it did, it would be fairly easy to gank JFs warping to the highsec gate after jumping into lowsec. All you have to do is time how long it takes for a JF to warp from the jump-in station to the highsec gate, and then just have a cloaked scout on the station grid call out the exact moment he enters warp. Spool up your command MJD 8 seconds before he arrives and you're pretty likely to drag him off.
Keep an exit cyno ready to light when you're in lowsec. Someone does this to you, you light immediately and bounce. And that, btw, is also only applicable if the 'doesn't affect invulnerable ships' isn't in effect - because you've got those seconds when you come out of warp when you can't be targeted yet, because the system hasn't changed your state. Make sure you spam 'jump' when you're coming in, and you should be ok.
The real question is: these things don't need to target. If I'm 5km away from one of these things when it goes off, and I've already heard 'warp drive active', will I warp from the new location? If it works like a normal MJD, the code-side effect seems to be purely 'changing location to these coordinates in space' - speed, targeting, module cycling, none of it changes. Normal MJDs, though, can't be activated on a ship entering warp, and prevent you from initiating warp if it's cycling up. Will this prevent warps, or just bounce the start point by 100km? (assuming the endpoint wouldn't move 100km in the same direction.) |
Moraguth
Ranger Corp Vae. Victis.
168
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 20:48:12 -
[383] - Quote
Will ships that are currently lighting a cyno be moved by the jump?
If they are moved, will the cyno spot move or remain in the original position?
I got a Feature Added!
Stop calling an Abaddon "abba-dawn". It is "uh-bad-in"
dictionary.com/abaddon
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2722
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 21:25:21 -
[384] - Quote
If a fleet of 100 of these all activate MJFG at the same time, will they jump 10,000km away? Will it crash the server?
I think it's worth considering forcing them to restart the MJFG after being jumped, that way it gives snipers a brief chance to take them out before they get away.
I'm imagining a scenario in which a destroyer fleet is brawling with an Apocalypse/Bhaalgorn fleet. The destroyers are slowly losing ships due to the Bhaalgorn's neuts and webs allowing Apocalypses to hit with gleam ammo. Their fleet is bubbled so they have one of their command destroyers activate the MJFG to get out of the bubble so they can warp away. As soon as the MJFG goes active, the battleship FC tells all apocalypse pilots to activate sensor boosters and switch to aurora ammo. Soon as the destroyers land they're still targeted by the apocalypses, who fire and take out half the remaining destroyer fleet in seconds before they manage to warp off.
Pirate ship Nightmare, can you fathom
Larger but with smaller spikes than Phantasm
The Succubus looks meaner
But the Revenant cleaner
Seems as they get bigger, the smaller spikes they has'm
|
Midori Tsu
Evolution Northern Coalition.
144
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 21:26:47 -
[385] - Quote
For counter gameplay options could Micro Jump Drive Disruption bubbles be introduced? They did show up in the database at one point so i know the idea isn't that far out there. Would be cool to give this to heavy interdictors to give them another thing to do.
I think the fact that the only counter game play to this mechanic is scramblers or killing the command destroyer is very disappointing. More options would be great. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
2715
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 23:02:46 -
[386] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:
Keep an exit cyno ready to light when you're in lowsec. Someone does this to you, you light immediately and bounce. And that, btw, is also only applicable if the 'doesn't affect invulnerable ships' isn't in effect - because you've got those seconds when you come out of warp when you can't be targeted yet, because the system hasn't changed your state. Make sure you spam 'jump' when you're coming in, and you should be ok.
The real question is: these things don't need to target. If I'm 5km away from one of these things when it goes off, and I've already heard 'warp drive active', will I warp from the new location? If it works like a normal MJD, the code-side effect seems to be purely 'changing location to these coordinates in space' - speed, targeting, module cycling, none of it changes. Normal MJDs, though, can't be activated on a ship entering warp, and prevent you from initiating warp if it's cycling up. Will this prevent warps, or just bounce the start point by 100km? (assuming the endpoint wouldn't move 100km in the same direction.)
You aren't invulnerable in warp, since you can be smart bombed once you are on grid. So the above posters concern is actually serious for slower ships, since it takes you a long time to exit warp. |
Shagmar Gera
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
1
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 23:04:36 -
[387] - Quote
I just tested it on Singularity. And since so many people were asking...
So far:
The MJFG does jump bastioned marauders.
It does not jump freighters, or Orcas.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2442
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 23:16:04 -
[388] - Quote
Shagmar Gera wrote:I just tested it on Singularity. And since so many people were asking...
So far:
The MJFG does jump bastioned marauders.
It does not jump freighters, or Orcas.
EDIT: Also! I MFJG'd a cyno ship. The Ship moved but the cyno stayed put.
The marauder and cyno are really bad. Hopefully bugs. |
Moraguth
Ranger Corp Vae. Victis.
171
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 23:24:38 -
[389] - Quote
Shagmar Gera wrote:I just tested it on Singularity. And since so many people were asking...
So far:
The MJFG does jump bastioned marauders.
It does not jump freighters, or Orcas.
EDIT: Also! I MFJG'd a cyno ship. The Ship moved but the cyno stayed put.
Thanks for checking and reporting back! Interesting that in this case the orca/JF counts as a capital ship in this case. Very very interesting.
The cyno thing is the most amazing thing. light the cyno with a tanky ship, then jump it away. your capitals jumping in will all stay put. very interesting indeed.
EDIT: the marauder thing i'm not too sure about. I can see that one going either way.
I got a Feature Added!
Stop calling an Abaddon "abba-dawn". It is "uh-bad-in"
dictionary.com/abaddon
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2722
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 23:42:13 -
[390] - Quote
Moraguth wrote:It does not jump freighters, or Orcas. Interesting that in this case the orca/JF[/quote] When he said "jump freighters" he was talking about freighters (not jump freighters) being jumped by the MJFG.
It's probably the same for regular freighters and jump freighters.
Pirate ship Nightmare, can you fathom
Larger but with smaller spikes than Phantasm
The Succubus looks meaner
But the Revenant cleaner
Seems as they get bigger, the smaller spikes they has'm
|
|
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
1325
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 23:53:00 -
[391] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Lloyd Roses wrote:Stitch Kaneland wrote:Im going to assume fitting 2-3 links on one of these will mean 0 tank. By fitting 2-3 links, you've also beaten the hull trait of *can fit one warfare link*. I thought it was made clear earlier on in this thread that they were like T1 Battlecruisers - they can fit one link. Theoretically, they could fit command processors to fit more links, but the fitting costs for command processors make that unlikely on these ships.
CBC state *can fit warfare links*, while those are described differently. Was just a guess tbh. |
DeadDuck
The Legion of Spoon Curatores Veritatis Alliance
185
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 23:54:33 -
[392] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Lloyd Roses wrote:Stitch Kaneland wrote:Im going to assume fitting 2-3 links on one of these will mean 0 tank. By fitting 2-3 links, you've also beaten the hull trait of *can fit one warfare link*. I thought it was made clear earlier on in this thread that they were like T1 Battlecruisers - they can fit one link. Theoretically, they could fit command processors to fit more links, but the fitting costs for command processors make that unlikely on these ships.
Actually they work fine with 2 links. Of course their tank is inexistent but for a cheap OOG they work very well specially if you use them in a specific system like in FW. |
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
218
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 00:03:30 -
[393] - Quote
is it known when in december we get this exactly? i like to know this in regards to planning my skill cue
[u]Carpe noctem[/u]
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
244
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 00:43:37 -
[394] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Lloyd Roses wrote:Stitch Kaneland wrote:Im going to assume fitting 2-3 links on one of these will mean 0 tank. By fitting 2-3 links, you've also beaten the hull trait of *can fit one warfare link*. I thought it was made clear earlier on in this thread that they were like T1 Battlecruisers - they can fit one link. Theoretically, they could fit command processors to fit more links, but the fitting costs for command processors make that unlikely on these ships.
2 links fits without any fitting mods. a fitting mod will let you fit tank(to some degree). the trick will be to get 3 links on this.
its just a cheap throw away booster that if lost doesn't remove sp. push more people to always have there favourite links |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1629
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 01:55:27 -
[395] - Quote
Shagmar Gera wrote:I just tested it on Singularity. And since so many people were asking...
So far:
The MJFG does jump bastioned marauders.
It does not jump freighters, or Orcas.
EDIT: Also! I MFJG'd a cyno ship. The Ship moved but the cyno stayed put.
Derp! Right, Freighters are technically capitals. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1953
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 03:57:15 -
[396] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Shagmar Gera wrote:I just tested it on Singularity. And since so many people were asking...
So far:
The MJFG does jump bastioned marauders.
It does not jump freighters, or Orcas.
EDIT: Also! I MFJG'd a cyno ship. The Ship moved but the cyno stayed put. The marauder and cyno are really bad. Hopefully bugs.
I really hope they fix these things.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Carniflex
StarHunt Mordus Angels
342
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 07:43:27 -
[397] - Quote
Moac Tor wrote:Just a suggestion here, but perhaps prevent use of these if they are within a certain range of a Stargate or a Station. The reason being that this could potentially kill a lot of PvP.
Station "games" are lame anyway. Besides, you can still do it in capital. If you can consider this to be "a lot of PvP" that is.
Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... THWONK!
GOT the bastard.
|
Carniflex
StarHunt Mordus Angels
342
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 07:59:27 -
[398] - Quote
Lady Rift wrote:Stitch Kaneland wrote:Moac Tor wrote:Just a suggestion here, but perhaps prevent use of these if they are within a certain range of a Stargate or a Station. The reason being that this could potentially kill a lot of PvP. I think there should be no restriction. The main reason is i want to see cowardly link alts who hug stations/gates to get killed as frequently as possible by MJDing them away from their 99% safe area and get wrecked. Cant wait for links to be changed, lowsec is pure cancer right now because of this. To the point we have linked breachers and comets flying around. Ill happily take negative sec status and welp a few CD to kill these cowards hiding behind links. till you realize that these can fit 2-3 links and give the same bonuses as t3's thus its may be cheaper to have links in space.
Price is not a balancing factor.
In addition to that T3 being able to be nullified and warp cloaked. Not to mention actually having enough CPU to run more than two links ;) Or be able to run up to 5 links and still be nullified, able to warp cloaked or be bridged by blops and in some cases still a bit more agile with any kind of viable setup.
I have not looked at the numbers but considering their CPU levels I have some serious doubts if it will be really viable to run 3+ links on these. I mean for 3 links you will need at minimum 2 command processors which would set you back 300 CPU (150 CPU per command processor) to start with and then you would have to find 55 CPU per link for 3 links. And these bad boys kinda start off with ~230 CPU or so.
So my gut feeling is that one is sort of limited to about two links at best unless we are starting to talk about officer co-pros here and even then I'm not 100% convinced one can do it because of stacking penalties.
Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... THWONK!
GOT the bastard.
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions The-Company
909
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 09:00:11 -
[399] - Quote
Lady Rift wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Lloyd Roses wrote:Stitch Kaneland wrote:Im going to assume fitting 2-3 links on one of these will mean 0 tank. By fitting 2-3 links, you've also beaten the hull trait of *can fit one warfare link*. I thought it was made clear earlier on in this thread that they were like T1 Battlecruisers - they can fit one link. Theoretically, they could fit command processors to fit more links, but the fitting costs for command processors make that unlikely on these ships. 2 links fits without any fitting mods. a fitting mod will let you fit tank(to some degree). the trick will be to get 3 links on this. its just a cheap throw away booster that if lost doesn't remove sp. push more people to always have there favourite links
The Pontifex and Magus can fit 2 without the processors but you could always have a buddy and have another two links in your gang. I am not keen on dropping a gun for a link but I leave that up to you.
If I am not completly of they should cost around 40-50m and you can kill tech3 destroyeres with them - I like.
Eve Minions is recruiting. Learn from about pvp, learn about ships and how to fly them correctly. Small gang and solo action in high, low and nullsec and w-space alike.
We will teach you everything you need and want to know.
|
Moac Tor
Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation
326
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 09:54:05 -
[400] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:afkalt wrote:Shagmar Gera wrote:I just tested it on Singularity. And since so many people were asking...
So far:
The MJFG does jump bastioned marauders.
It does not jump freighters, or Orcas.
EDIT: Also! I MFJG'd a cyno ship. The Ship moved but the cyno stayed put. The marauder and cyno are really bad. Hopefully bugs. I really hope they fix these things. Using it to jump a cyno offensively sounds like it could be powerful, atlhough I don't think it is particularly broken considering it is difficult to stop a cyno anyway.
The bastion module on the other hand has EWAR immunity and so it should definitely be immune or else marauders effectively become useless.
Modulated ECM Effects
An Alternative to Skill Trading
|
|
Luscius Uta
182
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 10:33:54 -
[401] - Quote
I cannot fathom how anyone could seriously suggest usage of MJFGs in highsec. Has anyone thought of the mess they would cause on Jita undock? Sure, this could lead to delicious tears from certain fail PvPers who just station camp all day, but potential for exploits is far greater. I suggest their ban from lowsec also. As well as disabling the activating ship's warp drive for 15 seconds after activation.
Drifters have arrived - The End is nigh!
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2725
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 11:01:53 -
[402] - Quote
Luscius Uta wrote:I cannot fathom how anyone could seriously suggest usage of MJFGs in highsec. Has anyone thought of the mess they would cause on Jita undock? Sure, this could lead to delicious tears from certain fail PvPers who just station camp all day, but potential for exploits is far greater. I suggest their ban from lowsec also. As well as disabling the activating ship's warp drive for 15 seconds after activation. Or they could be allowed in highsec but disallowed within 100km of stargates, stations, asteroid belts, and deadspace pockets in highsec. They could be disallowed within 25km of stargates and stations in lowsec.
Pirate ship Nightmare, can you fathom
Larger but with smaller spikes than Phantasm
The Succubus looks meaner
But the Revenant cleaner
Seems as they get bigger, the smaller spikes they has'm
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2444
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 11:33:04 -
[403] - Quote
Moac Tor wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:afkalt wrote:Shagmar Gera wrote:I just tested it on Singularity. And since so many people were asking...
So far:
The MJFG does jump bastioned marauders.
It does not jump freighters, or Orcas.
EDIT: Also! I MFJG'd a cyno ship. The Ship moved but the cyno stayed put. The marauder and cyno are really bad. Hopefully bugs. I really hope they fix these things. Using it to jump a cyno offensively sounds like it could be powerful, atlhough I don't think it is particularly broken considering it is difficult to stop a cyno anyway, but it shouldn't jump the ship and leave the cyno behind. The bastion module on the other hand has EWAR immunity and so it should definitely be immune or else marauders effectively become useless.
I think it is a bug as bastion blocks a marauders OWN mjd.
They just need to code that immobilized objects are not moved.
Jumping bastioned marauders would be a complete nonsense. "Halp, my tank is breaking....warp me off grid, pronto" and the other guys can't even scram the marauder to hold it down, because bastion. |
elitatwo
Eve Minions The-Company
909
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 12:31:41 -
[404] - Quote
For the last time those mj-drives are not allowed in highsec.
Eve Minions is recruiting. Learn from about pvp, learn about ships and how to fly them correctly. Small gang and solo action in high, low and nullsec and w-space alike.
We will teach you everything you need and want to know.
|
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
641
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 13:11:36 -
[405] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Luscius Uta wrote:I cannot fathom how anyone could seriously suggest usage of MJFGs in highsec. Has anyone thought of the mess they would cause on Jita undock? Sure, this could lead to delicious tears from certain fail PvPers who just station camp all day, but potential for exploits is far greater. I suggest their ban from lowsec also. As well as disabling the activating ship's warp drive for 15 seconds after activation. Or they could be allowed in highsec but disallowed within 100km of stargates, stations, asteroid belts, and deadspace pockets in highsec. They could be disallowed within 25km of stargates and stations in lowsec.
Or they could just not be allowed in HS. LS is not supposed to be safe, neither is HS for that matter. Certainly not LS though. Proper scouting and protection from CDs should be up to the player, not some silly arbitrary rule.
With your proposal this would then continue the 99.9% safe links hugging stations and gate with very limited options in killing them (mainly alpha nados). People need to accept some risk, especially in lowsec. The only form of safety they should get is the gate guns helping when you agress.
Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
|
Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
1331
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 13:42:07 -
[406] - Quote
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:Hi-sec was not intended to be this big mass safety zone. It was intended that if you were bad, Concord punished you. I see more of CCP playing this role lately then Concord itself. Player engagement is what established this game, what grew this game. More and more this is removed due to safety nets needing to be put in place. You know whats a constant trend since eve got safer and player friendly? Less players. An amazing trend that started since the NPE and increased protections around all classes of space was the reduction of active players, of subscribed players, of fleets filling quick, of guys and gals to do content with.
May we stop this shyt and go back to what made eve popular in the days that filled its server? The days that filled fleets and voice channels? Stop holding everyones hand and let the players engage. It's what made EVE. Let the players relearn how to protect their ships. Let us relearn how to safeguard our assets. Get your filthy dev hand off mine and let me get ganked in my Blingdicator while chasing a mothership. If I got caught obviously my group wasnt watching the area. We didnt have gates or stations scouted, or warpins guarded. EVE is about choice, and risk, stop taking it away damnit.
I want the damn rush I had playing this game. I fight enough to log in. I used to get excited mining, there was risk. Gankers always were around, you paid attention in local , you slipped attention an extra twenty bucks when you had to go bio, hoped attention had you back while you were gone. You rushed that damn bathroom also. You had no safety switch, no warning for pvp. You had a decision to make, ruins someday or show humanity. That was your choice in EVE. You did not have to cross check the TOS, EULA, FORUMS, Reddit to make sure your combat wasnt going to be petitioned and be handed a 30 day vacation, because suddenly it was considered Griefing someone if you shot them while they were in the bathroom in the middle of the third shake. What you had to worry mercs were sent after you, or there corp. Bring back the days of players policing themselves. Bring back player engagement and actual risk. Give back the blood rush people kept thru the day. Kill off the monotony we now face. Let us go back to playing the game and stop deciding how it should be. That was never your selling point. Get the adults out of my sandbox!
I'm guessing my "back in the day" was different to yours, in that PVE was the mainstay of EVE Online, when the highest peak of players was around 5-6K and we thought it was crowded then but we lived with the PVPers and the greifers, we formed gangs (yep they were called gangs in my day) from Local and got together to mine and make our money.
While I agree there is a little too much pandering to the "New Players" and this softly softly approach to them I'm all for a cautious approach when adding something like this that really has so many applications.
Take note that they asked for feedback and also reserve the right to change the module or tweak it as they get feedback. I think the kids need to be kicked out of the sandbox and let the adults play with the toys. Adults always have more fun with toys than kids do anyway.
[b]Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee"
Undocking - More Routes Out of Station[/b]
Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up!
|
Feledain
Elmsfeuer
61
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 15:22:40 -
[407] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:For the last time those mj-drives are not allowed in highsec.
we know this the argment is if they should be you know... because F&I
I say allow them, but with some restirctrions. Getting suspect and beeing immobile like marauderes while the MJFG spools up.
CCP can allways bann them if they are realy gamebraking.
The whole "but the jita undock" can be solved with tethering for ALL stations. BUM immun ships at undock (if they are tethert) |
Valkin Mordirc
1653
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 16:12:42 -
[408] - Quote
What have people seen on how these things do against T3D's?
I've fought both Sviples and Confessors on SiSi and had fairly good luck with the Stork. With a Single MSE + point dual webs with an MWD and MJD you can fairly easily skirt around them. The Tank wasn't quite great but you could drop the MJD for another MSE I think.
10MN fittings on the Stork was possible to, but it don't seem OP at all. Incase anyone was wondering.
#DeleteTheWeak
|
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
642
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 16:56:45 -
[409] - Quote
I was tinkering with the stork and bifrost on SiSi last night. As far as link killers go, i believe the stork/bifrost will be the best bets. The bifrost will be the better dps boat due to the extra low over the stork. I fit it with rockets, dual BCU, DCU, dual MSE plus AB and MJD. With rage rockets it was about 230dps before heat with my skills. In game stats were over 12k EHP. Not too bad for tank. Hopefully enough to handle gate guns.
Tested the mjd on station undock and i believe it warped "invulnerable" ships too. As about 1-2sec before the MJD activated a hecate undocked and he came along with me as well as a couple other ships.
So i believe there are a couple bugs, and that might explain why marauders and cynos can be moved.
Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
866
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 17:06:37 -
[410] - 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 :(
You say that like it is a bad thing. |
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
866
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 17:12:43 -
[411] - Quote
Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote: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 :( It's not over the top. It's hilarious and moreover, some needed risk to that community. When there is no counterplay, its over the top. Specifically referring to the ability of these destroyers to warp into an incursion fight, activate without anyone stopping them and killing the fleet as the logi is now 100km away and useless. In low and null, as soon as the destroyer lands, its able to be killed. In high sec, you get concorded. Even a criminal timer when it activates isn't enough, both for the fleet to kill it or for it to activate before concord kills it in certain systems.
Sure there is counterplay. Make the module automatically give the pilot a suspect timer, you got ~5secs to scram the Command Destroyer. |
Valkin Mordirc
1653
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 17:37:28 -
[412] - Quote
Stitch Kaneland wrote:I was tinkering with the stork and bifrost on SiSi last night. As far as link killers go, i believe the stork/bifrost will be the best bets. The bifrost will be the better dps boat due to the extra low over the stork. I fit it with rockets, dual BCU, DCU, dual MSE plus AB and MJD. With rage rockets it was about 230dps before heat with my skills. In game stats were over 12k EHP. Not too bad for tank. Hopefully enough to handle gate guns.
Tested the mjd on station undock and i believe it warped "invulnerable" ships too. As about 1-2sec before the MJD activated a hecate undocked and he came along with me as well as a couple other ships.
So i believe there are a couple bugs, and that might explain why marauders and cynos can be moved.
Yeah the Stork I was using was
Highslot, Five LML II w Rage
Mid 2 meta 4 webs 1 meta 4 point 1 Retrained MWD 1 MJD 1 MSE
Low DC BCS
Rigs Anti-EM Polycarb Polycarb
Went 2.8k without links 3.5 I think with links, I had Highgrade snakes no omega, That setup was pretty much able to beat a fessor and a Svip barely. But the snakes alone was able to keep them at range with help of the webs. When I tried it with links I didn't really need the webs unless I was flying like crap.
DPS was like 130 with rage, I think. I actually can't remember but 130 sounds close.
As for the MJD I was able to move a few ships with me, a Demios and Slep were fighting and a Pilgrim jumped into the fight. I was able to move both the the ships without the pilgrim, drones and all. When we landed, the Slep and Demi still had lock on each other and were still engaging, drones actually didn't seem to at first.
#DeleteTheWeak
|
Blood Thorn
Duchy Of Wessex Intrepid Crossing
4
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 17:56:37 -
[413] - Quote
While this may seem to add to the strategy portfolio - it makes defensive tactical positioning around gates useless and is yet another reason to not include long range weapons in a fight. So ultimately this reduces combat strategy for fleets.
How is this good for the game?
It seems to me that something needs to be added for a tactical counter. Perhaps a warp disruption bubble in the path? |
Doddy
Esoteric Operations
947
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 18:01:49 -
[414] - Quote
Zockhandra wrote:
If this modules works like other MJD (can only be shut down via scram), what is stopping players from diving into a bubble to save titans?
I don't know why this is an issue for people, you know any ship could dive into a bubble and smartbomb it already right? That can't be stopped by scrams. |
Jenn aSide
Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore
12963
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 18:02:12 -
[415] - Quote
Blood Thorn wrote: So ultimately this reduces combat strategy for fleets.
I fear this will be the case. What CCP thi8nks will happen is 'more manual piloting', I think what will happen is that fleets will become faster (ie even less reason to use big ships), fleet fights will be much more a game of 'keep away' even than they are now, and people will get sick of it in very very short order.
CCp seems to have not learned the lesson that everything exploitable will be exploited,, every thing that can be min/maxxed will be min/maxxed and everything eventually boils down to it's simplest common denominator. |
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
642
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 18:12:09 -
[416] - Quote
Blood Thorn wrote:While this may seem to add to the strategy portfolio - it makes defensive tactical positioning around gates useless and is yet another reason to not include long range weapons in a fight. So ultimately this reduces combat strategy for fleets.
How is this good for the game?
It seems to me that something needs to be added for a tactical counter. Perhaps a warp disruption bubble in the path?
Dont put all your long range guns in the same spot? Spread them out around the grid.
Also "long range" can mean a lot things. A rail naga with sebos can shoot out to 250km, which is completely unaffected by this MJD dessie. An arty cane has a max range between 50-90km. If you are 150km away, or 50km away, an MJD dessie wont land on top of you.
So i guess what im getting at is, dont sit 100km off a gate/station? Seems like a pretty simple work around.
As for how its good for the game, the command dessie side of things is good for frig gangs that want mobile links. Makes frig gangs more viable without lugging around a booster t3.
The MJD function has many uses. Escaping or starting a fight. Using it to help your BS bretheren avoid a bombing run (or teleport the bombs away from them). Move enemy logi out of their blob to be killed unopposed. Moving cowardly link boats hugging stations/gates. Those are just a few ideas off the top of my head that were discussed in the first pages of the thread. Perhaps look there first?
Your "counterplay" would utterly defeat the whole purpose of the ship. Every other dictor in a fleet would just spam "anti-MJD" bubbles and there would be very few uses for it after that.
Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
|
Doddy
Esoteric Operations
947
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 18:16:36 -
[417] - Quote
Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote: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 :( It's not over the top. It's hilarious and moreover, some needed risk to that community. When there is no counterplay, its over the top. Specifically referring to the ability of these destroyers to warp into an incursion fight, activate without anyone stopping them and killing the fleet as the logi is now 100km away and useless. In low and null, as soon as the destroyer lands, its able to be killed. In high sec, you get concorded. Even a criminal timer when it activates isn't enough, both for the fleet to kill it or for it to activate before concord kills it in certain systems.
Stay within 6k of the logi, being repped from 50k away is to op in pvp never mind against incursion rats.
|
virm pasuul
The Congregation No Handlebars.
341
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 20:07:31 -
[418] - Quote
What happens if an MFJG ship is spinning up it's 9 second activation timer and during that spinup it itself get hit by another ships' MFJG.
Example 7 MFJG ships. 6 spread out around, but within 6km of the centrally positioned 7th. All pointing away from it in different directions. The centrally positioned 7th activates it's 9 second timer whilst pointing into the middle of an enemy fleet. Two full seconds later the remaining 6 ships all activate their MFJGs
6 seconds later the central anchor ship jumps them all. As soon as they land all the other MFJGs now go off in among the enemy fleet. Enemy fleet flies apart in all directions. |
Thales
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
4
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 20:09:01 -
[419] - 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
I loved the idea of T2 destroyers with the microjump drive.
But command destroyers, with the prerequisites you have added? No thank you.
I am sure many people will be using their billion isk implanted pods as hero tackle on a regular basis no? Using ongrid suicide links and boost on grid? No? Or is the idea of suiciding ones links, to win the battle in an all or nothing sacrifice not actually going to happen? Or is this just a sop to those afraid of losing the value of their training when they lose the ability to operate from a safe?
This new and exciting mode of combat, is totally incompatable with the concept of link characters, I really do not know how you mashed these two ideas together.
Can we please actually get to use this ship without training skills that have no relevance to it's design, especially as if these ships are fitted with links they are ill equipped to fit the MJD with enough tank to survive the spoolup in the first place (cpu) |
motie one
Secret Passage
48
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 20:23:07 -
[420] - Quote
The coming soon page does get one excited about the new T2 destroyer coming, and after reading here, it seems that that has all changed and we now have a command destroyer to provide links. Great, linky MJD mishmash.
That's a letdown.
I have absolutely no intention of touching anything to do with training links while their future is so up in the air. There are better things to train, and these are now relegated in my mind to cool idea, shame I will just see others use them.
Please remove link skills as a prerequisite to use these ships, let those who want to use them in this form do so, but not with these prerequisites killing the anticipation for the rest of us. |
|
TarPalantir I
Evolution Northern Coalition.
14
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 21:05:03 -
[421] - Quote
Tar-Palantir has two comments he'll share. Both are trying to be "big picture" - hopefully they are useful to readers.
1. It is important to understand what this change is. This is not just a couple of scenarios that allow X, Y, or Z and would be cool for A, B, C reasons. This is a very fundamental change to Eve movement mechanics. This will have as far reaching impacts - likely further than the introduction of MWD's way back in the mists of time. This will allow players to teleport objects that up until this point could not be moved after being deployed, or had very specific movement mechanics. This change will alter the very basic ways people fly ships, fight NPC's, fight each other, move objects around a grid, etc. This is about thousands of possible scenarios, not just 5 or 30. Hopefully CCP realizes this and have considered the wide reaching impacts such a basic change to movement mechanics will have. From talking with other players and reading this forum, it seems clear that lots of players havenGÇÖt grasped this yet. Many seem focused on a couple of scenarios that are important to them in one way or another. Tar-Palantir encourages people to go beyond a couple of scenarios and just imagine what you can do if you can teleport most objects in the game 100 km to Y*100 (with daisy chaining) instantly.
2. Similarly big picture, Tar-Palantir is very concerned about the impact this change will have on the role of and importance of positioning in how the game is played. Yes, Tar-Palantir understands where you position your MJFG ships matters and requires skill and all that. Not arguing against that. What Tar-Palantir is concerned about is that the importance of positioning of objects - ships in a fleet, ships around asteroids, bubbles around a gate, bombs in a bombing run, etc, etc is all diminished when you have the ability to teleport those objects nearly instantly long distances. The last fundamental change to the role of positioning in fighting in Eve - especially fleet fighting above 20ish ships - was instant probing. You no longer needed ships flying thru space trying to get proper positions for the FC to to warp to. Where you were on grid became less important because wherever that was, your foe could warp in at some distance. Instant probing would wipe out pretty much all fighting happening above 120-130 km, a pattern that still holds now 5 years later. Anything more than that became nearly irrelevant because instant probing allowed your foe to get to the distance they wanted rapidly and with very limited ability to prevent it. Tar-Palantir believes this will be as fundamental of a change. With its far ranging impacts on how objects move, this will greatly change how positioning is done. Tar-Palantir won't be surprised at all after all the impacts sort themselves out that most fights happen at less than 80-90 km. This doesnGÇÖt require probing an object/fleet out or choosing the right ships/object in the fleet to warp to. This you align, wait 5-9 seconds, and you land 100 km closer than you were. Or, if you prefer, 100 km further away, or above so outside of the plane of warps from celestials. With proper daisy chaining you can travel much further instantly. Moving across distances becomes even less of a barrier than it is now as you travel instantly and without being shot or blocked by warp bubbles.
People may like both #1 and #2 and believe that is good for the game. Tar-Palantir is rather uneasy about it to the point of being opposed, but he is going to avoid getting into that discussion and focus on his point that it is a massive change that will have very far ranging impacts. It isnGÇÖt a couple of scenarios that will change, or a GÇ£niche" that gets GÇ£nerfedGÇ¥ (whether that be heavily tanked ship station games or Incursion fleets) - this will change how Eve is played at a very basic level. That is what people should be thinking of when discussing these changes, not whether it helps/hurts their favorite activity.
Tar-Palantir will now return the forums to their regularly scheduled shouting, bragging, trolling, insulting, insights, and self-interest campaigning.
|
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
644
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 21:23:19 -
[422] - Quote
motie one wrote:The coming soon page does get one excited about the new T2 destroyer coming, and after reading here, it seems that that has all changed and we now have a command destroyer to provide links. Great, linky MJD mishmash. That's a letdown. I have absolutely no intention of touching anything to do with training links while their future is so up in the air. Not forgetting the hidden prerequisite of leadership V added in as well. There are better things to train, and these are now relegated in my mind to cool idea, shame I will just see others use them. No one with a whit of sense will train leadership skills to V and link skills to IV to use these ships as a MJFG equipped ship. So you are restricting them to those who already have these skills or are training them anyway. Please remove link and leadership skills as a prerequisite to use these ships, let those who want to use them in this form do so, but not with these prerequisites killing the anticipation for the rest of us. You do not HAVE to call them command ships, I would expect a command ship to be able to be far more powerful at providing links than this. The standard battlecruiser does not have to have these skills as a prerequisite, only when specialising to ships like the Eos etc, do these type of skills start to become enforced prerequisites. They have a role as a link ship, they have a role as a hero tackle MJD ship providing asymmetric disruption, however as an analogy you seem to have created a well functioning tin opener with a blowtorch feature added as an afterthought . Sounds like something one sells to the stupid on QVC. Ps I have tried them on Sisi, MJFG role is awesome, I can see a wide range of tactics developing from them, great idea, unfortunately, as the requirements stand, I will only be using them on Sisi, Pity.
You realize the link/leadership skills needed are for more than just the new destroyers right? They give you bonuses when in a fleet on their own (IIRC 10% bonuses to things like armor/shield HP). They also open the door to command ships. Which can also be used completely without links. I doubt these will be pure link boats. Mainly ships to supplement a frig gang and provide an MJD gimmick for other ships.
Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
|
GRNALL
Ranting McKennas'.
0
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 21:25:55 -
[423] - Quote
Deep space transports are going to be all but useless now to anyone who doesnt want to ......ahhhhhhhh SIT AT THE GAME AND ACTUALLY FLY THEIR SHIP. Align time makes the C-Dessie able to rip it off gate with almost zero counter except to scram the Dessie. But then whats the point of having the capability to run if you cant jump when you hit the next gate or dock when you hit the station. MMJD away...? Ohhh good times ahead. |
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
644
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 21:34:13 -
[424] - Quote
GRNALL wrote:Deep space transports are going to be all but useless now to anyone who doesnt want to ......ahhhhhhhh SIT AT THE GAME AND ACTUALLY FLY THEIR SHIP. Align time makes the C-Dessie able to rip it off gate with almost zero counter except to scram the Dessie. But then whats the point of having the capability to run if you cant jump when you hit the next gate or dock when you hit the station. MMJD away...? Ohhh good times ahead.
Dont DST have inherent bonus to scram strength? So the CD would need 2 scrams to hold you right?
I think what you should be more concerned about is the insta lock uber scram HIC that will be on every gate camp. So now you cant MJD or turn on your MWD for any kind of escape.
Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1956
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 21:50:55 -
[425] - Quote
motie one wrote:
No one with a whit of sense will train leadership skills to V and link skills to IV to use these ships as a MJFG equipped ship. So you are restricting them to those who already have these skills or are training them anyway.
You are complaining about less than 10 days of skill training to fly a T2 ship? One of which is Leadership V - a very useful skill...
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Moac Tor
Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation
326
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 22:14:36 -
[426] - Quote
GRNALL wrote:Deep space transports are going to be all but useless now to anyone who doesnt want to ......ahhhhhhhh SIT AT THE GAME AND ACTUALLY FLY THEIR SHIP. Align time makes the C-Dessie able to rip it off gate with almost zero counter except to scram the Dessie. But then whats the point of having the capability to run if you cant jump when you hit the next gate or dock when you hit the station. MMJD away...? Ohhh good times ahead. I was testing this today and the DST will maintain its alignment even after being jumped. It won't be much of a change to DSTs, if you get caught after being jumped you were probably still going to be caught without a CD present.
Modulated ECM Effects
An Alternative to Skill Trading
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2448
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 22:17:19 -
[427] - Quote
In a bid to make them a bit less...niche and to open more interesting gameplay options....I would like to suggest that any higgs equipped ship doesnt get pulled. |
motie one
Secret Passage
48
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 22:17:22 -
[428] - Quote
Stitch Kaneland wrote:motie one wrote:The coming soon page does get one excited about the new T2 destroyer coming, and after reading here, it seems that that has all changed and we now have a command destroyer to provide links. Great, linky MJD mishmash. That's a letdown. I have absolutely no intention of touching anything to do with training links while their future is so up in the air. Not forgetting the hidden prerequisite of leadership V added in as well. There are better things to train, and these are now relegated in my mind to cool idea, shame I will just see others use them. No one with a whit of sense will train leadership skills to V and link skills to IV to use these ships as a MJFG equipped ship. So you are restricting them to those who already have these skills or are training them anyway. Please remove link and leadership skills as a prerequisite to use these ships, let those who want to use them in this form do so, but not with these prerequisites killing the anticipation for the rest of us. You do not HAVE to call them command ships, I would expect a command ship to be able to be far more powerful at providing links than this. The standard battlecruiser does not have to have these skills as a prerequisite, only when specialising to ships like the Eos etc, do these type of skills start to become enforced prerequisites. They have a role as a link ship, they have a role as a hero tackle MJD ship providing asymmetric disruption, however as an analogy you seem to have created a well functioning tin opener with a blowtorch feature added as an afterthought . Sounds like something one sells to the stupid on QVC. Ps I have tried them on Sisi, MJFG role is awesome, I can see a wide range of tactics developing from them, great idea, unfortunately, as the requirements stand, I will only be using them on Sisi, Pity. You realize the link/leadership skills needed are for more than just the new destroyers right? They give you bonuses when in a fleet on their own (IIRC 10% bonuses to things like armor/shield HP). They also open the door to command ships. Which can also be used completely without links. I doubt these will be pure link boats. Mainly ships to supplement a frig gang and provide an MJD gimmick for other ships.
Yes I do. That applies to almost every skill in game, there is always another use for skills. However, the requirements to use a MJFG ROLE are diametrically opposed to a link alts requirement. By calling them a command destroyer and adding these requirements is very disappointing.
|
motie one
Secret Passage
48
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 22:20:57 -
[429] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:motie one wrote:
No one with a whit of sense will train leadership skills to V and link skills to IV to use these ships as a MJFG equipped ship. So you are restricting them to those who already have these skills or are training them anyway.
You are complaining about less than 10 days of skill trbaining to fly a T2 ship? One of which is Leadership V - a very useful skill...
Useful in it's way, so is mining and Pi, lots of skills are useful if you wish to follow that path/career.
but apart from naming them late in the day command destroyers, is irrelevant, less effective with links than a T1 battlecruiser that does not enforce link skills to fly it, and totally incomparable to how effective a true command ship is, where the prerequisites make some kind of sense. Should we make this a requirement for T3's and battlecruisers before we can fly them? |
Moac Tor
Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation
326
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 22:31:53 -
[430] - Quote
TarPalantir I wrote:Hopefully CCP realizes this and have considered the wide reaching impacts such a basic change to movement mechanics will have. I have the impression that CCP haven't tested this thoroughly and are throwing it out there for us to test. It seems to be a method of balancing they have used for stuff such as the T3 Destroyers, Garmur, and more recently HIC 37.5km scrams.
CCP knows that the majority of players don't post on the forums and unfortunately I think they brush off a lot of the feedback unless it is overwhelming and balance by the statistics which they receive in game.
I expect this will be OP at first until players find all the game breaking things it can do and then CCP will fix them. After that it will slowly get nerfed until its usage is seen to be in line with other ships.
I think this is a shame as there is a lot of good feedback that can be found on here and would save a lot of hassle for both devs and players clearing up balance issues on singularity. But I can understand from CCPs position it is difficult to differentiate from the actual issues raised by players on the forum from those posters who are simply trying to push an agenda or reacting to a change that does not benefit themselves or their group.
I do hope that CCP takes note of the obvious stuff such as the issue with marauders and cynos, and also with the HIC long scram as there have been comments from a lot of very experienced PvPers on that issue. The rest though I expect will be tested live on Tranquility.
As for your comments on positioning, yes it seems logical that this will push fights into a 50km sweet spot. At 100km you are vulnerable to MJDs and now CDs, and at 150km+ you are vulnerable to probing. I don't see this as great as it kills a lot of long range doctrines. I also agree that a lot of these changes won't hit home until they are live on Tranquility, and at this early stage raising these points will be like shouting into the wind.
Good post by the way.
Modulated ECM Effects
An Alternative to Skill Trading
|
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
244
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 22:46:02 -
[431] - Quote
motie one wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:motie one wrote:
No one with a whit of sense will train leadership skills to V and link skills to IV to use these ships as a MJFG equipped ship. So you are restricting them to those who already have these skills or are training them anyway.
You are complaining about less than 10 days of skill trbaining to fly a T2 ship? One of which is Leadership V - a very useful skill... Useful in it's way, so is mining and Pi, lots of skills are useful if you wish to follow that path/career. but apart from naming them late in the day command destroyers, is irrelevant, less effective with links than a T1 battlecruiser that does not enforce link skills to fly it, and totally incomparable to how effective a true command ship is, where the prerequisites make some kind of sense. Should we make this a requirement for T3's and battlecruisers before we can fly them? The idea of them being a T2 ship was absolutely fine, adding this linky command afterthought,for basic linking, and restricting it to force those skills is not. So as I say, disappointing, and a good idea weakened through not keeping the concept of a new idea uncomplicated with feature creep. And causing many who would use it not to be interested due to the least important feature of the ship, dominating who can fly it. I would contend that just trying to create skill training sinks without considering the main role of the ship, is not a good idea if you wish players to feel engaged. But of course those with the skills already, are highly unlikely to use their link alts in active, engaged, play, not involving being sat semi afk at a safe, where they will usually lose their ship, with a "hero" save for the fleet. So no doubt feel all is good. They will still play in the heart of the fleet, relegating the link alt, to minor attention. It is only those who will actually use them that will be forced to train , for them, useless skills, so all is good I guess?
this has a bonus to links. t1 battlecruisers do not if they did i would expect that leaderships would be required to fly them.
|
motie one
Secret Passage
48
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 22:50:53 -
[432] - Quote
Lady Rift wrote:motie one wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:motie one wrote:
No one with a whit of sense will train leadership skills to V and link skills to IV to use these ships as a MJFG equipped ship. So you are restricting them to those who already have these skills or are training them anyway.
You are complaining about less than 10 days of skill trbaining to fly a T2 ship? One of which is Leadership V - a very useful skill... Useful in it's way, so is mining and Pi, lots of skills are useful if you wish to follow that path/career. but apart from naming them late in the day command destroyers, is irrelevant, less effective with links than a T1 battlecruiser that does not enforce link skills to fly it, and totally incomparable to how effective a true command ship is, where the prerequisites make some kind of sense. Should we make this a requirement for T3's and battlecruisers before we can fly them? The idea of them being a T2 ship was absolutely fine, adding this linky command afterthought,for basic linking, and restricting it to force those skills is not. So as I say, disappointing, and a good idea weakened through not keeping the concept of a new idea uncomplicated with feature creep. And causing many who would use it not to be interested due to the least important feature of the ship, dominating who can fly it. I would contend that just trying to create skill training sinks without considering the main role of the ship, is not a good idea if you wish players to feel engaged. But of course those with the skills already, are highly unlikely to use their link alts in active, engaged, play, not involving being sat semi afk at a safe, where they will usually lose their ship, with a "hero" save for the fleet. So no doubt feel all is good. They will still play in the heart of the fleet, relegating the link alt, to minor attention. It is only those who will actually use them that will be forced to train , for them, useless skills, so all is good I guess? this has a bonus to links. t1 battlecruisers do not if they did i would expect that leaderships would be required to fly them.
http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Myrmidon can fit warfare link modules
You only need the skills if you fit them not to fly the ship. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2449
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 22:52:12 -
[433] - Quote
"fit" and "bonus to effectiveness" are not the same thing.
I can FIT autocannons to a thorax, but it is not BONUSED for them. |
motie one
Secret Passage
48
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 22:59:56 -
[434] - Quote
afkalt wrote:"fit" and "bonus to effectiveness" are not the same thing.
I can FIT autocannons to a thorax, but it is not BONUSED for them.
Hence no one (hardly ever) flies battlecruisers as link ships. Same will apply to this, as it is so limited in the link role, shame the primary role is restricted to those users by requirements for running it that way |
motie one
Secret Passage
48
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 23:01:01 -
[435] - Quote
afkalt wrote:"fit" and "bonus to effectiveness" are not the same thing.
I can FIT autocannons to a thorax, but it is not BONUSED for them.
Hence no one (hardly ever) flies battlecruisers as link ships. Same will apply to this, as it is so limited in the link role, shame the primary role is restricted to those users by requirements for running it that way.
And I agree the fact you can fit autocannons should not be a prerequisite for flying a thorax either.
You should not be able to fit a warfare link without the skills, not need the skills to fly the ship |
Moraguth
Ranger Corp Vae. Victis.
171
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 23:19:00 -
[436] - Quote
motie one wrote:afkalt wrote:"fit" and "bonus to effectiveness" are not the same thing.
I can FIT autocannons to a thorax, but it is not BONUSED for them. Hence no one (hardly ever) flies battlecruisers as link ships. Same will apply to this, as it is so limited in the link role, shame the primary role is restricted to those users by requirements for running it that way. And I agree the fact you can fit autocannons should not be a prerequisite for flying a thorax either. Or for that matter medium hybrids? You should not be able to fit a warfare link without the skills, not need the skills to fly the ship If you cannot fit the link due to skills, you cannot gain the bonus. So, with that in mind, why are the skills to fit a warfare link a prerequisite to fly the ship?
For the same reason you need advanced skills to fly command ships or any other T2/3 variant, these new T2 destroyers require additional skills related to the role they are intended to fulfill. You can fly them any way you want, and not utilize their specializations, but your character has to at least understand the concepts of those specializations to sit in the ship.
Why? Because that's the way the game works and should continue to work.
I got a Feature Added!
Stop calling an Abaddon "abba-dawn". It is "uh-bad-in"
dictionary.com/abaddon
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2449
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 23:21:05 -
[437] - Quote
All my primary characters have those skills, because that was the way to shortcut to command ships before the change.
LD V should be a stock skill for everyone though. Absolutely without exception, so it's not really that bad. |
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1786
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 23:24:51 -
[438] - Quote
afkalt wrote:All my primary characters have those skills, because that was the way to shortcut to command ships before the change.
LD V should be a stock skill for everyone though. Absolutely without exception, so it's not really that bad.
I was looking forward to this ship, I still am, But I will not be flying it it seems.
If I had trained links before the racial destroyer change, and before the command ship changes, well, then I would be of a different opinion.
So, I will watch others enjoy it instead.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions The-Company
909
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 23:26:12 -
[439] - Quote
TarPalantir I wrote:Tar-Palantir has two comments he'll share. Both are trying to be "big picture" - hopefully they are useful to readers. -snip, lots of valid concerns-
I see what you are getting at but you also have to look at some other "details".
Last night on SiSi I saw the first iteration of the "new grid" which is far larger than our 250km grid "bubble" without grid-fu. The new grid on SiSi exeeds 1000km.
Now imagine when the combat carriers with their Battlestar Galactica squadrons are messing with ships from 500km range you really want to have a tool to get there and deal with them.
Another thing could be the monster range on XL-citadels that hurt you from 700km away - scary things are happening.
I say nay to allowing mjds in highsec!
I also say nay to removing NPC stations before someone gets funny ideas.
Eve Minions is recruiting. Learn from about pvp, learn about ships and how to fly them correctly. Small gang and solo action in high, low and nullsec and w-space alike.
We will teach you everything you need and want to know.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2449
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 23:47:26 -
[440] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:afkalt wrote:All my primary characters have those skills, because that was the way to shortcut to command ships before the change.
LD V should be a stock skill for everyone though. Absolutely without exception, so it's not really that bad. I was looking forward to this ship, I still am, But I will not be flying it it seems. If I had trained links before the racial destroyer change, and before the command ship changes, well, then I would be of a different opinion. So, I will watch others enjoy it instead. I imagine everyone in the same position will come to the same conclusions. Now if these skills let me fly "real" command ships, without the everlasting train, then My opinion would match yours.
LD V isn't about links, it's about squad commander positions and cascading the actual booster, hence "mandatory".
If your SC dies, you need everyone in the fleet able to slide up immediately.
This is why I say it is mandatory.
Unless you're exclusively solo...in which case, yeah bummer. |
|
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1786
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 23:49:49 -
[441] - Quote
afkalt wrote:epicurus ataraxia wrote:afkalt wrote:All my primary characters have those skills, because that was the way to shortcut to command ships before the change.
LD V should be a stock skill for everyone though. Absolutely without exception, so it's not really that bad. I was looking forward to this ship, I still am, But I will not be flying it it seems. If I had trained links before the racial destroyer change, and before the command ship changes, well, then I would be of a different opinion. So, I will watch others enjoy it instead. I imagine everyone in the same position will come to the same conclusions. Now if these skills let me fly "real" command ships, without the everlasting train, then My opinion would match yours. LD V isn't about links, it's about squad commander positions and cascading the actual booster, hence "mandatory". If your SC dies, you need everyone in the fleet able to slide up immediately. This is why I say it is mandatory. Unless you're exclusively solo...in which case, yeah bummer.
That makes sense, but there are usually enough in fleet that trained these when they gave the command ship access, not to matter. Why leadership V though? You only need leadership 1 to command a squadron? The Bonus is not that high compared to the bonuses from fleet? /booster.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
Zuzzin
Rare Mineral Mining Corporation
0
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 23:50:36 -
[442] - Quote
Can I move asteroids? |
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1786
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 23:57:22 -
[443] - Quote
Zuzzin wrote:Can I move asteroids?
That is interesting, worth testing on sisi.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1786
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 00:02:48 -
[444] - Quote
Moraguth wrote:motie one wrote:afkalt wrote:"fit" and "bonus to effectiveness" are not the same thing.
I can FIT autocannons to a thorax, but it is not BONUSED for them. Hence no one (hardly ever) flies battlecruisers as link ships. Same will apply to this, as it is so limited in the link role, shame the primary role is restricted to those users by requirements for running it that way. And I agree the fact you can fit autocannons should not be a prerequisite for flying a thorax either. Or for that matter medium hybrids? You should not be able to fit a warfare link without the skills, not need the skills to fly the ship If you cannot fit the link due to skills, you cannot gain the bonus. So, with that in mind, why are the skills to fit a warfare link a prerequisite to fly the ship? For the same reason you need advanced skills to fly command ships or any other T2/3 variant, these new T2 destroyers require additional skills related to the role they are intended to fulfill. You can fly them any way you want, and not utilize their specializations, but your character has to at least understand the concepts of those specializations to sit in the ship. Why? Because that's the way the game works and should continue to work.
Warfare link skills are not needed to fly a T3
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
244
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 00:11:05 -
[445] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:Moraguth wrote:motie one wrote:afkalt wrote:"fit" and "bonus to effectiveness" are not the same thing.
I can FIT autocannons to a thorax, but it is not BONUSED for them. Hence no one (hardly ever) flies battlecruisers as link ships. Same will apply to this, as it is so limited in the link role, shame the primary role is restricted to those users by requirements for running it that way. And I agree the fact you can fit autocannons should not be a prerequisite for flying a thorax either. Or for that matter medium hybrids? You should not be able to fit a warfare link without the skills, not need the skills to fly the ship If you cannot fit the link due to skills, you cannot gain the bonus. So, with that in mind, why are the skills to fit a warfare link a prerequisite to fly the ship? For the same reason you need advanced skills to fly command ships or any other T2/3 variant, these new T2 destroyers require additional skills related to the role they are intended to fulfill. You can fly them any way you want, and not utilize their specializations, but your character has to at least understand the concepts of those specializations to sit in the ship. Why? Because that's the way the game works and should continue to work. Warfare link skills are not needed to fly a T3 And this is a new class of ships, that is under discusion as to final features, that was billed as a T2 destroyer with a special are of effect micro jump drive. Only recently has this been changed to include links as its primary prerequisites, and even tonight on O7 this microjump role was being discussed and links were never discussed, at all, zip, nada. So why apart from a sexy name, has it become unavailable to so many?
this is the first time it has been shown and it inculdes links. also how is less than 10days training make something unavailable? can i use that line when they add the next new ship? |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
244
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 00:13:00 -
[446] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:afkalt wrote:epicurus ataraxia wrote:afkalt wrote:All my primary characters have those skills, because that was the way to shortcut to command ships before the change.
LD V should be a stock skill for everyone though. Absolutely without exception, so it's not really that bad. I was looking forward to this ship, I still am, But I will not be flying it it seems. If I had trained links before the racial destroyer change, and before the command ship changes, well, then I would be of a different opinion. So, I will watch others enjoy it instead. I imagine everyone in the same position will come to the same conclusions. Now if these skills let me fly "real" command ships, without the everlasting train, then My opinion would match yours. LD V isn't about links, it's about squad commander positions and cascading the actual booster, hence "mandatory". If your SC dies, you need everyone in the fleet able to slide up immediately. This is why I say it is mandatory. Unless you're exclusively solo...in which case, yeah bummer. That makes sense, but there are usually enough in fleet that trained these when they gave the command ship access, not to matter. Why leadership V though? You only need leadership 1 to command a squadron? The Bonus is not that high compared to the bonuses from fleet? /booster. That have priority? But as a rank 1 skill, it does at least have some use.
leadership 5 is needed to have 10 people in the squad. with leadership one and you take over squad command to keep the boosts being given to your squad it wont work as your squad is to big. |
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1787
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 00:17:11 -
[447] - Quote
Lady Rift wrote:epicurus ataraxia wrote:afkalt wrote:epicurus ataraxia wrote:afkalt wrote:All my primary characters have those skills, because that was the way to shortcut to command ships before the change.
LD V should be a stock skill for everyone though. Absolutely without exception, so it's not really that bad. I was looking forward to this ship, I still am, But I will not be flying it it seems. If I had trained links before the racial destroyer change, and before the command ship changes, well, then I would be of a different opinion. So, I will watch others enjoy it instead. I imagine everyone in the same position will come to the same conclusions. Now if these skills let me fly "real" command ships, without the everlasting train, then My opinion would match yours. LD V isn't about links, it's about squad commander positions and cascading the actual booster, hence "mandatory". If your SC dies, you need everyone in the fleet able to slide up immediately. This is why I say it is mandatory. Unless you're exclusively solo...in which case, yeah bummer. That makes sense, but there are usually enough in fleet that trained these when they gave the command ship access, not to matter. Why leadership V though? You only need leadership 1 to command a squadron? The Bonus is not that high compared to the bonuses from fleet? /booster. That have priority? But as a rank 1 skill, it does at least have some use. leadership 5 is needed to have 10 people in the squad. with leadership one and you take over squad command to keep the boosts being given to your squad it wont work as your squad is to big.
Thanks for that, that is a good reason. Makes sense.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
247
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 00:18:46 -
[448] - Quote
motie one wrote:Lady Rift wrote:motie one wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:motie one wrote:
No one with a whit of sense will train leadership skills to V and link skills to IV to use these ships as a MJFG equipped ship. So you are restricting them to those who already have these skills or are training them anyway.
You are complaining about less than 10 days of skill trbaining to fly a T2 ship? One of which is Leadership V - a very useful skill... Useful in it's way, so is mining and Pi, lots of skills are useful if you wish to follow that path/career. but apart from naming them late in the day command destroyers, is irrelevant, less effective with links than a T1 battlecruiser that does not enforce link skills to fly it, and totally incomparable to how effective a true command ship is, where the prerequisites make some kind of sense. Should we make this a requirement for T3's and battlecruisers before we can fly them? The idea of them being a T2 ship was absolutely fine, adding this linky command afterthought,for basic linking, and restricting it to force those skills is not. So as I say, disappointing, and a good idea weakened through not keeping the concept of a new idea uncomplicated with feature creep. And causing many who would use it not to be interested due to the least important feature of the ship, dominating who can fly it. I would contend that just trying to create skill training sinks without considering the main role of the ship, is not a good idea if you wish players to feel engaged. But of course those with the skills already, are highly unlikely to use their link alts in active, engaged, play, not involving being sat semi afk at a safe, where they will usually lose their ship, with a "hero" save for the fleet. So no doubt feel all is good. They will still play in the heart of the fleet, relegating the link alt, to minor attention. It is only those who will actually use them that will be forced to train , for them, useless skills, so all is good I guess? this has a bonus to links. t1 battlecruisers do not if they did i would expect that leaderships would be required to fly them. http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Myrmidon can fit warfare link modules You only need the skills if you fit them not to fly the ship. Look at the ship, it is hardly going to be used as an alternative to a command ship or a T3, it can not even compete with an unbonused battlecruiser, it is a T2 destroyer that had a role rammed into it at the last minute, and THAT causes the prerequisites, even though it is an appallingly poor choice in that role. So for it's primary role, one cannot fly it, without training for a role it will almost never be used for. http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Warfare_links You cannot get the bonus, without fitting the link, you cannot fit the link without the skills. Why should you not fly the ship without the skills to fit the warfare link if you are not fitting it?
the ship doesnt require the skills to actually use any links. BC have no bonus to links. these links will be stronger than the bc's you can fit 2-3 on one. the jump drive doesnt shut off links.
there is a whole set of leadership skills that don't require mods to make use of.
t3's are special people are going to have to get over that fact sometime. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1957
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 00:20:10 -
[449] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:afkalt wrote:All my primary characters have those skills, because that was the way to shortcut to command ships before the change.
LD V should be a stock skill for everyone though. Absolutely without exception, so it's not really that bad. I was looking forward to this ship, I still am, But I will not be flying it it seems. If I had trained links before the racial destroyer change, and before the command ship changes, well, then I would be of a different opinion. So, I will watch others enjoy it instead. I imagine everyone in the same position will come to the same conclusions. Now if these skills let me fly "real" command ships, without the everlasting train, then My opinion would match yours. But the reality is most people who have link skills trained, are on their link alts, which are unlikely to be combat trained unless they are trained for command ships, and they will be older players who did so before the changes, that made them such a long train. Newer alts, will tend to be highly focused and will not fly these, and newer mains will not have trained link skills. So in short, these ships will be mainly flown by multi year old players.
You do not have to train all the Leadership skills to fly these ships. Leadership V is a ridiculously useful skill, except for a true solo player with no friends and no alts. All of my characters already have it, even if they had no other leadership skills. It's clear that CCP threw Warfare Link Specialist IV on there as a bit of an additional time sink and to justify them being "specialized" T2 ships.
My off-spec Frigate/Destroyer specialist requires a total of five days training to use these awesome new ships. So what if Warfare Link Specialist IV is not used for anything else? It would hardly be the first relatively useless skill - at least it makes sense from a naming convention point of view. Contrast that with High Energy Physics IV, which was originally announced as the prerequisite for the Bastion module, now I have three characters with that skill, which does nothing at all for them, and probably never will. In the same vein, I don't really have much use for Electronics Upgrades V, but I trained it so I could fly a Covert Ops and Recon ships. That takes twice as long as training Warfare Link Specialist IV...
I suppose they could have really ****** with us and made Micro Jump Drive Operation V mandatory or something like that (imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth in that case! ). Maybe CCP should do that instead?
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1787
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 00:21:59 -
[450] - Quote
Lady Rift wrote:epicurus ataraxia wrote:Moraguth wrote:motie one wrote:afkalt wrote:"fit" and "bonus to effectiveness" are not the same thing.
I can FIT autocannons to a thorax, but it is not BONUSED for them. Hence no one (hardly ever) flies battlecruisers as link ships. Same will apply to this, as it is so limited in the link role, shame the primary role is restricted to those users by requirements for running it that way. And I agree the fact you can fit autocannons should not be a prerequisite for flying a thorax either. Or for that matter medium hybrids? You should not be able to fit a warfare link without the skills, not need the skills to fly the ship If you cannot fit the link due to skills, you cannot gain the bonus. So, with that in mind, why are the skills to fit a warfare link a prerequisite to fly the ship? For the same reason you need advanced skills to fly command ships or any other T2/3 variant, these new T2 destroyers require additional skills related to the role they are intended to fulfill. You can fly them any way you want, and not utilize their specializations, but your character has to at least understand the concepts of those specializations to sit in the ship. Why? Because that's the way the game works and should continue to work. Warfare link skills are not needed to fly a T3 And this is a new class of ships, that is under discusion as to final features, that was billed as a T2 destroyer with a special are of effect micro jump drive. Only recently has this been changed to include links as its primary prerequisites, and even tonight on O7 this microjump role was being discussed and links were never discussed, at all, zip, nada. So why apart from a sexy name, has it become unavailable to so many? this is the first time it has been shown and it inculdes links. also how is less than 10days training make something unavailable? can i use that line when they add the next new ship?
Hmm I have leadership IV, and skill queue shows over 14 days to train, plus however long the new command destroyer skill takes, to at least 4. Probably another 10 days or so? It does not seem to need racial destroyer to V though, so that's something.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1957
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 00:24:25 -
[451] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
Hmm I have leadership IV, and skill queue shows over 14 days to train, plus however long the new command destroyer skill takes, to at least 4. Probably another 10 days or so? It does not seem to need racial destroyer to V though, so that's something.
CCP already confirmed that you will need the appropriate Racial Destroyer V to fly these ships.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2825
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 00:30:18 -
[452] - Quote
motie one wrote:afkalt wrote:"fit" and "bonus to effectiveness" are not the same thing.
I can FIT autocannons to a thorax, but it is not BONUSED for them. Hence no one (hardly ever) flies battlecruisers as link ships. Same will apply to this, as it is so limited in the link role, shame the primary role is restricted to those users by requirements for running it that way. And I agree the fact you can fit autocannons should not be a prerequisite for flying a thorax either. Or for that matter medium hybrids? You should not be able to fit a warfare link without the skills, not need the skills to fly the ship If you cannot fit the link due to skills, you cannot gain the bonus. So, with that in mind, why are the skills to fit a warfare link a prerequisite to fly the ship? Anyway as stated on the O7 show CCP rise is going on holiday until just before release, so expect these to Flop hard! After the pilots with link alts try them out and then forget them forever after the first week, because one would have to be a really special snowflake to train link skills on one's main when they are so up in the air, regarding eliminating OGB, until that is resolved. What a wasted opportunity. The same reason any skill that is t directly related to the ship is required.
There are dozens of ships with skills you could argue away as useless for what you want. It doesn't necessarily justify my desire to fly a mining Titan and not want to train the skills for jump drives and jump portals and leadership V |
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1787
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 00:31:56 -
[453] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:epicurus ataraxia wrote:
Hmm I have leadership IV, and skill queue shows over 14 days to train, plus however long the new command destroyer skill takes, to at least 4. Probably another 10 days or so? It does not seem to need racial destroyer to V though, so that's something.
CCP already confirmed that you will need the appropriate Racial Destroyer V to fly these ships.
Well even though I have that on two races, many will not.
Is not racial destroyer V and the need to train command destroyers to Iv or so to be effective, not a sufficient Skill sink? Do they really have to add leadership and link skills as well if they want people to bother training into them?
It is only my opinion, but I feel the addition of the link skills as a prerequisite to even fly the ship as excessive, to use warfare links, sure, thats reasonable, but just to fly the ship? I think they will disappoint rather than delight. However one justifies that, it is generally not a wise choice from a customer relations viewpoint.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1787
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 00:53:00 -
[454] - Quote
Rowells wrote:motie one wrote:afkalt wrote:"fit" and "bonus to effectiveness" are not the same thing.
I can FIT autocannons to a thorax, but it is not BONUSED for them. Hence no one (hardly ever) flies battlecruisers as link ships. Same will apply to this, as it is so limited in the link role, shame the primary role is restricted to those users by requirements for running it that way. And I agree the fact you can fit autocannons should not be a prerequisite for flying a thorax either. Or for that matter medium hybrids? You should not be able to fit a warfare link without the skills, not need the skills to fly the ship If you cannot fit the link due to skills, you cannot gain the bonus. So, with that in mind, why are the skills to fit a warfare link a prerequisite to fly the ship? Anyway as stated on the O7 show CCP rise is going on holiday until just before release, so expect these to Flop hard! After the pilots with link alts try them out and then forget them forever after the first week, because one would have to be a really special snowflake to train link skills on one's main when they are so up in the air, regarding eliminating OGB, until that is resolved. What a wasted opportunity. The same reason any skill that is t directly related to the ship is required. There are dozens of ships with skills you could argue away as useless for what you want. It doesn't necessarily justify my desire to fly a mining Titan and not want to train the skills for jump drives and jump portals and leadership V
You are aware we are talking of skills relating to a destroyer here aren't you? And how relevent they are to this class of ships? And whether it is a good idea to boost up just how exciting the new area of effect mjd is , for the customer to discover, he has to then train destroyers to 5 , the new command destroyer skill, all the other skills for destroyer combat if he has not already got them, all the support skills too in order to survive using it? And than to add insult to injury warfare links to IV with the prerequisite for leadership V.
Now no one should expect to fly a T2 ship without support skills, It is quite normal, to train the racial ship to V. For a T2 ship. And there is always a new skill to learn for a new class. People might grumble and come to accept that.
But then adding on the warfare link requirement, is just going to annoy people unnecessarily.
Not a good way to make players feel happy with their new "present"
It appears that there are some who believe this may be a bad choice.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
zhang elliott
Independent Miners Guild Care Factor
6
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 01:07:27 -
[455] - Quote
I still wait patiently for a cow-ops/EW/ECCM battle cruiser with an area effect cloak, and web drones worth a damn. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1743
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 01:33:05 -
[456] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:Well even though I have that on two races, many will not.
Is not racial destroyer V and the need to train command destroyers to Iv or so to be effective, not a sufficient Skill sink? Looking at all the current T2 ship prerequisites currently in place, no. There are always some other skill that need trained.
epicurus ataraxia wrote:Do they really have to add leadership and link skills as well if they want people to bother training into them?
It is only my opinion, but I feel the addition of the link skills as a prerequisite to even fly the ship as excessive, to use warfare links, sure, thats reasonable, but just to fly the ship? I think they will disappoint rather than delight. Do they need to? No, Though really it's no more onerous that the trains for an interdictor considering the skills involved that one might not otherwise train to 5 for a destroyer.
epicurus ataraxia wrote:However one justifies that, it is generally not a wise choice from a customer relations viewpoint.
Come December a lot of people looking forward to this, who do not read this thread or test on sisi, are going to feel they have been slapped in the face, instead of having a new toy to play with.
Is that really a good idea? Not sure what you're trying to appeal to here, the idea that they should break away from the way T2 training has worked because some people don't have the skills? The customer base that would potentially draw issue here is the same one that has been dealing with this same type of training for quite a while. Why would this one be a particular problem? |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2825
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 01:36:14 -
[457] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:Rowells wrote:motie one wrote:afkalt wrote:"fit" and "bonus to effectiveness" are not the same thing.
I can FIT autocannons to a thorax, but it is not BONUSED for them. Hence no one (hardly ever) flies battlecruisers as link ships. Same will apply to this, as it is so limited in the link role, shame the primary role is restricted to those users by requirements for running it that way. And I agree the fact you can fit autocannons should not be a prerequisite for flying a thorax either. Or for that matter medium hybrids? You should not be able to fit a warfare link without the skills, not need the skills to fly the ship If you cannot fit the link due to skills, you cannot gain the bonus. So, with that in mind, why are the skills to fit a warfare link a prerequisite to fly the ship? Anyway as stated on the O7 show CCP rise is going on holiday until just before release, so expect these to Flop hard! After the pilots with link alts try them out and then forget them forever after the first week, because one would have to be a really special snowflake to train link skills on one's main when they are so up in the air, regarding eliminating OGB, until that is resolved. What a wasted opportunity. The same reason any skill that is t directly related to the ship is required. There are dozens of ships with skills you could argue away as useless for what you want. It doesn't necessarily justify my desire to fly a mining Titan and not want to train the skills for jump drives and jump portals and leadership V You are aware we are talking of skills relating to a destroyer here aren't you? And how relevent they are to this class of ships? And whether it is a good idea to boost up just how exciting the new area of effect mjd is , for the customer to discover, he has to then train destroyers to 5 , the new command destroyer skill, all the other skills for destroyer combat if he has not already got them, all the support skills too in order to survive using it? And than to add insult to injury warfare links to IV with the prerequisite for leadership V. Now no one should expect to fly a T2 ship without support skills, It is quite normal, to train the racial ship to V. For a T2 ship. And there is always a new skill to learn for a new class. People might grumble and come to accept that. But then adding on the warfare link requirement, is just going to annoy people unnecessarily. Not a good way to make players feel happy with their new "present" It appears that there are some who believe this may be a bad choice. It seems to me, that there seems to be an upset with the fact that any skills have to be trained at all. And my example still stands, I dont want to use the ship for one of of it's roles, doesn't mean i don't have to train the skill for it them.
and unless I missed something, its already a shorter train than interdictors by a significant amount. Which, by the way, is another ship that requires a useless skill (graviton physics) to just sit in the hull, even if i dont want to use bubbles. For such an interesting ship, it is definitely worth the skill train. MJGD, links, and decent combat ability? good lord, my sabre is going to be jealous. The skill will be useful. If the pilot chooses not to use it, then it is his own decision that devalues the train time.
In fact, a destroyer sized link-ship is something I have been waiting for, for a very long time. And I will adjust my skillplan to move leadership skills up faster, not so I can fly it (already have that), but so I can fully utilize its bonuses.
I about messed myself in public when I first read the post. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2825
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 01:38:50 -
[458] - Quote
zhang elliott wrote:I still wait patiently for a cow-ops/EW/ECCM battle cruiser with an area effect cloak, and web drones worth a damn. O_O |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
867
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 02:54:23 -
[459] - Quote
To the person complaining about having to train Leadership 5 and Warfare Link Specialist 4, why don't you train for a Command Ship? Then come and talk to me about the long train time for a Command Destroyer. |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
249
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 03:12:11 -
[460] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
Hmm I have leadership IV, and skill queue shows over 14 days to train, plus however long the new command destroyer skill takes, to at least 4. Probably another 10 days or so? It does not seem to need racial destroyer to V though, so that's something.
to go from leadership 0 to leader ship 5, and then Warfare link Specialist 0 to 4 is 12 days on a neutral remap. |
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
2720
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 05:14:16 -
[461] - Quote
Moac Tor wrote: I was testing this today and the DST will maintain its alignment even after being jumped. It won't be much of a change to DSTs, if you get caught after being jumped you were probably still going to be caught without a CD present.
You aren't considering the effect of gate guns on light tackle if you try and tackle the DST directly on the gate. Ripping it off gate removes that issue. |
Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
347
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 06:10:13 -
[462] - Quote
I'm thinking these things are a bit too fast. |
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
801
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 07:16:19 -
[463] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
Come December a lot of people looking forward to this, who do not read this thread or test on sisi, are going to feel they have been slapped in the face, instead of having a new toy to play with.
Is that really a good idea?
They should read blogs and notes then. Eve a complicated game...it can need some additional reading. Eve is not alone here. Damn near any MMO or online RPG I played is like this.
CCP very generous here with a fair amount of notice. I have seen crap changed last minute with almost no warning. Sometimes nice presents...sometimes hey CCP where is my dinner, kiss or KY before you bend us over twink in the prison shower style.
Or were you expecting 2000000 noobs being in these day 1. You weren't getting this. Boats like this can be game changing force multipliers. It wasn't being given out like candy.
Specialized ship, specialized train. Those with an interest in leadership should have had these already. Fun fact....many leadership skills give passive boosts no link fit whatsoever. 2% per level. Small roam. put a player on booster spot and lets have them 5'd already for say shields. That is 10% more shield ehp right there alone. No links...in any ship they fly. These aren't useless skills. Its10% boosts max level to many areas given just by being there.
Crew/players opted to not hook themselves up doing this, thats on them. I did this long ago of own free will and no desire to fly CS'. Many did. Out with 5-10 friends often....at some point one if not more should be going you know, someone should be in the booster spot who can actually do something there, if only for 10% passive boosts no links. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2451
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 08:41:17 -
[464] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Moac Tor wrote: I was testing this today and the DST will maintain its alignment even after being jumped. It won't be much of a change to DSTs, if you get caught after being jumped you were probably still going to be caught without a CD present.
You aren't considering the effect of gate guns on light tackle if you try and tackle the DST directly on the gate. Ripping it off gate removes that issue.
Which is why for the love of all that is holy, these need to aggro guns on initiation. |
Sgt Ocker
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
777
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 09:16:55 -
[465] - Quote
I'm sort of curious as to who it is at CCP that hates Caldari ships so much as to call the new Destroyer - A common wading bird. While the Amarr get - A rip off of the pope and Catholic church Gallente and minmatar - Old Norse name and Greek mythological names respectively.
I guess the Caldari one had its name chosen last and you'd run out of beer and couldn't be bothered thinking about it. Or the beer really took over and you thought Stork would be a good name, in comparison to the other 3.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
Why can't CCP see the obvious - Large dominating groups are bad for Eve.
|
Maksmad
Perkone Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 09:51:15 -
[466] - Quote
Question for CCP or someone with access to SISI.
Command Destroyer skill - what rank is it?
Question to CCP
Command Ships - will it be renamed to Command Cruisers?
thx |
Moac Tor
Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation
326
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 10:40:10 -
[467] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Moac Tor wrote: I was testing this today and the DST will maintain its alignment even after being jumped. It won't be much of a change to DSTs, if you get caught after being jumped you were probably still going to be caught without a CD present.
You aren't considering the effect of gate guns on light tackle if you try and tackle the DST directly on the gate. Ripping it off gate removes that issue. Not quite, most decent gate campers will have something that can tank the gate guns, once you are caught my a semi competent gate camp then killing the DST should only be a matter of time.
The DSTs best defence is to avoid being tackled, it can do this my using MWD + Cloak, and also WCS in LS. The CD won't make any difference to whether you get tackled.
Also you'd need two CDs to pull the DST out of gate gun range. After having thought about this for a few days although I believe CDs are fine by themselves, being able to daisy chain jumps will be completely OP and game breaking as you can effectively move ships an unlimited distance by daisy chaining.
Want to bring snipers to your fleet, no problem, jump 100km to pick them up and pre activate another CD for the return journey.
Want to avoid gate guns, use two CDs to move 200km out of gate gun range.
I think this is too powerful as you have unlimited movement possibilities by daisy chaining.
Three changes I'd urge CCP to reconsider before these start to become balanced.
1. Disallow daisy chaining (perhaps after a CD is jumped the MJFG's needs a period of time to recalibrate).
2. An active bastion module should stop a marauder being jumped and the cyno should be jumped with the cyno ship if the ship is able to be jumped in the first place.
3. Activation of the MJFG should cause instant aggression upon activation rather than upon jumping.
Modulated ECM Effects
An Alternative to Skill Trading
|
Moneta
Gilded Goose Brokerage
5
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 11:10:34 -
[468] - Quote
Remove the ability to probe ships on the same grid as the prober, and this'll turn out alot of fun for fleet fights i think. Don't and it'll have way less of a fun enhancing impact. Either way, it'd be good nerf same-grid combat probing anyway |
Kyshonuba
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
31
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 11:12:23 -
[469] - Quote
Moac Tor wrote:TarPalantir I wrote:
Tar-Palantir is rather uneasy about the new mechanic to the point of being opposed, but he is going to avoid getting into that discussion and focus on his point that the MJFG is a massive change that will have very far ranging impacts. It isnGÇÖt a couple of scenarios that will change, or a GÇ£niche" that gets GÇ£nerfedGÇ¥ (whether that be heavily tanked ship station games or Incursion fleets) - this will change how Eve is played at a very basic level. That is what people should be thinking of when discussing these changes, not whether it helps/hurts their favorite activity.
Hopefully CCP realizes this and have considered the wide reaching impacts such a basic change to movement mechanics will have.
I have the impression that CCP haven't tested this thoroughly and are throwing it out there for us to test. It seems to be a method of balancing they have used for stuff such as the T3 Destroyers, Garmur, and more recently HIC 37.5km scrams. ....... As for your comments on positioning, yes it seems logical that this will push fights into a 50km sweet spot. At 100km you are vulnerable to MJDs and now CDs, and at 150km+ you are vulnerable to probing. I don't see this as great as it kills a lot of long range doctrines. I also agree that a lot of these changes won't hit home until they are live on Tranquility, and at this early stage raising these points will be like shouting into the wind. Good post by the way.
Its quite obvious forum design isn't suited for feedback threads. I guess its even easier for CCP dev's themselves, to track down feedback in the "branching structured " reddit forums then in their companies very own forum.
Concerning the new ships and the MJFG module. It looks quite stimulated by merchandising logic. We have 5 new ships,with a brand new module exclusively for the new ship type. It is fair to state CCP game design department has been quite successful in the last years introducing new ship types, balancing them and listening to player feedback in the same context
On the hand this can't be said about new modules and the re-balancing of meta4 items ( ...not to speak about faction modules respective faction store items). Ancillary armor booster, ancillary shield booster, reactive armor harders, MicroJumpDrives are for example , stil sitting on blue print copy seed. Now they have settled on a function as to to save exploration pilot income ....making the already complex production mechanics of eve spreading out into the contract department .
I see the MJFG module, if balance is passed, sitting rite among this selection of "blue print copy only items"......no faction variants, no t2 variants and being fittable only on a small selection of ships.
Introducing new ship types stimulates short turn merchandising effects while module rebalancing creates long-term customer satisfaction, yeah ....its quite a typical economic dilemma. Personally, i think, its about time to put a bit of work in the ground-laying module rebalancing. I feel that the niches for new supcap ships are becoming too small and too complicated.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2451
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 11:16:34 -
[470] - Quote
Moac Tor wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote:Moac Tor wrote: I was testing this today and the DST will maintain its alignment even after being jumped. It won't be much of a change to DSTs, if you get caught after being jumped you were probably still going to be caught without a CD present.
You aren't considering the effect of gate guns on light tackle if you try and tackle the DST directly on the gate. Ripping it off gate removes that issue. Not quite, most decent gate campers will have something that can tank the gate guns, once you are caught my a semi competent gate camp then killing the DST should only be a matter of time. The DSTs best defence is to avoid being tackled, it can do this my using MWD + Cloak, and also WCS in LS. The CD won't make any difference to whether you get tackled. Also you'd need two CDs to pull the DST out of gate gun range. After having thought about this for a few days although I believe CDs are fine by themselves, being able to daisy chain jumps will be completely OP and game breaking as you can effectively move ships an unlimited distance by daisy chaining. Want to bring snipers to your fleet? No problem, jump 100km to pick them up and pre activate another CD for the return journey. Want to avoid gate guns? Use two CDs to move 200km out of gate gun range. I think this is too powerful as you have unlimited movement possibilities by daisy chaining. Three changes I'd urge CCP to reconsider before these start to become balanced. 1. Disallow daisy chaining (perhaps after a CD is jumped the MJFG's needs a period of time to recalibrate). 2. An active bastion module should stop a marauder being jumped and the cyno should be jumped with the cyno ship if the ship is able to be jumped in the first place. 3. Activation of the MJFG should cause instant aggression upon activation rather than upon jumping.
This is not verfied and is conjecture
With the new grids coming and more specifically the lifting of the lock limit, who is to say gate guns will remain with their current, "lock range" limits....?
Worth a thought.
|
|
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1787
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 11:35:54 -
[471] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Moac Tor wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote:Moac Tor wrote: I was testing this today and the DST will maintain its alignment even after being jumped. It won't be much of a change to DSTs, if you get caught after being jumped you were probably still going to be caught without a CD present.
You aren't considering the effect of gate guns on light tackle if you try and tackle the DST directly on the gate. Ripping it off gate removes that issue. Not quite, most decent gate campers will have something that can tank the gate guns, once you are caught my a semi competent gate camp then killing the DST should only be a matter of time. The DSTs best defence is to avoid being tackled, it can do this my using MWD + Cloak, and also WCS in LS. The CD won't make any difference to whether you get tackled. Also you'd need two CDs to pull the DST out of gate gun range. After having thought about this for a few days although I believe CDs are fine by themselves, being able to daisy chain jumps will be completely OP and game breaking as you can effectively move ships an unlimited distance by daisy chaining. Want to bring snipers to your fleet? No problem, jump 100km to pick them up and pre activate another CD for the return journey. Want to avoid gate guns? Use two CDs to move 200km out of gate gun range. I think this is too powerful as you have unlimited movement possibilities by daisy chaining. Three changes I'd urge CCP to reconsider before these start to become balanced. 1. Disallow daisy chaining (perhaps after a CD is jumped the MJFG's needs a period of time to recalibrate). 2. An active bastion module should stop a marauder being jumped and the cyno should be jumped with the cyno ship if the ship is able to be jumped in the first place. 3. Activation of the MJFG should cause instant aggression upon activation rather than upon jumping. This is not verfied and is conjectureWith the new grids coming and more specifically the lifting of the lock limit, who is to say gate guns will remain with their current, "lock range" limits....? Worth a thought.
The new grids on Sisi are absolutely enormous, and while what we see there is not conclusive proof of what will be there on release, we can pretty much leave old assumptions in the dust.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
Janeway84
Def Squadron Pride Before Fall
180
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 15:04:34 -
[472] - Quote
Maksmad wrote:Question for CCP or someone with access to SISI.
Command Destroyer skill - what rank is it?
Question to CCP
Command Ships - will it be renamed to Command Cruisers?
thx
if they are going to rename Command ships it should be Command battlecruisers |
elitatwo
Eve Minions The-Company
909
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 17:32:02 -
[473] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:I'm sort of curious as to who it is at CCP that hates Caldari ships so much as to call the new Destroyer - A common wading bird. While the Amarr get - A rip off of the pope and Catholic church Gallente and minmatar - Old Norse name and Greek mythological names respectively.
I guess the Caldari one had its name chosen last and you'd run out of beer and couldn't be bothered thinking about it. Or the beer really took over and you thought Stork would be a good name, in comparison to the other 3.
Sgt, at least it is a bird. Caldari ships have a long tradition in giving their birds a bird's name.
Eve Minions is recruiting. Learn from about pvp, learn about ships and how to fly them correctly. Small gang and solo action in high, low and nullsec and w-space alike.
We will teach you everything you need and want to know.
|
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1787
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 17:47:56 -
[474] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:I'm sort of curious as to who it is at CCP that hates Caldari ships so much as to call the new Destroyer - A common wading bird. While the Amarr get - A rip off of the pope and Catholic church Gallente and minmatar - Old Norse name and Greek mythological names respectively.
I guess the Caldari one had its name chosen last and you'd run out of beer and couldn't be bothered thinking about it. Or the beer really took over and you thought Stork would be a good name, in comparison to the other 3. Sgt, at least it is a bird. Caldari ships have a long tradition in giving their birds a bird's name.
The Bird name fits, I wonder what Storks are like in Iceland, but In the UK we tend to see them as something a bit cute with a Baby in a blanket.
Not as awesome as pontiflex magus or Bifrost, got to love Bifrost as a name. Stork? Well as you say it's a name, not much more to add. Just wish it was something awesome instead, dripping blood and gore as it forcibly drags things away. Shrike would have been a good name. The butcher bird that carries insects off and impails them on spikes!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrike
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
871
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 17:57:02 -
[475] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:I'm sort of curious as to who it is at CCP that hates Caldari ships so much as to call the new Destroyer - A common wading bird. While the Amarr get - A rip off of the pope and Catholic church Gallente and minmatar - Old Norse name and Greek mythological names respectively.
I guess the Caldari one had its name chosen last and you'd run out of beer and couldn't be bothered thinking about it. Or the beer really took over and you thought Stork would be a good name, in comparison to the other 3. Sgt, at least it is a bird. Caldari ships have a long tradition in giving their birds a bird's name.
Explain the Cerberus, Ferox, Scorpion, Onyx, Naga, Badger, Tayra, Basilisk, Golem, Widow, and Rokh. Rokh should prolly have been spelled "Rukh", but I guess CCP failed to catch it.
Did I miss any non-bird name Caldari ships? |
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
645
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 18:12:58 -
[476] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:elitatwo wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:I'm sort of curious as to who it is at CCP that hates Caldari ships so much as to call the new Destroyer - A common wading bird. While the Amarr get - A rip off of the pope and Catholic church Gallente and minmatar - Old Norse name and Greek mythological names respectively.
I guess the Caldari one had its name chosen last and you'd run out of beer and couldn't be bothered thinking about it. Or the beer really took over and you thought Stork would be a good name, in comparison to the other 3. Sgt, at least it is a bird. Caldari ships have a long tradition in giving their birds a bird's name. The Bird name fits, I wonder what Storks are like in Iceland, but In the UK we tend to see them as something a bit cute with a Baby in a blanket. Not as awesome as pontiflex magus or Bifrost, got to love Bifrost as a name. Stork? Well as you say it's a name, not much more to add. Just wish it was something awesome instead, dripping blood and gore as it forcibly drags things away. Shrike would have been a good name. The butcher bird that carries insects and lizards off and impails them on spikes! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrike
Shrike does seem more fitting. Especially with the example of carrying bugs off.
Example: MJD to "carry" ships over to be "impaled" by a waiting gang.
Stork sounds like the name of an industrial.
Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
871
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 18:21:02 -
[477] - Quote
Stitch Kaneland wrote:epicurus ataraxia wrote:elitatwo wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:I'm sort of curious as to who it is at CCP that hates Caldari ships so much as to call the new Destroyer - A common wading bird. While the Amarr get - A rip off of the pope and Catholic church Gallente and minmatar - Old Norse name and Greek mythological names respectively.
I guess the Caldari one had its name chosen last and you'd run out of beer and couldn't be bothered thinking about it. Or the beer really took over and you thought Stork would be a good name, in comparison to the other 3. Sgt, at least it is a bird. Caldari ships have a long tradition in giving their birds a bird's name. The Bird name fits, I wonder what Storks are like in Iceland, but In the UK we tend to see them as something a bit cute with a Baby in a blanket. Not as awesome as pontiflex magus or Bifrost, got to love Bifrost as a name. Stork? Well as you say it's a name, not much more to add. Just wish it was something awesome instead, dripping blood and gore as it forcibly drags things away. Shrike would have been a good name. The butcher bird that carries insects and lizards off and impails them on spikes! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrike Shrike does seem more fitting. Especially with the example of carrying bugs off. Example: MJD to "carry" ships over to be "impaled" by a waiting gang. Stork sounds like the name of an industrial.
Storks are oftentimes paired with delivering babies. kinda fits.
|
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1787
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 18:21:19 -
[478] - Quote
Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote:Rosal Milag wrote:afkalt wrote:
There is instant counterplay.
You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time.
Again, if you can expect combat fleets to do this, you can JUST as easily expect incursion fleets to do this.
ed: And it should only go suspect, imo.
Problem is, in high sec, a gank attempt targets one ship. Yes with a large enough suicide fleet, you can kill an entire incursion fleet. But that is committing numbers and can be noticed on D-scan. With these destroyers, they can kill a whole fleet in ~5 seconds. With one ship. Tell me how that is not overpowered. I don't care what your thoughts are on incursion runners, that is not the point here. One ship, in high sec, should not be able to effectively kill 10 others illegally in 5 seconds. PvP fleets are fit to take down PvP ships. A PvE fleet is not designed nor intended to engage a PvP target, especially a destroyer sized target with battleship targeting. So bring a SeBod HIC. It's not exactly hard to stop these. Maybe, >gasp< you need to adapt your fittings. The horror. But again, what this comes down to is "MAH ISK/HOUR!!!!!" I don't care about incursions, I don't run them. The bigger point is that ONE ship can, without much warning or notice, wreck an entire incursion fleet. Currently, you need to provide a level of trust (joining a fleet for fleet warps), do something to become a legal target (suspect/killright), or be specifically targeted to lose your ship. If this class of ship is allowed to use its MJD in high sec, then bombs should be allowed, as they are as indiscriminate and provide at least 10 seconds of warning for ships to get out of the way. This isn't about who's fun is more important, incursion or gankers. Its recognizing player trends and possible usage cases and ensuring that there is a level playing field for PvP. You want to kill an incursion fleet, put some effort into it and not 5 seconds to glory. Risk = reward. And 5 seconds is not nearly long enough for the billions from a dead incursion fleet.
These ships are potentially the most disruptive force to have entered the game in recent times, I hope these turn out to be awesome, encourage new tactics and decisions, and bring a new life into many forms of combat.
We have many intelligent, imaginative people who will dream up ideas, that are going to exceed anything we have come up with so far.
Whilst I personally do not do incursions, as I do not enjoy them for reasons that are clear to many who have tried, Introducing these In HS would be like setting predatory big cats loose in a shopping centre. You KNOW children are the first on the menu.
So before we consider such actions, we should see how things play out in areas where we are familar with combat, and not provide a new Noob killing mechanism in HS. Hatred of incursion runners is a bad excuse to allow a widespread irresponsible massacre, no matter how "fun" that some might find it.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
Alexis Nightwish
353
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 18:32:32 -
[479] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:I'm sort of curious as to who it is at CCP that hates Caldari ships so much as to call the new Destroyer - A common wading bird. While the Amarr get - A rip off of the pope and Catholic church Gallente and minmatar - Old Norse name and Greek mythological names respectively.
I guess the Caldari one had its name chosen last and you'd run out of beer and couldn't be bothered thinking about it. Or the beer really took over and you thought Stork would be a good name, in comparison to the other 3. Are you kidding? It's a great name! I'm going to be doing this every time I use one!
CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Fixing bombs, not the bombers
|
aldhura
Bartledannians
18
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 20:26:30 -
[480] - Quote
What about an ore T2 destroyer that gives mining boosts to the roaming gangs of gas miners :)
These do look good, be nice if they had a speed bonus while cloaked so they can sneak up on things like logi\EWAR support instead of the MWD bonus.
Bartledannians are recruiting.. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6150832#post6150832
|
|
Moraguth
Ranger Corp Vae. Victis.
172
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 21:10:18 -
[481] - Quote
Maksmad wrote:Question for CCP or someone with access to SISI.
Command Destroyer skill - what rank is it?
Question to CCP
Command Ships - will it be renamed to Command Cruisers?
thx
I'm on sisi now. Command destroyer skill is rank 6. Cost 20M.
lvl 1 00d 00h 35m lvl 2 00d 02h 46m lvl 3 00d 15h 40m lvl 4 03d 16h 42m lvl 5 20d 21h 46m
I have remapped to train spaceship command/weapon skills fast and have +5 implants in.
The skill for the MJFG is the same for all the micro jump drives, so nothing new there.
I got a Feature Added!
Stop calling an Abaddon "abba-dawn". It is "uh-bad-in"
dictionary.com/abaddon
|
Maksmad
Perkone Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 22:05:38 -
[482] - Quote
Moraguth wrote:Maksmad wrote:Question for CCP or someone with access to SISI.
Command Destroyer skill - what rank is it?
Question to CCP
Command Ships - will it be renamed to Command Cruisers?
thx I'm on sisi now. Command destroyer skill is rank 6. Cost 20M. lvl 1 00d 00h 35m lvl 2 00d 02h 46m lvl 3 00d 15h 40m lvl 4 03d 16h 42m lvl 5 20d 21h 46m I have remapped to train spaceship command/weapon skills fast and have +5 implants in. The skill for the MJFG is the same for all the micro jump drives, so nothing new there.
Thx very much for the info! Rank 6... very high but was expected having in mind Command Ships is rank 8... |
Maksmad
Perkone Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 22:07:47 -
[483] - Quote
Janeway84 wrote:Maksmad wrote:Question for CCP or someone with access to SISI.
Command Destroyer skill - what rank is it?
Question to CCP
Command Ships - will it be renamed to Command Cruisers?
thx if they are going to rename Command ships it should be Command battlecruisers
hahaha true :) |
elitatwo
Eve Minions The-Company
909
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 00:14:14 -
[484] - Quote
aldhura wrote:What about an ore T2 destroyer that gives mining boosts to the roaming gangs of gas miners :)
These do look good, be nice if they had a speed bonus while cloaked so they can sneak up on things like logi\EWAR support instead of the MWD bonus.
Hmm.. nobody is stopping you from fitting mining foremen links on them.
Eve Minions is recruiting. Learn from about pvp, learn about ships and how to fly them correctly. Small gang and solo action in high, low and nullsec and w-space alike.
We will teach you everything you need and want to know.
|
Moraguth
Ranger Corp Vae. Victis.
173
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 00:26:38 -
[485] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:aldhura wrote:What about an ore T2 destroyer that gives mining boosts to the roaming gangs of gas miners :)
These do look good, be nice if they had a speed bonus while cloaked so they can sneak up on things like logi\EWAR support instead of the MWD bonus. Hmm.. nobody is stopping you from fitting mining foremen links on them.
The problem is, none of the new destroyers have specific bonuses to mining links, so they would be just as effective on a Strategic Cruiser, BC, Command Ship, Carrier, or Titan. The only ships that give bonuses to the mining links are the orca and rorqual. ... I think. It's been forever since I've fit mining links.
I got a Feature Added!
Stop calling an Abaddon "abba-dawn". It is "uh-bad-in"
dictionary.com/abaddon
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1958
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 00:49:02 -
[486] - Quote
Moraguth wrote:elitatwo wrote:aldhura wrote:What about an ore T2 destroyer that gives mining boosts to the roaming gangs of gas miners :)
These do look good, be nice if they had a speed bonus while cloaked so they can sneak up on things like logi\EWAR support instead of the MWD bonus. Hmm.. nobody is stopping you from fitting mining foremen links on them. The problem is, none of the new destroyers have specific bonuses to mining links, so they would be just as effective on a Strategic Cruiser, BC, Command Ship, Carrier, or Titan. The only ships that give bonuses to the mining links are the orca and rorqual. ... I think. It's been forever since I've fit mining links.
None of those other ships can get inside a shattered WH to give out bonuses...
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Moraguth
Ranger Corp Vae. Victis.
173
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 01:35:22 -
[487] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Moraguth wrote:elitatwo wrote:aldhura wrote:What about an ore T2 destroyer that gives mining boosts to the roaming gangs of gas miners :)
These do look good, be nice if they had a speed bonus while cloaked so they can sneak up on things like logi\EWAR support instead of the MWD bonus. Hmm.. nobody is stopping you from fitting mining foremen links on them. The problem is, none of the new destroyers have specific bonuses to mining links, so they would be just as effective on a Strategic Cruiser, BC, Command Ship, Carrier, or Titan. The only ships that give bonuses to the mining links are the orca and rorqual. ... I think. It's been forever since I've fit mining links. None of those other ships can get inside a shattered WH to give out bonuses...
Very true! I didn't consider that. These new destroyers would at least give you SOME form of mining bonus. It would still be nice to have an ORE destroyer to provide mining bonuses like the Orca. It wouldn't even need to be T2 at that point. Maybe it could even have some sort of ore bay to make each ninja trip into the shattered WH a bit more profitable.
Ah, but that would be a discussion for another thread.
I got a Feature Added!
Stop calling an Abaddon "abba-dawn". It is "uh-bad-in"
dictionary.com/abaddon
|
Yasuo Aldent
Hammer of Hephaestus Reign of Olympus
6
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 02:58:23 -
[488] - Quote
Cephei Kells wrote:CCP Rise wrote:
More than any module/mechanic I've worked on, this is an attempt to expand fleet sizes and tactics, not limit them. I believe (as long as the numbers end up somewhat balanced) this is one of the most promising 'sandbox' module/ship additions we've done recently and the fact that we have no idea what players will do with it feels really great and exciting.
The problem that I'm seeing is that anchoring in a fleet doctrine which isn't specifically a fast moving/kiting doctrine is pretty much dead now as this new AOE MJD has the ability to remove your ships from logistical rep range and with the addition of RR falloff you have a much tighter bubble to where you can turtle with a doctrine meaning its easier than ever for a single person to MJD all your dudes off and force them to warp off and back to the fight. Rewarping to the fight is a moot point if its your logistics who get blinked as everything will be dead by the time they return. The point I'm getting at is there needs to be a counter to this which is not just killing the ship attempting to do this as the simple counter to that is to fling 5-6 of these at a hostile fleet and watch them scatter while not being able to do anything about it. Please do not release this without there being a competent counter because this will honestly kill all fleet combat which isn't cerbs and ishtars.
Competent counter == Scram. Done |
Stjornuvindur
Isogen 5
3
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 04:44:14 -
[489] - Quote
+1 for these boats. A lot more choices we currently ignore become interesting and addresses some current concerns.
Counter is simple as already posted. Scram it before it jumps, they are then irrelevant. Soon, this will be doable with a HIC bubble so locktime is irrelevant.
If I don't want to get blinked the scanres on my boat becomes a concern. If I'm flying something too large for me to fix my scanres for lock/scram < 6s then I must bring support for my fleet, inducing more variety in comps.
I can move heavier boats through massively overbubbled gates without giving up # of pilots x 1 midslot for MJDs or being 'slippery'. I can also remove interdiction probes from my trapped vessels, or pick up hostile ones and drop them back on their own fleet.
I can move my fleets around the soon to be gigantic grids without burning around like a peon.
Positioning when you're already 'set up' in shiptypes we are all familiar with becomes less of an I Win button. Hopefully reducing 'you jump into us', 'no we jumped into you last time, YOU jump into US' bullshittery.
Counterplay for bombs < not that I care personally but big complaint in 0.0 yes?
Far too many positives for us to ouinouin here I think.
The lack of variety in the hulls is a disappointment however. Tut tut. I hope we can expect that to change as time goes by.
|
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
218
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 05:44:46 -
[490] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:aldhura wrote:What about an ore T2 destroyer that gives mining boosts to the roaming gangs of gas miners :)
These do look good, be nice if they had a speed bonus while cloaked so they can sneak up on things like logi\EWAR support instead of the MWD bonus. Hmm.. nobody is stopping you from fitting mining foremen links on them.
bonus will be less as it does not give specialized bonus, if PVP ships can get bonuses from destroyer i think it is only fair to give miners something equally good.
[u]Carpe noctem[/u]
|
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions The-Company
909
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 07:07:04 -
[491] - Quote
Ellendras Silver wrote:elitatwo wrote:aldhura wrote:What about an ore T2 destroyer that gives mining boosts to the roaming gangs of gas miners :)
These do look good, be nice if they had a speed bonus while cloaked so they can sneak up on things like logi\EWAR support instead of the MWD bonus. Hmm.. nobody is stopping you from fitting mining foremen links on them. bonus will be less as it does not give specialized bonus, if PVP ships can get bonuses from destroyer i think it is only fair to give miners something equally good.
Maybe but you can get +18.75% yield with one tech2 link on a Ferox, take it or leave it.
Eve Minions is recruiting. Learn from about pvp, learn about ships and how to fly them correctly. Small gang and solo action in high, low and nullsec and w-space alike.
We will teach you everything you need and want to know.
|
Skir Skor
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
31
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 07:11:32 -
[492] - Quote
Very poor return on training this ship to V.
Command Ships are an x8 but give 1 DMG bonus, 1 Application Bonus and 3% to links effectiveness. We are only getting a 2% bonus to a single link and a 5% reduction to MJ spool up.
I'm a big fan of, if it worth training, train it to V, but with this idk. |
Abbot Jackson
Puppies and Christmas
3
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 08:03:24 -
[493] - Quote
Cephei Kells wrote:CCP Rise wrote:
More than any module/mechanic I've worked on, this is an attempt to expand fleet sizes and tactics, not limit them. I believe (as long as the numbers end up somewhat balanced) this is one of the most promising 'sandbox' module/ship additions we've done recently and the fact that we have no idea what players will do with it feels really great and exciting.
The problem that I'm seeing is that anchoring in a fleet doctrine which isn't specifically a fast moving/kiting doctrine is pretty much dead now as this new AOE MJD has the ability to remove your ships from logistical rep range and with the addition of RR falloff you have a much tighter bubble to where you can turtle with a doctrine meaning its easier than ever for a single person to MJD all your dudes off and force them to warp off and back to the fight. Rewarping to the fight is a moot point if its your logistics who get blinked as everything will be dead by the time they return. The point I'm getting at is there needs to be a counter to this which is not just killing the ship attempting to do this as the simple counter to that is to fling 5-6 of these at a hostile fleet and watch them scatter while not being able to do anything about it. Please do not release this without there being a competent counter because this will honestly kill all fleet combat which isn't cerbs and ishtars.
the counter would be another command destroyer right next to your anchor that can immediately jump your fleet right back to where it was or have a command destroyer with your logi so that it can bring them within range. |
Rivr Luzade
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
2114
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 09:52:48 -
[494] - Quote
Abbot Jackson wrote:the counter would be another command destroyer right next to your anchor that can immediately jump your fleet right back to where it was or have a command destroyer with your logi so that it can bring them within range. Or simply dedicated Arazu/Lachesis with scrams in your 2 fleet groups that instantly lock and scram the destroyer.
UI Improvement Collective
My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1959
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 10:24:33 -
[495] - Quote
Stjornuvindur wrote:+1 for these boats. A lot more choices we currently ignore become interesting and addresses some current concerns.
Counter is simple as already posted. Scram it before it jumps, they are then irrelevant. Soon, this will be doable with a HIC bubble so locktime is irrelevant.
If I don't want to get blinked the scanres on my boat becomes a concern. If I'm flying something too large for me to fix my scanres for lock/scram < 6s then I must bring support for my fleet, inducing more variety in comps.
I can move heavier boats through massively overbubbled gates without giving up # of pilots x 1 midslot for MJDs or being 'slippery'. I can also remove interdiction probes from my trapped vessels, or pick up hostile ones and drop them back on their own fleet.
I can move my fleets around the soon to be gigantic grids without burning around like a peon.
Positioning when you're already 'set up' in shiptypes we are all familiar with becomes less of an I Win button. Hopefully reducing 'you jump into us', 'no we jumped into you last time, YOU jump into US' bullshittery.
Counterplay for bombs < not that I care personally but big complaint in 0.0 yes?
Far too many positives for us to ouinouin here I think.
The lack of variety in the hulls is a disappointment however. Tut tut. I hope we can expect that to change as time goes by.
The HIC bubble does not scram you - only the targeted scripted version. Still a relatively minor point, since scramming is an easy counter.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Minyarrtarri
Matari Dark Ale
0
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 12:15:40 -
[496] - Quote
Okay, let's look at this again. A BS can micro-jump itself, but a tiny little destroyer can micro-jump everything in a 6km radius? WTF?
This should have been built on a BS hull. How can a destroyer possible have enough power to do this? At least try and keep it real..
Having recently come back I was suprised how (extremely) awesome T3 destroyers are. I guess destroyers are flavor of the month now.
If I read correctly, we can also expect a ninja ice-mining frigate with a 15,000m3 ore bay. IT'S A FRIGATE, FFS!
The way things seem to be going, if we ever get T3 Battleships they'll be able to alpha titans with a narrowband DD or something equally over the top. |
Abbot Jackson
Puppies and Christmas
3
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 12:21:23 -
[497] - Quote
This seems really cool. The more I think about it the more excited I get. And it's coinciding with the crazy graphics updates! YES. Things are going well.
I agree with afkalt on the highsec thing, but it's not worth debating because it's not going to happen. the only point i'd like to make is that making sure that everything goes smoothly/according to plan for missioners, miners, incursion runners and Jita Undock is really bad for the game. I can think of a lot of highsec pve and station game scenarios where the MJD portal thing would help the aforementioned groups.
But enough of that.
Several ideas. Warning: pretty much stream of consciousness ideas that came to mind after reading this thread.
1. To people who are saying that this favors kitey doctrines (ishtars, cerbs, tengus), I think that's wrong. With these things you can teleport your higher dps brawly armor gang right into optimal range. Also, as far as I know, alignment is maintained [SOMEONE SAID THIS IN THE THREAD, CAN ANYONE CONFIRM?]. So you can have two CD's: #1 is facing towards the enemy's logi, waiting for it to be 100km away, and #2 is facing 180 degrees from where #1 is facing. #1 lights the MDJ Portal thing, and #2 lights its MJD Portal thing right afterwards, and the enemy logi should appear right in front of your vindis and bhaalgorns. This would obviously require a lot of player skill, but my point is that these things can bring the enemy to you just as well as it can keep you away from the enemy. I bet blaster doctrines will become a thing when these fuggers get implemented; and if you have a problem with that, then you should biomass in game.
2. 6km radius isn't that big. Some people ITT have been acting like an entire, 100+ man fleet could be teleported by one of these things. I want to see a blob keep 500 people in 6km. Well, I guess it would be 12km diameter, which is pretty big. Idk, I guess this is more of a question, how many people can fit within the MJD Portal's range without everyone just bumping out? How much space does a F1AnchorBlob take up? As for logi, logi are rarely within 6km of each other, and they certainly have room to maneuver out of the CD's vector while staying within cap transfer/rep range.
3. The main problem with these things that I see is that in really heavy TiDi, people will be able to fly these things close to perfectly. And that might make it so that battles never end [or never really begin, depending on how you look at it]. In other words, there's a sort of N+1 aspect to these things where, in heavy TiDi, if an FC sees an enemy CD burning in to MJD his fleet, he'll say "okay, one of my CD's anchor up on the enemy CD and bring my fleet back once they get teleported". Basically fleets will just try to bring the most CD's to be able to deliver more MJD Portal phaggory, and therefore a better control of movement on the grid, than the enemy. This is just in heavy TiDi; in normal time I think things generally move fast enough where a high level of player skill will be required for them to be effective at all.
4. I think this is going to increase the amount of fleet doctrines that there are. As I said before, BLASTER DOCTRINES HELL YEAH . Maybe even just a squadron of high dps blaster boats, say Nexeqs, that can lurch forward into a fleet, grab vulnerable ships, then slither back into rep range with a bunch of droneless ishtars in their jaws. Or just stay there and keep raeping. Also Apocs and other battleships that apply damage really well at ~100km; just get everyone in fleet to partner up with a scram buddy, let your enemy try to get under your guns while shooting them, tell everyone to scram inside their partner's warphole, and then have your CD's jump the enemy back into optimal range. This could work with big or small battleship comps. OOH OOH ALSO: bomb teleporting. This may be unrealistic, but there could be a industrial ship filled with bombs just sitting next to a full bomber wing that is sitting like 500km from a fight, and the bombers could just continuously send a stream of bombs down a CD network/"daisychain" [not sure what this name means] at an enemy fleet. Just sitting there carpet bombing. It would be a Human Centipede! Not sure how long the CD on the rear end of it would survive though.
5. The links aren't going to be used. I spent like 30 seconds wondering why these "link ships" are being mixed with this glorious new mechanic, but then decided to just not question it and let it happen.
HOLY ****. CAN'T WAIT. I APPROVE 100%.
BRING IT INTO HIGHSEC. BRING IT INTO STATIONS. BRING IT INTO THE GOD DAMN LOGIN SCREEN.
CCP <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 F**K THE HATERS! |
Zero Conscience
DPS-K
5
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 13:04:33 -
[498] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Quote:Please do not release this without there being a competent counter because this will honestly kill all fleet combat which isn't cerbs and ishtars. If this kind of tactic becomes really common it is always an option to either defend your logi/fleet with long range scrams to use on the incoming Command Dessies or, if you don't have another option, simply scram your own fleet.
Then we need to be able to activate our own scrams on our own ships? Then the player has a tactical choice to make. |
Cavazos
Novacore Industries
3
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 13:49:25 -
[499] - Quote
I feel these ship should be able to fit 2 links without command processors since it gets bonuses for 2 type of links as well since it is a destroyer hull and could utilize its mids for better things to make it a battlefield worthy ship besides just warp in and mjd group and leave since all of its CPU will be taken by the command processors or link(s). |
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
1329
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 13:55:08 -
[500] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:aldhura wrote:What about an ore T2 destroyer that gives mining boosts to the roaming gangs of gas miners :)
These do look good, be nice if they had a speed bonus while cloaked so they can sneak up on things like logi\EWAR support instead of the MWD bonus. Hmm.. nobody is stopping you from fitting mining foremen links on them.
But Gallente/Amarr blnkblink only got 3 turret slots, that's a major hurdle to overcome being limited to basically 60% max gas huffing yield. Pls Buff. |
|
Noga Taranogas
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 19:37:40 -
[501] - Quote
CCP -remove the command processor that allows 5 links and make bonuses on apply if ship is on same grid -make them have some skin in the fight. Also hope to see command/T3/commdessies required as wing and squad commanders instead of 1 command ship boosting 200+ people.
remove ceptor bubble immunity |
elitatwo
Eve Minions The-Company
910
|
Posted - 2015.11.22 05:04:41 -
[502] - Quote
Noga Taranogas wrote:CCP -remove the command processor that allows 5 links and make bonuses on apply if ship is on same grid -make them have some skin in the fight. Also hope to see command/T3/commdessies required as wing and squad commanders instead of 1 command ship boosting 200+ people.
remove ceptor bubble immunity
No worries, I believe CCP Rise hinted that he is working on something link-related. So far we know that it will be done. What I can guess ahead is that we won't get any of it in 2015 so next year will be my guess, when is unknown so don't hold it against me.
Eve Minions is recruiting. Learn from about pvp, learn about ships and how to fly them correctly. Small gang and solo action in high, low and nullsec and w-space alike.
We will teach you everything you need and want to know.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2458
|
Posted - 2015.11.22 09:40:49 -
[503] - Quote
Stjornuvindur wrote:+1 for these boats. A lot more choices we currently ignore become interesting and addresses some current concerns.
Counter is simple as already posted. Scram it before it jumps, they are then irrelevant. Soon, this will be doable with a HIC bubble so locktime is irrelevant.
It's not a scram bubble, it's the focused effect. |
iwannadig
Impersonal Department Special Operations RUST415
16
|
Posted - 2015.11.22 13:31:43 -
[504] - Quote
Can Tactical Destroyer warp out a ship in tethering state when Citadel expansion comes to live? |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1640
|
Posted - 2015.11.22 14:46:38 -
[505] - Quote
iwannadig wrote:Can Tactical Destroyer warp out a ship in tethering state when Citadel expansion comes to live?
I think you mean Command Destroyers, and they won't affect invulnerable ships (which tethered ships would be). |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2458
|
Posted - 2015.11.22 15:10:25 -
[506] - Quote
I still think a higgs rig should stop these. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2829
|
Posted - 2015.11.22 17:39:46 -
[507] - Quote
any reason the amarr and gallente CDs aren't getting the drone speed bonus of their T1 counterparts? |
Cerulean Ice
EVE University Ivy League
49
|
Posted - 2015.11.22 17:43:19 -
[508] - Quote
The Stork really needs a better name. The only thing a stork is known for is delivering babies. While the link with MJFGs and delivery is clear, it isn't very intimidating. It doesn't sound commanding or destructive either.
With various ships, including the Corax, Rook, Raven and Jackdaw, being named for members of the Corvus genus of birds, perhaps something from that genus could be used? Wikipedia: List of Corvus speciesWikipedia: Corvus genus
Another option is a different species of Eagle Wikipedia: Eagle I quite like Rapax (tawny eagle) and Audax (wedge-tailed eagle), and both of those are fairly close to Corax in sound.
Cerulean Ice, Professor, E-UNI
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2829
|
Posted - 2015.11.22 17:45:18 -
[509] - Quote
Cerulean Ice wrote:The only thing a stork is known for is delivering babies. delivering them straight back to sender |
Fat Buddah
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
9
|
Posted - 2015.11.23 03:07:34 -
[510] - Quote
This should be useful in low-sec gate/station camping.
|
|
Bobman Smith
Purging Maelstrom SpaceMonkey's Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2015.11.23 03:12:58 -
[511] - Quote
Very awesome addition!! (not sure if that's a proper sentence but I'm sticking to it)
This is good news because it will make command bonus more common and thus reduce the, "You got links, I'm not fighting" that happens in FW.
If I were to suggest a change: Give Amarr lasers and Mimintar their Projectile weapon bonus so you guys don't look too lazy.
QUESTION: Will this Micro Jump work in FW plex's? (Oh plz Oh plz OH PLZ!!!)
On a side note: Good way I think to fix the OP T3 destroyers. Double the cost and remove their added damage bonus or bring it down to 25%. They really don't need to do thaat much DPS when they have their modes to play with and they really are too cheap at about 100M.
Another off topic note: In FW plex's, just like you can't warp within it, you should add that warp stabs don't work. Farmers really do kill FW!! You want LP: You might just have to fight for it! |
Croc Evil
Croc's Family Business Schizophrenic Macro Hive
3
|
Posted - 2015.11.23 11:09:59 -
[512] - Quote
So as of this new toy.
Command links on small ships is an interesting thing and I generally like it.
As of MJFG I have lot of concerns. Unless it has proximity limitations to jump gates and stations similar to smartbombs it will make any solo activity in low/null very frustrating. All transport ships that now rely on stabs to survive in low sec will have problems with this low MJFG activation time: on the edge of warp out time and impossible to run back to gate. Solo PvP and mostly battlecruiser / battleship rely a lot on aggression/weapon timer to separate/flee blobs on gate or stations. Again MJFG will essentially cancel this tactic. But there is no other effective tactic available for solo large ships (apart from not going into 1 vs many fights ofc). Command destroyers will be probably easily accessible and relatively cheap so any unorganized ganks/blobs will be probably able to field, use and replace them without too much effort.
MJFG Idea itself is interesting but I would rather see it on some harder to fly and expensive ships. BlackOps looks like best candidate to me.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2460
|
Posted - 2015.11.23 13:36:30 -
[513] - Quote
Croc Evil wrote: All transport ships that now rely on stabs to survive in low sec will have problems with this low MJFG activation time: on the edge of warp out time and impossible to run back to gate.
If you think 100km sideways is going to break an align to something multiple AU away I've a bridge to sell you*
*provided that the existing mechanic of "ships jumped keep their original velocity and vector" does not change.
|
Khan Wrenth
Ore Oppression Prevention and Salvation
291
|
Posted - 2015.11.23 13:59:27 -
[514] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Croc Evil wrote: All transport ships that now rely on stabs to survive in low sec will have problems with this low MJFG activation time: on the edge of warp out time and impossible to run back to gate.
If you think 100km sideways is going to break an align to something multiple AU away I've a bridge to sell you* *provided that the existing mechanic of "ships jumped keep their original velocity and vector" does not change.
Agreed. What might actually turn out to be a problem to transports is the changes to the warp disruption field generator (focus script). But, that's a discussion for the other thread.
Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
|
Darth Squeemus
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
5
|
Posted - 2015.11.23 22:11:45 -
[515] - Quote
This sounds really cool. I'm excited to see them in action. |
aldhura
Bartledannians
18
|
Posted - 2015.11.24 04:22:32 -
[516] - Quote
Darth Squeemus wrote:This sounds really cool. I'm excited to see them in action.
They on the test server, great fun to play with :)
Bartledannians are recruiting.. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6150832#post6150832
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2829
|
Posted - 2015.11.24 06:04:54 -
[517] - Quote
aldhura wrote:Darth Squeemus wrote:This sounds really cool. I'm excited to see them in action. They on the test server, great fun to play with :) I'm still having trouble trying to ninja myself onto a blob of people and then micro jump drive them away |
elitatwo
Eve Minions The-Company
910
|
Posted - 2015.11.24 06:41:52 -
[518] - Quote
Bobman Smith wrote:On a side note: Good way I think to fix the OP T3 destroyers. Double the cost and remove their added damage bonus or bring it down to 25%..
Here is another sidenote only for you, stop talking about topics you have nothing to contribute to.
Eve Minions is recruiting. Learn from about pvp, learn about ships and how to fly them correctly. Small gang and solo action in high, low and nullsec and w-space alike.
We will teach you everything you need and want to know.
|
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
1331
|
Posted - 2015.11.24 11:26:02 -
[519] - Quote
Rowells wrote:aldhura wrote:Darth Squeemus wrote:This sounds really cool. I'm excited to see them in action. They on the test server, great fun to play with :) I'm still having trouble trying to ninja myself onto a blob of people and then micro jump drive them away
Those dessis don't have the smallest of signatures, but skirmish links and X-Instinct basically do help with that.
I'd imagine those being awesome together with T3Ds feauturing combat probes. You'll get a precise warp and a small number of scrams, run MJDG and leave behind those that you scram. If your mate is scrammed by a brawler, you drop on top of them and run the generator, you offer that tackling guy the options of keep scramming him and be blinked 100k away together with a sturdy dessi or to switch scram, leaving your friend to bugger off.
From a tendency, I had more fun using a 10mn prop pushing me to around 2km/s and keeping my sig and their targeting speed down, MWD - even bonused - and the linked sigbloom were a tad contraproductive. |
RcTamiya
SUPREME MATHEMATICS A Band Apart.
25
|
Posted - 2015.11.24 12:56:38 -
[520] - Quote
RIP Triage + sub-capfleet in w-space. |
|
Strongo
3
|
Posted - 2015.11.24 13:56:05 -
[521] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Here is a feedback thread for some awesome new ships, Command Destroyers! So here's the basics. We are adding a new line of Tech II destroyers based on the Algos, Dragoon, Corax and Talwar along with a new type of module called the Micro Jump Field Generator, which the new Destroyers will have exclusive access to. I'm going to go through some basic questions here at the top and then give you all the details after. First, why Command Destroyers? We have always wanted to do a line of smaller ships that could provide gang support, but we expected to wait until after a rework of the ganglink mechanics, but here we saw a perfect opportunity to bring you this awesome new module and combining the role with gang support seems ideal. We still want to rework links and think these will slot in perfectly to that rework when it happens, but in the mean time you guys get a few awesome new tools. Second, how exactly does the Micro Jump Field Generator work? This module is exactly like a Micro Jump Drive except that when it fires, it pulls any ships nearby along with it for the jump. There's a lot of specifics to consider here but the big restrictions you need to know are that you cannot use this module in high sec, you can not pull invulnerable targets (ships that have just undocked or just jumped through a gate and are still cloaked), you can not move capitals, and you can not jump into starbase shields. You CAN however do a lot of really crazy thing such as pull bombs that are midair, pull dictor bubbles or chain multiple jumps in a row using several Command Destroyers. As for numbers, we have a base spool up time of 9 seconds, a reactivation delay of 160 seconds, a pull radius of 6km from the ship and a jump distance of 100km. The module requires 5 PG and 31 CPU to fit and requires the same skill as normal MJDs to use. Now, for the ships themselves. We are aiming to have a set of destroyers that are both faster and more resilient than either their Tech I counterparts or Interdictors, but sacrifice offense. This should make the support role, whether with MJFG or links, easier to fill while leaving them vulnerable to abuse in combat. Their weapon systems will be missile or drone based, like their base hulls. Here are the bonuses: MAGUSGallente Destroyer Per Level: 10% Bonus to Drone Damage 4% bonus to armor resists Command Destroyer Per Level: 2% to Armor and Skirmish Warfare link effectiveness 5% reduction in MJFG spool up time Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators Role: Can fit one Warfare Link PONTIFEXAmarr Destroyer per Level: 10% Bonus to Drone Damage 4% bonus to Armor Resistances Command Destroyer per Level: 2% to Armor and Information Warfare link effectiveness 5% reduction in MJFG spool up time Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators Role: Can fit one Warfare Link STORKCaldari Destroyer per Level: 10% to Rocket and Light Missile Damage 4% Bonus to Shield Resistances Command Destroyer per Level: 2% to Siege and Information link effectiveness per level 5% reduction in MJFG spool up time Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators Role: Can fit one Warfare Link BIFROSTMinmatar Destroyer per Level: 10% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile Damage 4% bonus to shield resists Command Destroyer per Level: 2% to Siege and Skirmish Warfare link effectiveness 5% reduction in MJFG spool up time Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators Role: Can fit one Warfare Link And for their attributes I'm using a google doc this time for better readability: ATTRIBUTESAs always, we look forward to your feedback. With these ships I'm especially interested in any opinions or insights on the powergrid and CPU numbers, as the ships will probably get used a few different ways and I'm not positive we've accounted for all of them. If you have any questions or need clarifications please ask, and don't be surprised if there's a typo here and there that needs fixing :) Thanks !
These things are ment for speed why give them drones? Give them guns instead....going to need to keep moving on the field and leaving behind your drones crap :(... to these with missles makes it easier to hit and go on their targets... |
Rek Seven
Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering
2112
|
Posted - 2015.11.24 21:03:02 -
[522] - Quote
The Magus slot layout doesn't seem right. If it has t2 resists to armour, it's low slots and armour HP should reflect that. However, It only has 4 low slots and 800 armour HP, whereas the Pontifex gets 5 low slots and 850 armour HP. Unlike the T1 version, making the magus a hull tanker would be inefficient as you would be wasting the T2 resists.
All other command destroyers can dedicate at least 5 slots to tank (in the case of shield ships they can use mids and lows) so the magus is clearly the odd one out.
Give the Magus an extra low or more hitpoints.
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
659
|
Posted - 2015.11.24 21:16:30 -
[523] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:The Magus slot layout doesn't seem right. If it has t2 resists to armour, it's low slots and armour HP should reflect that. However, It only has 4 low slots and 800 armour HP, whereas the Pontifex gets 5 low slots and 850 armour HP. Unlike the T1 version, making the magus a hull tanker would be inefficient as you would be wasting the T2 resists.
All other command destroyers can dedicate at least 5 slots to tank (in the case of shield ships they can use mids and lows) so the magus is clearly the odd one out.
Give the Magus an extra low or more hitpoints.
Shield ships are -2 mids for prop/mjd, so that leaves 3 mids on the bifrost for tackle/tank. Which is more like 1 mid for tank if you go scram/web. Or 2 mids for tank if only scram. The stork can have more tank but less dps. Which is a non issue in a fleet role.
Gallente have always had slightly more hull HP that armor. Just their flavor.
Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
|
Rek Seven
Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering
2112
|
Posted - 2015.11.24 21:59:53 -
[524] - Quote
Has it been confirmed that the MJFG is a mid slot and not a high? ...I would assume the latter.
Shield ships can use both mid and low slot modules for tank.
My argument stands. I still think the Magus' tank needs looking at.
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
660
|
Posted - 2015.11.24 22:42:26 -
[525] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Has it been confirmed that the MJFG is a mid slot and not a high? ...I would assume the latter.
Shield ships can use both mid and low slot modules for tank.
My argument stands. I still think the Magus' tank needs looking at.
The MJFG is a mid slot item. As per current SiSi build.
Just because you can, doesnt mean you should. As in, the stork has 2 lows. So dcu and 400mm plate? Same can be said for the armor boats. They have 4 mids as well. Throw an MSE plus plate on your magus if you think that is a good argument for dismissing shield ships having similar tank.
Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
|
Rek Seven
Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering
2112
|
Posted - 2015.11.24 22:53:21 -
[526] - Quote
No silly I'm talking about the DC and the passive shield mods...
Ah thanks, I think it would be better as a high slot but meh... Does the MJFG also bloom your sig?
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
1331
|
Posted - 2015.11.25 00:37:40 -
[527] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:The Magus slot layout doesn't seem right. If it has t2 resists to armour, it's low slots and armour HP should reflect that. However, It only has 4 low slots and 800 armour HP, whereas the Pontifex gets 5 low slots and 850 armour HP. Unlike the T1 version, making the magus a hull tanker would be inefficient as you would be wasting the T2 resists.
All other command destroyers can dedicate at least 5 slots to tank (in the case of shield ships they can use mids and lows) so the magus is clearly the odd one out.
Give the Magus an extra low or more hitpoints.
From what testing shows, the Magus is really well suited to use in very small gangs, especially thanks to that 4/4 layout mid and lows. You get a flexible fit with anything from dualscram+MJDG and mwd for kidnappings to a more general 10mn+web/CB+scram+MJDG to survive in something like a c4/c5 gank. The caplife on each of them is splendid, you can run a SAR II on both pontifex and magus almost stable next to a 10mn, or supplement with a CB thanks to that generous cargohold - and remain operational for ages.
The Magus with 10mn+web+scram with a SAR II has for me legitimately brawled down hecates and confessors, I'd be careful dismissing any ship with a 4mid+4low layout. The Pontifex in comparison is a lot weaker in small gang setups, and imo needs RR or other stuff on grid to really shine.
In short: 800 or 850 armor hp is unimportant, you won't notice a difference. 4/4 layout is great for small gang stuff, 3/5 should be better with large gangs, when going from local tanked to 400mm with eanm, dcu and EM/Therm specifics.
Edit: Certain it does bloom your sig, and the bifrost/stork will have ridiculous tank coupled with good mobility when neglecting damage, relying on their solid baseline. |
Bobman Smith
Purging Maelstrom SpaceMonkey's Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2015.11.25 07:25:11 -
[528] - Quote
Been sleeping on this... Why not make these 2 different ships? I can see how these functions can work together but wont it be better if these were divided into 2 different classes making 4 different unique T2 Destroyers? Destroyers can in some ways be like mini Battlecruisers.
I know the Interdictors bigger bro is a Cruisers... but meh, details right? And if the mini (6km) MJFG is a success, why not bring out a new class for the Battlecruisers that has more range? To counter that range, we should probably have a mass cap. The little Destroyer should not potentiality (numbers not tested) be able to move some 30ish odd Battleships but a future Battlecruiser sized ship could.
And to make the Commander Destroyer stand out more on its own, make it so it gets 0% added command boosts to ships not on grid with it, and those that are get the full 3%! Do that with the other command ships too (2% for T3's). I like how you can get off grid boosts, but you should get a good bonus for them being on grid. And with talks of making grid sizes bigger I think it wont be too hard to keep these ships far away from being in harms way. |
Rek Seven
Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering
2112
|
Posted - 2015.11.25 09:40:04 -
[529] - Quote
Lloyd Roses wrote:Rek Seven wrote:The Magus slot layout doesn't seem right. If it has t2 resists to armour, it's low slots and armour HP should reflect that. However, It only has 4 low slots and 800 armour HP, whereas the Pontifex gets 5 low slots and 850 armour HP. Unlike the T1 version, making the magus a hull tanker would be inefficient as you would be wasting the T2 resists.
All other command destroyers can dedicate at least 5 slots to tank (in the case of shield ships they can use mids and lows) so the magus is clearly the odd one out.
Give the Magus an extra low or more hitpoints. From what testing shows, the Magus is really well suited to use in very small gangs, especially thanks to that 4/4 layout mid and lows. You get a flexible fit with anything from dualscram+MJDG and mwd for kidnappings to a more general 10mn+web/CB+scram+MJDG to survive in something like a c4/c5 gank. The caplife on each of them is splendid, you can run a SAR II on both pontifex and magus almost stable next to a 10mn, or supplement with a CB thanks to that generous cargohold - and remain operational for ages. The Magus with 10mn+web+scram with a SAR II has for me legitimately brawled down hecates and confessors, I'd be careful dismissing any ship with a 4mid+4low layout. The Pontifex in comparison is a lot weaker in small gang setups, and imo needs RR or other stuff on grid to really shine. In short: 800 or 850 armor hp is unimportant, you won't notice a difference. 4/4 layout is great for small gang stuff, 3/5 should be better with large gangs, when going from local tanked to 400mm with eanm, dcu and EM/Therm specifics. Edit: Certain it does bloom your sig, and the bifrost/stork will have ridiculous tank coupled with good mobility when neglecting damage, relying on their solid baseline.
Ok, that all seems to make scene, so i'll take your word for it that the Magus is ok. Thanks for the reply.
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
RcTamiya
SUPREME MATHEMATICS A Band Apart.
25
|
Posted - 2015.11.25 11:53:49 -
[530] - Quote
There's only one VERY big concern, all you need is 1 dic, 2-3 Command destroyers and good timing to **** up every single Triage and Blapdreaddoctrin out there
-> Command destroyer 1 cycles his MJDG, Command destroyer 2 starts his cycle ~ 3 seconds after, dic drops a bubble and moves outside of Command destroyer 2's MJDG-Range -> first jump with dic + both CDs + Warpdisruptionprobe -> second jump with both CDs + Warpdisruptionprobe + hostile subcap-fleet, dic stays with caps and bubbles them
-> **** subcaps without their triagesupport ( ~50k out of reprange) and finish off caps after
Counters aint really excisting, scrambchains aint viable in many setups, counterscramb even with isntalock T3s is difficult using this tactic, why not give HIC-bubbles the ability to stop ships inside from beeing dragged through MJDG?! |
|
Rek Seven
Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering
2112
|
Posted - 2015.11.25 13:04:22 -
[531] - Quote
Yeah I'm fairly certain CCP will eventually change it so your can't activate a second MJFG if you are already in an active micro-jump field.
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2460
|
Posted - 2015.11.25 14:15:02 -
[532] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Yeah I'm fairly certain CCP will eventually change it so your can't activate a second MJFG if you are already in an active micro-jump field.
Maybe but half these scenarios need things lined up so perfectly they're like launching a basketball from a cannon a few miles away and getting it in first time.
I mean, it's a big enough mission to get 50-100 nerds to press a button at the same time, on the same target half the time. |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
881
|
Posted - 2015.11.25 15:35:18 -
[533] - Quote
The MJFG needs to changed so we can use it in hisec. Or at least give a definitive reason why it cannot be used. |
RcTamiya
SUPREME MATHEMATICS A Band Apart.
26
|
Posted - 2015.11.25 15:40:20 -
[534] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Yeah I'm fairly certain CCP will eventually change it so your can't activate a second MJFG if you are already in an active micro-jump field. Maybe but half these scenarios need things lined up so perfectly they're like launching a basketball from a cannon a few miles away and getting it in first time. I mean, it's a big enough mission to get 50-100 nerds to press a button at the same time, on the same target half the time.
google "guild wars spike" and you'll see, that getting 3 people absolutely synced up with each other is no problem at all .... i am allready using this tactic as daily practice on sisi, absolutely doable |
Ares Desideratus
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
305
|
Posted - 2015.11.25 16:22:12 -
[535] - Quote
Ships in this game have slowly become far too homogenized, and these destroyers are a perfect example of it.
More ships that use links are the last thing we need in this game. |
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
2924
|
Posted - 2015.11.26 02:52:02 -
[536] - Quote
RcTamiya wrote:RIP Triage + sub-capfleet in w-space.
Not really. It's just as useful for saving the triage or dread by blinking off the tacklers surrounding them. And the dictor probes as well. It'll be very useful for defending capitals and extracting them from deep doodoo.
Your Triage will just have to gets its fleet to spread out a bit more. Like, not anchor up on something too much. Maybe try for low-sig high-transversal X-instinct-skirmish linked wake limited subsystem HAM legions. Like, you know, lazerhawks use vs blap dreads.
~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1963
|
Posted - 2015.11.26 03:02:53 -
[537] - Quote
Ares Desideratus wrote:Ships in this game have slowly become far too homogenized, and these destroyers are a perfect example of it.
More ships that use links are the last thing we need in this game.
Well, then you are in luck, because these ships will suck as link ships (except in shattered WH's). They will be awesome because of the MJDF... not the links.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
nate albush
Major League Infidels Size Really Doesn't Matter
6
|
Posted - 2015.11.26 10:27:49 -
[538] - Quote
Xenontechs wrote:Quote:Gallente Destroyer Per Level: 10% Bonus to Drone Damage
Amarr Destroyer per Level: 10% Bonus to Drone Damage
Caldari Destroyer per Level: 10% to Rocket and Light Missile Damage
Minmatar Destroyer per Level: 10% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile Damage I get that these are the big brothers of other ships with these sort of bonuses, but I'd love to see more weapon types edit: ok with interdictors in mind this may fit actually... there we have everything except drones edit2: and lazors are missing too the reason i think that they put missiles and drones is because the micro jump drive these ships can use can also move their drones and missiles with them as well but if you are shooting your enemy with anything else they wont be hit as all if you know what i mean
|
Xequecal
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
361
|
Posted - 2015.11.26 11:15:43 -
[539] - Quote
Also, how exactly do these sacrifice offense? The Pontifex easily does over 300 DPS with like 60km range on its weapons, that's not really matched by anything. Confessor/Svipul do similar DPS but don't have anywhere near the range, other destroyers can beat the DPS by a little but they have to be like 3km away from the target or closer. |
Rek Seven
Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering
2115
|
Posted - 2015.11.26 20:46:45 -
[540] - Quote
I'm struggling to come up with a good Pontifex fit that isn't left with empty highs and still requires CPU and power rigs. I'm aiming for around 15k ehp, 1 link and a MJFG.
The spool up bonus seems pretty pointless. A MJFG range bonus per level would be much useful.
Overall i'm left feeling that the Pontifex could do with a little more CPU to make sure it can fill both it's specialized roles without sacrificing too much.
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
|
Rek Seven
Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering
2115
|
Posted - 2015.11.26 21:03:44 -
[541] - Quote
Xequecal wrote: The Pontifex easily does over 300 DPS with like 60km range on its weapons.
It doesn't really though
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2831
|
Posted - 2015.11.26 22:30:31 -
[542] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:I'm struggling to come up with a good Pontifex fit that isn't left with empty highs and still requires CPU and power rigs. I'm aiming for around 15k ehp, 1 link and a MJFG.
As for the bonuses, the spool up bonus seems like a waste and a MJFG range bonus per level (10km at level 5) would be much more useful. I don't see why this ship doesn't have the 3% per level boost to links like the command ships. These two issues make me question if i should even bother training the CD skill past level 1.
After playing around on sisi for an hour, overall i'm left feeling that the Pontifex could do with a little more CPU to make sure it can fill both it's specialized roles without sacrificing too much. If you're trying to move things quickly, either for rescue or offensively, less time spent in one place (presumably under fire) is better. Whereas changing the range may not be beneficial, especially if that range easily brings you in warp range and you have effectively gained little. |
Rek Seven
Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering
2115
|
Posted - 2015.11.26 22:47:59 -
[543] - Quote
With the CD skill at 5 i think you only save about 2 seconds spool up on a level 5 MJFG, which is practically insignificant.
Whether you have a 6.5km range or a 10km rang, you are still in, or on the edge of, scram range. I just feel that the current range leads to too large a margin for error, which is easily overcome by those with the ability to blob but not the smaller gangs.
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2831
|
Posted - 2015.11.26 23:18:13 -
[544] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:With the CD skill at 5 i think you only save about 2 seconds spool up on a level 5 MJFG, which is practically insignificant.
Whether you have a 6.5km range or a 10km rang, you are still in, or on the edge of, scram range. I just feel that the current range leads to too large a margin for error, which is easily overcome by those with the ability to blob but not the smaller gangs. 2sec is not really that insignificant when the counter to it is scramming. 2 sec practically removes any BS or BC from having a chance at turning it off.
And as for blob vs gang: not much changed. Only real difference is a slightly smaller fleet can use these as effectively to remove things like logi and other key ships. More chance to inflict damage than before. |
Rek Seven
Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering
2115
|
Posted - 2015.11.26 23:34:40 -
[545] - Quote
Well we will just have to agree to disagree...
For me that 2 seconds is not worth the training time. The time on grid can me completely mitigated by using 2 CDs in tandem and with good timing and further more when using them in a gang, there are several things you can do to stop the ship from being targeted and scramed.
Even a MJFG reaction time bonus would be better than what we have currently.
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1964
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 00:34:05 -
[546] - Quote
Two seconds is an eternity in a world of server tics. My Interdictor specialist is training Microjumpdrive skill to Level V. So looking forward to these ships.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Sgt Ocker
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
777
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 02:18:48 -
[547] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Two seconds is an eternity in a world of server tics. My Interdictor specialist is training Microjumpdrive skill to Level V. So looking forward to these ships. When the biggest blob in the game starts promoting a coming change as being good, you know it is going to be abused and is far from balanced.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
Why can't CCP see the obvious - Large dominating groups are bad for Eve.
|
RcTamiya
SUPREME MATHEMATICS A Band Apart.
26
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 12:36:11 -
[548] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Two seconds is an eternity in a world of server tics. My Interdictor specialist is training Microjumpdrive skill to Level V. So looking forward to these ships. When the biggest blob in the game starts promoting a coming change as being good, you know it is going to be abused and is far from balanced.
imagine somebodys face if you mjd out all their logis 100k away and far out of reprange *_* |
DrysonBennington
Aliastra Gallente Federation
244
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 12:47:34 -
[549] - Quote
Ah look the STORK brought us this year....more little Squiddies...how cute. |
marly cortez
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
116
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 13:45:01 -
[550] - Quote
Looks the have very little value except to Lo-Sec Gankers to me.
|
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1964
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 13:47:45 -
[551] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Two seconds is an eternity in a world of server tics. My Interdictor specialist is training Microjumpdrive skill to Level V. So looking forward to these ships. When the biggest blob in the game starts promoting a coming change as being good, you know it is going to be abused and is far from balanced.
I'm sorry, but I only weigh 175 pounds. I hardly think that qualifies me for the title "biggest blob in the game."
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2468
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 14:05:27 -
[552] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Two seconds is an eternity in a world of server tics. My Interdictor specialist is training Microjumpdrive skill to Level V. So looking forward to these ships.
I've never been able to work out if MJDs work on ticks or if they are like weapons. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1965
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 14:10:24 -
[553] - Quote
afkalt wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Two seconds is an eternity in a world of server tics. My Interdictor specialist is training Microjumpdrive skill to Level V. So looking forward to these ships. I've never been able to work out if MJDs work on ticks or if they are like weapons.
Either way, this is not sex, having it happen faster is always better.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Rek Seven
Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering
2116
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 14:19:27 -
[554] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:afkalt wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Two seconds is an eternity in a world of server tics. My Interdictor specialist is training Microjumpdrive skill to Level V. So looking forward to these ships. I've never been able to work out if MJDs work on ticks or if they are like weapons. Either way, this is not sex, having it happen faster is always better.
But not as useful as my suggested range bonus in the majority of situations.
Any frig, destroyer or cruiser in range will still insta-lock you as soon as you activate the jump field and bloom your sig.
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1965
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 15:27:35 -
[555] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:afkalt wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Two seconds is an eternity in a world of server tics. My Interdictor specialist is training Microjumpdrive skill to Level V. So looking forward to these ships. I've never been able to work out if MJDs work on ticks or if they are like weapons. Either way, this is not sex, having it happen faster is always better. But not as useful as my suggested range or reactivation bonus in the majority of situations. Any frig, destroyer or cruiser in range will still insta-lock you as soon as you activate the jump field and bloom your sig, making that 2 seconds irrelevant. I'd be interested to hear how you envisage using the MJFG on these ships... Do you plan on getting a warp-in on a target using a cloaky scout or are you thinking about using them in conjunction with another CD?
My Corp is looking to use them for small gang stuff in conjunction with Interdictors, T3D's, and other small stuff. So, I expect to get warp-ins from my T3D, bubble and point what we want to kill, scram what we don't, activate mjdf, split them up, kill, repeat. There are lots of other potential uses of course, but for the most part I expect to use these in small gang fights (less than ten pilots on our side). They will also be useful for gate and station huggers.
I rarely participate in large fleet fights except as a capital ship or Interdictor pilot, so have not put much thought into how to use them on that scale.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Rek Seven
Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering
2116
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 17:21:25 -
[556] - Quote
@ CCP what happens if you try to jump someone off the edge of a pos forcefield (e.g. a link alt orbiting)? Can the forcefield get in the way of you jumping if the CD is not between the target and the forcefield, pointing away from the forcefield?
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
1061
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 22:26:38 -
[557] - Quote
These things look game breakingly OP
Not today spaghetti.
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions The-Company
918
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 23:58:03 -
[558] - Quote
Sexy Cakes wrote:These things look game breakingly OP
Shhhh!!! I do want to fly them before they nerf them down again, look what you have done to the Stratios even before she even went live.
No more amputations on pirate ships, capiche?
Eve Minions is recruiting. Learn from about pvp, learn about ships and how to fly them correctly. Small gang and solo action in high, low and nullsec and w-space alike.
We will teach you everything you need and want to know.
|
Fourteen Maken
Omega Industry Inc. The Ditanian Alliance
244
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 15:58:56 -
[559] - Quote
This is gonna suck.
Support a fairer loyalty point market for faction war:
The sinews of war; infinite money.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
32902
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 16:30:41 -
[560] - Quote
Micro Jump Drive Generator should have a range indicator bubble in tactical overview.
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
|
|
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
798
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 17:57:47 -
[561] - Quote
WHY ARE THESE SO FAST!? What is wrong with you people?
Ease off on the bloody speed creep. There is no reason for these to be FASTER than AFs when they can already do 100km in 8 seconds.
You have classes dedicated to light and heavy tackling, and you want to make a Destroyer class faster than them. Did we learn nothing from Angels, and the current cancer of T3Ds and Mordus?
AND you're adding T2 frig logi Maybe you guys should log in for once before you start shitting out ideas.
Here's a better idea: Let's just remove frigates from the game. Sound good? It means far less work for you toilet jockeys
https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage
|
Sgt Ocker
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
778
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 23:51:23 -
[562] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:WHY ARE THESE SO FAST!? What is wrong with you people? Ease off on the bloody speed creep. There is no reason for these to be FASTER than AFs when they can already do 100km in 8 seconds. You have classes dedicated to light and heavy tackling, and you want to make a Destroyer class faster than them. Did we learn nothing from Angels, and the current cancer of T3Ds and Mordus? AND you're adding T2 frig logi Maybe you guys should log in for once before you start shitting out ideas. Here's a better idea: Let's just remove frigates from the game. Sound good? It means far less work for you toilet jockeys
There has been so many 'pretty" effects added - server space for those who want to play (fly ships) is limited, so everyone needs to fly frigates and destroyers. Or CCP have realized - 90% of the pvp content in Eve is in lowsec (FW), they like their destroyers and frigates so why not make them as OP as we can.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
Why can't CCP see the obvious - Large dominating groups are bad for Eve.
|
Tyranis Marcus
Bloody Heathens
1458
|
Posted - 2015.11.29 03:02:36 -
[563] - Quote
How long until the Caldari T2 destroyers are reworked so one of them has a hybrid weapon bonus instead of missiles? It's surely in the future. Somewhere.
Do not run. We are your friends.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
17227
|
Posted - 2015.11.29 03:09:13 -
[564] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:WHY ARE THESE SO FAST!? What is wrong with you people? Ease off on the bloody speed creep. There is no reason for these to be FASTER than AFs when they can already do 100km in 8 seconds. You have classes dedicated to light and heavy tackling, and you want to make a Destroyer class faster than them. Did we learn nothing from Angels, and the current cancer of T3Ds and Mordus? AND you're adding T2 frig logi Maybe you guys should log in for once before you start shitting out ideas. Here's a better idea: Let's just remove frigates from the game. Sound good? It means far less work for you toilet jockeys
Counter suggestion: delete AFs, pretend they never existed, and get on with our lives. Most of the T2 small ship balancing issues disappear or significantly reduce overnight and we get to use our 1m sp refunds on the new ships.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
15285
|
Posted - 2015.11.29 03:17:12 -
[565] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Prometheus Exenthal wrote:WHY ARE THESE SO FAST!? What is wrong with you people? Ease off on the bloody speed creep. There is no reason for these to be FASTER than AFs when they can already do 100km in 8 seconds. You have classes dedicated to light and heavy tackling, and you want to make a Destroyer class faster than them. Did we learn nothing from Angels, and the current cancer of T3Ds and Mordus? AND you're adding T2 frig logi Maybe you guys should log in for once before you start shitting out ideas. Here's a better idea: Let's just remove frigates from the game. Sound good? It means far less work for you toilet jockeys Counter suggestion: delete AFs, pretend they never existed, and get on with our lives. Most of the T2 small ship balancing issues disappear or significantly reduce overnight and we get to use our 1m sp refunds on the new ships.
I can't help but wonder if you're being sarcastic, since you of all people would be able to grasp the concept of such blatant powercreep, if you have to outright delete old and invalidated classes.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2843
|
Posted - 2015.11.29 03:22:00 -
[566] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Malcanis wrote:Prometheus Exenthal wrote:WHY ARE THESE SO FAST!? What is wrong with you people? Ease off on the bloody speed creep. There is no reason for these to be FASTER than AFs when they can already do 100km in 8 seconds. You have classes dedicated to light and heavy tackling, and you want to make a Destroyer class faster than them. Did we learn nothing from Angels, and the current cancer of T3Ds and Mordus? AND you're adding T2 frig logi Maybe you guys should log in for once before you start shitting out ideas. Here's a better idea: Let's just remove frigates from the game. Sound good? It means far less work for you toilet jockeys Counter suggestion: delete AFs, pretend they never existed, and get on with our lives. Most of the T2 small ship balancing issues disappear or significantly reduce overnight and we get to use our 1m sp refunds on the new ships. I can't help but wonder if you're being sarcastic, since you of all people would be able to grasp the concept of such blatant powercreep, if you have to outright delete old and invalidated classes. Honestly, the only thing that kept AF relevant as they were, was the fact that the only threats were two classes up. Any addition of a viable T2 or faction destroyer is going to push them further into uslessness. It's a bit of a trade, and the same thing could be said for any attempts to expand BC line of ships as well.
They're so close together that improving the ships makes either bigger ones or smaller ones irrelevant, or just not much better than the T1 counterpart to begin with.
Guess it really depends on which class you like better. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
15286
|
Posted - 2015.11.29 04:47:42 -
[567] - Quote
Rowells wrote: Guess it really depends on which class you like better.
That's my point.
It shouldn't matter. There should be enough distinctions between the classes by themselves, so that we don't have to make T2 destroyers that are faster than frigates but tank like cruisers.
It's really rather ridiculous that we're even having this conversation. It's simple game balance, after all, if you're going to release something that invalidates a bunch of previously existing stuff, then the release should simply not happen. This has nothing to do with "moving forward" or "progress" or whatever justification you want to use.
It's power creep. Of the worst kind, too, speed. The two biggest pitfalls in game balance are always the same. Stealth, and speed. If they are out of balance, the game is broken. CCP has done a reasonably good job with stealth, but they have not done a good job of managing speed.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1969
|
Posted - 2015.11.29 05:34:26 -
[568] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Rowells wrote: Guess it really depends on which class you like better.
That's my point. It shouldn't matter. There should be enough distinctions between the classes by themselves, so that we don't have to make T2 destroyers that are faster than frigates but tank like cruisers. It's really rather ridiculous that we're even having this conversation. It's simple game balance, after all, if you're going to release something that invalidates a bunch of previously existing stuff, then the release should simply not happen. This has nothing to do with "moving forward" or "progress" or whatever justification you want to use. It's power creep. Of the worst kind, too, speed. The two biggest pitfalls in game balance are always the same. Stealth, and speed. If they are out of balance, the game is broken. CCP has done a reasonably good job with stealth, but they have not done a good job of managing speed.
I agree that speed has proved to be the most difficult thing to balance.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions The-Company
922
|
Posted - 2015.11.29 06:33:16 -
[569] - Quote
Last year I made a suggestion to remove now very useless attributes from all missiles and it was shut down and I declared certifyable.
Doesn't sound so terrible anymore does it? And who could have predicted that a few years ago.. I DID.
Eve Minions is recruiting. Learn from about pvp, learn about ships and how to fly them correctly. Small gang and solo action in high, low and nullsec and w-space alike.
We will teach you everything you need and want to know.
|
Kenja Saissore
Relentless Terrorism Separatists
1
|
Posted - 2015.11.29 10:16:17 -
[570] - Quote
I really really wanted to see the off grid boosting get touched, its just to powerful, especially since everything is about kiting and range now.
But these are just a joke, why bother even trying to balance the bigger ships if you then immediately throw them back into uselessness?
While I support a change when it comes to links, I cant support yet another meta that will make larger ships even more useless in pvp
Why are these even on the chalk board? you couldnt give this to the BC's and make them useful? What is it with you guys and making BC's viable?
the entire concept seems so much more entertaining on a BC hull.
This looks like another ship with no real counter, more skills to train, to fly a new ship, that doesnt do any role that was needed or wasnt already in the game, but obsoletes entire ships sole purpose for existing.
The last few small ships you guys released have given us enough cancer for the nxt year or so, cmon already... |
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
1314
|
Posted - 2015.11.29 15:28:01 -
[571] - Quote
After playing around with these on sisi I think scrams should only stop the activation of the mjfg not keep screamed ships from being jumped out this will see almost no use in small gangs as anything other than for disengagement
Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3? Corp Stasis
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
17227
|
Posted - 2015.11.29 21:52:08 -
[572] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Malcanis wrote:Prometheus Exenthal wrote:WHY ARE THESE SO FAST!? What is wrong with you people? Ease off on the bloody speed creep. There is no reason for these to be FASTER than AFs when they can already do 100km in 8 seconds. You have classes dedicated to light and heavy tackling, and you want to make a Destroyer class faster than them. Did we learn nothing from Angels, and the current cancer of T3Ds and Mordus? AND you're adding T2 frig logi Maybe you guys should log in for once before you start shitting out ideas. Here's a better idea: Let's just remove frigates from the game. Sound good? It means far less work for you toilet jockeys Counter suggestion: delete AFs, pretend they never existed, and get on with our lives. Most of the T2 small ship balancing issues disappear or significantly reduce overnight and we get to use our 1m sp refunds on the new ships. I can't help but wonder if you're being sarcastic, since you of all people would be able to grasp the concept of such blatant powercreep, if you have to outright delete old and invalidated classes.
Well that seems terribly unlikely.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Sgt Ocker
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
779
|
Posted - 2015.11.29 23:53:52 -
[573] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Malcanis wrote:Prometheus Exenthal wrote:WHY ARE THESE SO FAST!? What is wrong with you people? Ease off on the bloody speed creep. There is no reason for these to be FASTER than AFs when they can already do 100km in 8 seconds. You have classes dedicated to light and heavy tackling, and you want to make a Destroyer class faster than them. Did we learn nothing from Angels, and the current cancer of T3Ds and Mordus? AND you're adding T2 frig logi Maybe you guys should log in for once before you start shitting out ideas. Here's a better idea: Let's just remove frigates from the game. Sound good? It means far less work for you toilet jockeys Counter suggestion: delete AFs, pretend they never existed, and get on with our lives. Most of the T2 small ship balancing issues disappear or significantly reduce overnight and we get to use our 1m sp refunds on the new ships. I can't help but wonder if you're being sarcastic, since you of all people would be able to grasp the concept of such blatant powercreep, if you have to outright delete old and invalidated classes. Well that seems terribly unlikely. You don't need to physically delete invalidated classes. They just don't get used, until someone at CCP has a brainfart and decides to re-balance them. T1 cruisers - Very ordinary for a long time (with 1 or 2 exceptions) - CCP re-balanced them and all of a sudden, they are valid to use. Since then, unfortunately we had the arrival of T3D's (cruiser in a Destroyer shell) - They put a dent in T1 Cruiser use but they were still valid and a nooby (lower skilled) group could hold their own in a fight. Now, in the not too far future, we are to get the next OP addition to the "cruisers in disguise as destroyers" class.
So where exactly does this leave T1 Cruisers, or for that matter, any other sub-cap class.
This new class of ships - they aren't destroyers but aren't quite cruisers - so what exactly are they? Pretty soon there will be no need for anything bigger than a Destroyer, they have all the fleet roles covered, are just OP enough to negate the value of just about every subcap class AND the blobs can use them just as effectively as the small gang ganking solo players. As the meta for pvp has become, many vs one, how could these new ships be bad..
All those saved server resources; How good is it for those Devs who specialize in "pretty but not functional", all those extra servers resources to cram full of pretty crap.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
Why can't CCP see the obvious - Large dominating groups are bad for Eve.
|
Ares Desideratus
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
305
|
Posted - 2015.11.30 01:29:25 -
[574] - Quote
I guess I'll be the one to say it.
Stork is an awesome name. |
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
617
|
Posted - 2015.11.30 06:51:29 -
[575] - Quote
I don't have any objection to the Command Destroyers - a smaller ship which can fit links is probably a good thing.
However, I suspect that the MJFG is going to end up causing a long series of problems - technical, as well as exploits. I vaguely recall an old argument as to why Tractor Beams were never allowed to be used on player and NPC ships, nor on things you did not own. Seems to me that the MJFG is likely to bump up against similar problems to those which were brought up by devs in those old arguments.
I also think there are going to be some strange interactions in the code, when trying to resolve what happens when a MJFG is used when other actions are already in play during the same server tick.
All of this potential trouble for a purely gimmickly feature, which mostly seems to be designed to generate laughs....
And, sure, add them to high-sec, too. They can probably be used to delay Concord by chain-jumping the gankers & prey around, until the prey can be killed. We needed something new to replace hyperdunking, anyways..... |
Orwyyn Darsha
The Lone Wolf of EVE
20
|
Posted - 2015.11.30 08:12:17 -
[576] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Here is a feedback thread for some awesome new ships, Command Destroyers! So here's the basics. We are adding a new line of Tech II destroyers based on the Algos, Dragoon, Corax and Talwar along with a new type of module called the Micro Jump Field Generator, which the new Destroyers will have exclusive access to. I'm going to go through some basic questions here at the top and then give you all the details after. First, why Command Destroyers? We have always wanted to do a line of smaller ships that could provide gang support, but we expected to wait until after a rework of the ganglink mechanics, but here we saw a perfect opportunity to bring you this awesome new module and combining the role with gang support seems ideal. We still want to rework links and think these will slot in perfectly to that rework when it happens, but in the mean time you guys get a few awesome new tools. Second, how exactly does the Micro Jump Field Generator work? This module is exactly like a Micro Jump Drive except that when it fires, it pulls any ships nearby along with it for the jump. There's a lot of specifics to consider here but the big restrictions you need to know are that you cannot use this module in high sec, you can not pull invulnerable targets (ships that have just undocked or just jumped through a gate and are still cloaked), you can not move capitals, and you can not jump into starbase shields. You CAN however do a lot of really crazy thing such as pull bombs that are midair, pull dictor bubbles or chain multiple jumps in a row using several Command Destroyers. As for numbers, we have a base spool up time of 9 seconds, a reactivation delay of 160 seconds, a pull radius of 6km from the ship and a jump distance of 100km. The module requires 5 PG and 31 CPU to fit and requires the same skill as normal MJDs to use. Now, for the ships themselves. We are aiming to have a set of destroyers that are both faster and more resilient than either their Tech I counterparts or Interdictors, but sacrifice offense. This should make the support role, whether with MJFG or links, easier to fill while leaving them vulnerable to abuse in combat. Their weapon systems will be missile or drone based, like their base hulls. And for their attributes I'm using a google doc this time for better readability: ATTRIBUTESAs always, we look forward to your feedback. With these ships I'm especially interested in any opinions or insights on the powergrid and CPU numbers, as the ships will probably get used a few different ways and I'm not positive we've accounted for all of them. If you have any questions or need clarifications please ask, and don't be surprised if there's a typo here and there that needs fixing :) Thanks !
@CCP Rise
Congrats. I feel this a very interesting mechanic, possibly one of the most interesting new mechanics to be have happened the past few years right up there with the work @CCP Fozzie has done for EVE.
While I think it is a very interesting idea, I think that perhaps we have not seriously accounted for the amount of abuse this mechanic will generate. I am fairly sure that if this change happens now as planned that we will see not 1 or 2 of these CD in low/null fleets, we will literally see dozens of them being used to punt low/null fleets. I think the amount of hate/ragequitting/forum abuse will be staggering. Support ships will also be generally speaking lacking in a way to defend themselves. This is going to be especially prominent since the CD are being introduced at the same time as falloff in logistics, I think its a bit much to, also most logistics ships will not be able to spare a slow for a scrambler.
CCP Rise, may I suggest one change? My idea is that when the module is activated, that the Command Destroyers sig radius grows by the value of all the ships within its 6km radius of the module multiplied by the growth in sig radius that is the penalty of using micro jump. Perhaps even have this signature radius penalty continue for an equal length of time after successful activation of the micro jump. Therefore be at the increased sig radius for 5 seconds after the end of the successful micro jump.
This will allow bigger ships some measure of defence. |
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
1340
|
Posted - 2015.11.30 08:38:29 -
[577] - Quote
I'm a bit on the same page as prom-ex way up on the topic of speed creep.
The Hecate as a prime example, it was a splendid conecept just because the beefy, tanky, ganky hull was accompanied by a very low ship speed. It was a balanced design, with the low speed posing serious issues to overcome on the piloting front. It was extremely rewarding to pull it off, hammering out 450+ dps with neutrons and null or even kiting with 150mms.
It justified all the benefits it had just due to the significant drawbacks, the lack of those on the likes of svipul/confessor ccatapulted those ships up in both usage and effectiveness - and from testing it on SiSi, those CDs are absolute beasts not only due to their tank, but also due to their mobility. The downside of *low dps* really isn't one, if your damage mitigation, application and sheer ongrid mobility are cranked up like this.
Or, please turn them into hecates of sorts. |
Mr Mieyli
Hedion University Amarr Empire
115
|
Posted - 2015.11.30 09:57:36 -
[578] - Quote
I honestly don't understand the thought process behind these new MJFGs. It seems to me that there has never been a "why" for these modules; what problem do they solve? I mean what kind of balance is there in being able to daisy chain these things? I can now move any arbitrary distance I want in any arbitrary direction as long as I have enough of these ships, and we have seen time and again that eve players are good at massing together ships.
Sounds like everybody at CCP has got caught up in a weird internal language where "emergent gameplay" is an excuse to design something that you don't even know what it's for. Seriously the first stage of a design is deciding what the new thing is for. I get that you want to give us tools but they need to still fill a purpose and they still need to be balanced. After 10+ years in existence it's getting hard to add new roles to eve, focus on balance first and then if we still need new ships we can add them.
A case for more AoE in EvE
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2481
|
Posted - 2015.11.30 10:02:27 -
[579] - Quote
They solve anchoring. Remember that CCP wanted to remove keep at range/orbit. Realistically that isn't terribly viable given how much depends on it (bridging, for example) and how clunky manual control really is vs how it would need to be if we had no other way to fly.
So they have other ways to break the conga-chain with one guy flying for 50 and these are one of them.
It is also another tool in the box to fight/escape from kiting fleets as it can be used defensively to ping your fleet away form long points as well as offensively.
They just need to let us use them in high sec and it'll be perfecto |
Tub Chil
SQUIDS.
80
|
Posted - 2015.11.30 10:19:55 -
[580] - Quote
So current SISI CD-s do 3 things at once:
1. Boost fleet 2. MJD friends / enemies 3. Being an awesome, (even OP) combat ship
Something is not right here.
a single ship should not be able to do everything.
I think it would be a good idea to boost fleet boosting capabilities. let them fit another link, or apply PG bonus to command processors as well.
This would be fine. but at the same time offensive capabilities should be nerfed.
on the small scale we already have following ships that are used for combat:
Normal Frigates Faction / Pirate frigates Ass frigs Interceptors Normal destroyers Interdictors T3 destroyers (that are way too powerful IMO, but that's a topic for another discussion)
I excluded ewar hulls here, but some of them are pretty good combat ships. Especially new faction disruptions frigs.
So do we really need yet another small combat ship?
My argument here is not that new combat ships are bad. It's that every time new ship class is introduced, balance goes to hell. We have ENOUGH small hulls to fill every combat role. There is no reason to add combat ships, just for the sake of adding ships.
TL;DR keep (and boost) special powers of CD-s, reduce DPS by a lot. |
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2848
|
Posted - 2015.11.30 11:23:54 -
[581] - Quote
what happens if two MJD activate at the same time? is it just a random split bewteen the two? or is there always and order of operations?
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions The-Company
924
|
Posted - 2015.11.30 13:30:56 -
[582] - Quote
Rowells wrote:what happens if two MJD activate at the same time? is it just a random split bewteen the two? or is there always and order of operations?
Two buddies of mine did try this out on SiSi and this daisy chaining works in order of activation. We did was we were aligning to a celestial and the one in front activated first, then I and then the other missed it but we were already 200km from where we started so it does work with timer ticks and in order of activation.
So if you need to jump someone 100 to n+100km you can do just that.
Eve Minions is recruiting. Learn from about pvp, learn about ships and how to fly them correctly. Small gang and solo action in high, low and nullsec and w-space alike.
We will teach you everything you need and want to know.
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions The-Company
924
|
Posted - 2015.11.30 13:37:46 -
[583] - Quote
Mr Mieyli wrote:I honestly don't understand the thought process behind these new MJFGs. It seems to me that there has never been a "why" for these modules; what problem do they solve? I mean what kind of balance is there in being able to daisy chain these things? I can now move any arbitrary distance I want in any arbitrary direction as long as I have enough of these ships, and we have seen time and again that eve players are good at massing together ships.
Sounds like everybody at CCP has got caught up in a weird internal language where "emergent gameplay" is an excuse to design something that you don't even know what it's for. Seriously the first stage of a design is deciding what the new thing is for. I get that you want to give us tools but they need to still fill a purpose and they still need to be balanced. After 10+ years in existence it's getting hard to add new roles to eve, focus on balance first and then if we still need new ships we can add them.
I see tons of use cases for them and most of my fellow peers know them too. Your lack of vision a use for them doesn't invalidate the uses for everyone. Just give it a few months and there will be many use cases even you may develop.
And all this becomes clear on Dec 8th.
Eve Minions is recruiting. Learn from about pvp, learn about ships and how to fly them correctly. Small gang and solo action in high, low and nullsec and w-space alike.
We will teach you everything you need and want to know.
|
h4kun4
Heeresversuchsanstalt The Bastion
58
|
Posted - 2015.11.30 15:27:08 -
[584] - Quote
What people who follow this thread told me is that the Destroyers will be quite hard to kill because they have a small sig (which should bloom when activating the jump field) and if one of these things burns inside the fleet solo its quite easy to fend off (some lachesis/Arazus with factionscrams) but if you are able to chain them and the people doing have proper skill, they can rip apart any slower fleet doctrine. I understand that it must be hard work to time the MJD gen properly so you dont come in too late/early and nothing happens. I will be honest, i didn't bother to read all the last 30 pages or so, so please excuse me if this suggestion already happened.
HIC Bubbles interrupt any MJDs, local or field generated.
A simple risk vs. reward equation: Option A = No HIC: You Risk that your fleet gets torn apart but you can MJD/warp off if the brown hits the fan.
Option B = HIC: You Risk that your fleet get hit by a painful bombrun or gets in a shortrange brawl it can't win but you will be rewarded with the security from hostile MJD fields.
Anyway, I look forward to the changes. No matter how its going to turn out, first look, then complain |
elitatwo
Eve Minions The-Company
925
|
Posted - 2015.11.30 15:41:50 -
[585] - Quote
h4kun4 wrote:.... HIC Bubbles interrupt any MJDs, local or field generated.
A simple risk vs. reward equation:...
What would the "reward" be?
There seems to be a misunderstanding of risk versus reward here. Risk being you undock. A proper reward for the risk of undocking is a faction, deadspace or officer module or isk payout.
A killmail is not a reward.
Eve Minions is recruiting. Learn from about pvp, learn about ships and how to fly them correctly. Small gang and solo action in high, low and nullsec and w-space alike.
We will teach you everything you need and want to know.
|
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
799
|
Posted - 2015.11.30 21:42:51 -
[586] - Quote
Where the **** is the Kil2 I used to know, and how much of that koolaid did they make him drink? Every small-ship change/addition that has been added SCREAMS of people who have no idea what they are dealing with.
https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2849
|
Posted - 2015.11.30 21:54:45 -
[587] - Quote
h4kun4 wrote:What people who follow this thread told me is that the Destroyers will be quite hard to kill because they have a small sig (which should bloom when activating the jump field) and if one of these things burns inside the fleet solo its quite easy to fend off (some lachesis/Arazus with factionscrams) but if you are able to chain them and the people doing have proper skill, they can rip apart any slower fleet doctrine. I understand that it must be hard work to time the MJD gen properly so you dont come in too late/early and nothing happens. I will be honest, i didn't bother to read all the last 30 pages or so, so please excuse me if this suggestion already happened.
HIC Bubbles interrupt any MJDs, local or field generated.
A simple risk vs. reward equation: Option A = No HIC: You Risk that your fleet gets torn apart but you can MJD/warp off if the brown hits the fan.
Option B = HIC: You Risk that your fleet get hit by a painful bombrun or gets in a shortrange brawl it can't win but you will be rewarded with the security from hostile MJD fields.
Anyway, I look forward to the changes. No matter how its going to turn out, first look, then complain MJDs are supposed to be a partial counter to bubbles, no need to make the counter-counter countered again. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2849
|
Posted - 2015.11.30 21:57:11 -
[588] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:Rowells wrote:what happens if two MJD activate at the same time? is it just a random split bewteen the two? or is there always and order of operations?
Two buddies of mine did try this out on SiSi and this daisy chaining works in order of activation. We did was we were aligning to a celestial and the one in front activated first, then I and then the other missed it but we were already 200km from where we started so it does work with timer ticks and in order of activation. So if you need to jump someone 100 to n+100km you can do just that. Clarification:
If a ship is located in two MJD fields (assuming the two command destroyers are not in each other's fields, which one would the ship take?
For instance, odd timing has led a hostile CD trying to MJD my ship into hostiles, and the other CD is trying to get me back to safety away from the hostiles, at the same time.
Is it server tick or actual time or voodoo magic? |
h4kun4
Heeresversuchsanstalt The Bastion
58
|
Posted - 2015.11.30 23:50:58 -
[589] - Quote
Only HIC bubbles would be blocking MJDs while not working like a scram in this idea, so you couls still mwd out on a gatecamp for example. DIC Bubbles, ESS bubble and Mobile anchorable Bubbles would not affect an MJD by any means.
Again, because it seems like there was a misunderstanding Risk = You kill your own fleet by bubbling them Reward = your fleets stays together so you might win Reason = Everone has the choice to be prepared to certain things...the one who chooses to bring a certain ship will get that chance, the one who decides against it has to deal with it if he gets podded, Its always been like that, preparation shopuld be rewarded, otherwise the game wouldn't be fun.
ofc that only works in nullsec and WH This would just be a way i imagined would help to not make fleet eagements a game of russian destroyer roulette, still there might be better ways, like capping the number of times you can stack mjd fields or sth else nobody had thought about yet...
Some philosophic words about risk and rewards: Risk vs. reward works for everything in eve, for every risk you take (every action that moves your ship closer to exploding) there should be a reward, let it be isk, a nice item drop, tears of the enemy, a nice chat wit the one you just shot how awesome that fight was, or simply the certain knowledge that you've just ruined someones day. Everything you think of as a reward, becomes a reward. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
1316
|
Posted - 2015.12.01 02:58:51 -
[590] - Quote
h4kun4 wrote:Only HIC bubbles would be blocking MJDs while not working like a scram in this idea, so you couls still mwd out on a gatecamp for example. DIC Bubbles, ESS bubble and Mobile anchorable Bubbles would not affect an MJD by any means.
Again, because it seems like there was a misunderstanding Risk = You kill your own fleet by bubbling them Reward = your fleets stays together so you might win Reason = Everone has the choice to be prepared to certain things...the one who chooses to bring a certain ship will get that chance, the one who decides against it has to deal with it if he gets podded, Its always been like that, preparation shopuld be rewarded, otherwise the game wouldn't be fun.
ofc that only works in nullsec and WH This would just be a way i imagined would help to not make fleet eagements a game of russian destroyer roulette, still there might be better ways, like capping the number of times you can stack mjd fields or sth else nobody had thought about yet...
Some philosophic words about risk and rewards: Risk vs. reward works for everything in eve, for every risk you take (every action that moves your ship closer to exploding) there should be a reward, let it be isk, a nice item drop, tears of the enemy, a nice chat wit the one you just shot how awesome that fight was, or simply the certain knowledge that you've just ruined someones day. Everything you think of as a reward, becomes a reward.
why not just use the hic to scram the destroyers or its own fleet members?
also have you tried using these things? its a pain just to jump one unwilling target let alone a good portion of your fleet
Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3? Corp Stasis
|
|
Calypso Warsmith
Strata Dynamics Power Absolute Inc.
26
|
Posted - 2015.12.01 04:47:53 -
[591] - Quote
* Command Destroyers - Do not show up on D-Scan.
This is needed. |
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
1343
|
Posted - 2015.12.01 13:26:19 -
[592] - Quote
Rowells wrote:For instance, odd timing has led a hostile CD trying to MJD my ship into hostiles, and the other CD is trying to get me back to safety away from the hostiles, at the same time.
Till now, the vectors effectively stack. Had it happen once with animations playing slightly out of sync, yet the movement was not what I intended. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
1972
|
Posted - 2015.12.01 13:49:26 -
[593] - Quote
Calypso Warsmith wrote:* Command Destroyers - Do not show up on D-Scan.
This is needed. Are you saying that Command Destroyers should not show up on D-scan? If that is what you are suggesting, why do you think that is necessary?
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
250
|
Posted - 2015.12.01 15:15:26 -
[594] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Calypso Warsmith wrote:* Command Destroyers - Do not show up on D-Scan.
This is needed. Are you saying that Command Destroyers should not show up on D-scan? If that is what you are suggesting, why do you think that is necessary?
cause links should be safe ;) |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2486
|
Posted - 2015.12.01 15:18:33 -
[595] - Quote
Lady Rift wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Calypso Warsmith wrote:* Command Destroyers - Do not show up on D-Scan.
This is needed. Are you saying that Command Destroyers should not show up on D-scan? If that is what you are suggesting, why do you think that is necessary? cause links should be safe ;)
There was some debate on the other thread if he meant they currently DO NOT.
To which my money is on he's not added them to his dscan overview settings. |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
250
|
Posted - 2015.12.01 15:23:20 -
[596] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Lady Rift wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Calypso Warsmith wrote:* Command Destroyers - Do not show up on D-Scan.
This is needed. Are you saying that Command Destroyers should not show up on D-scan? If that is what you are suggesting, why do you think that is necessary? cause links should be safe ;) There was some debate on the other thread if he meant they currently DO NOT. To which my money is on he's not added them to his dscan overview settings.
i see the wording now. should pay alittle more attention. Thought it was asking for them to not show on d-scan not that they where either bugged not to or he forgot to update his overview. |
James Shardanii
X-Y-Z
0
|
Posted - 2015.12.02 03:22:56 -
[597] - Quote
I see an easy counter to any command dessies trying to jump out parts of your fleet:
Space out your fleet or have a few anti-dessy groups made up of two cruisers or a frig and a cruiser. These groups should worry about nothing but enemy command dessies. Whenever one starts to make a move, the nearest group MWDs to its most likely target, tackles and destroys the dessy. If the firepower of the group is insufficient to destroy it in a timely manner, have the group web and target paint the dessy and reassign a BC/BS's guns for a few seconds. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2853
|
Posted - 2015.12.02 04:50:09 -
[598] - Quote
James Shardanii wrote:I see an easy counter to any command dessies trying to jump out parts of your fleet:
Space out your fleet or have a few anti-dessy groups made up of two cruisers or a frig and a cruiser. These groups should worry about nothing but enemy command dessies. Whenever one starts to make a move, the nearest group MWDs to its most likely target, tackles and destroys the dessy. If the firepower of the group is insufficient to destroy it in a timely manner, have the group web and target paint the dessy and reassign a BC/BS's guns for a few seconds. If any of those ships for a scram, they should be able to easily stop it where it stands. |
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
218
|
Posted - 2015.12.02 09:39:53 -
[599] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Calypso Warsmith wrote:* Command Destroyers - Do not show up on D-Scan.
This is needed. Are you saying that Command Destroyers should not show up on D-scan? If that is what you are suggesting, why do you think that is necessary?
i read his post as: i dont see command destroyers on D-scan. and after that he posts that it is necessary i think he means that it is necassary to see them on D-scan and i agree (to make it abundantly clear i agree that it needs to be visible on D-scan)
[u]Carpe noctem[/u]
|
Rek Seven
Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering
2118
|
Posted - 2015.12.02 11:04:31 -
[600] - Quote
More CPU for the Pontifex please.
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
1321
|
Posted - 2015.12.02 12:30:01 -
[601] - Quote
Rowells wrote:James Shardanii wrote:I see an easy counter to any command dessies trying to jump out parts of your fleet:
Space out your fleet or have a few anti-dessy groups made up of two cruisers or a frig and a cruiser. These groups should worry about nothing but enemy command dessies. Whenever one starts to make a move, the nearest group MWDs to its most likely target, tackles and destroys the dessy. If the firepower of the group is insufficient to destroy it in a timely manner, have the group web and target paint the dessy and reassign a BC/BS's guns for a few seconds. If any of those ships for a scram, they should be able to easily stop it where it stands.
Hell all you really need is a few newbros in scram frigs to keep his mjfg off and if you lack numbers a single hic can stop 3-5 on its own from nearly 40km
But any half decent pilot will be able to keep out of the range of a hostile mjfg
Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3? Corp Stasis
|
Maccian
Soul Takers
36
|
Posted - 2015.12.03 10:46:36 -
[602] - Quote
I scrolled through half a dozen threads, question may have been asked already but I couldn't find an answer;
Will the MJD AOE also affect ships that have an active/open cyno field? Or will ships with cynos lit be invulnerable to it?
Edit. Follow up question;
If the MJD AOE does affect a ship that has an active/open cyno, will the ship and only the ship be affected, I.E does the ship get jumped 100km and the cyno is left behind? Like when you bump a ship that has an active cyno the cyno stays in place and the ship moves?.
Looking forward to panicking at the site of these on grid, and also looking forward to causing trouble to opponents with them!
Mac |
Crystal Thunder
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2015.12.03 12:49:06 -
[603] - Quote
Airi Cho wrote:TBH ... it could even be a viable module during the tournament... if the MJD usage in the amarr championship is any indication. and it would give frigs and dessies even more of an important task.
No... you'd just MJFD half the enemy fleet out of the arena for insta-kills. Would not be valid for tournaments. |
Crystal Thunder
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.12.03 14:17:44 -
[604] - Quote
James Shardanii wrote:I see an easy counter to any command dessies trying to jump out parts of your fleet:
Space out your fleet or have a few anti-dessy groups made up of two cruisers or a frig and a cruiser. These groups should worry about nothing but enemy command dessies. Whenever one starts to make a move, the nearest group MWDs to its most likely target, tackles and destroys the dessy. If the firepower of the group is insufficient to destroy it in a timely manner, have the group web and target paint the dessy and reassign a BC/BS's guns for a few seconds.
You literally just spelled out the problem. There's almost no other ship in EVE whose singular presence demands potentially changing the entire focus or comp of your (based on your post) frig-through-BS-sized fleet.
A single HIC warping on top of your fleet can be disastrous, but it's not something you bring along an entire dedicated set of anti-hic ship groups for. Why? Because a 400m+ ISK sacrifice isn't worth it to lock down a fleet below a certain size and value, AND because a HIC in a fleet fight is usually a sacrifice play. This is a much smaller investment being a destroyer, but it's offering the same potential disruption.
tl;dr Risk is much lower -> Reward is the same -> Thus, unbalanced. |
Yadaryon Vondawn
Alius Itineris Virtus
73
|
Posted - 2015.12.03 15:46:37 -
[605] - Quote
Why does the micro jump drive not affect fighters and fighter bombers? |
Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
539
|
Posted - 2015.12.04 00:30:15 -
[606] - Quote
so why does the amarr destroyer have the lowest powergrid out of them all?
Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
|
Marisol Aldurad
EVE University Ivy League
2
|
Posted - 2015.12.04 17:24:58 -
[607] - Quote
Do semi-capital ships get moved? (Freighter, Orca, etc)
Was asked alongg w/a billion similar requests. Capitals do NOT get jumped per the updated OP. Period.
If a Ship is listed under the Capital Skills book -- look in required for, then this Module should/WILL not work.
|
MindSweeper
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
0
|
Posted - 2015.12.04 18:35:47 -
[608] - Quote
RIP any non mobile doctrine. This is a troll ship plain and simple. Probably one of the worst ideas CCP has had. What did our CSM duders think about these? |
RcTamiya
SUPREME MATHEMATICS A Band Apart.
31
|
Posted - 2015.12.04 18:44:26 -
[609] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Rowells wrote:James Shardanii wrote:I see an easy counter to any command dessies trying to jump out parts of your fleet:
Space out your fleet or have a few anti-dessy groups made up of two cruisers or a frig and a cruiser. These groups should worry about nothing but enemy command dessies. Whenever one starts to make a move, the nearest group MWDs to its most likely target, tackles and destroys the dessy. If the firepower of the group is insufficient to destroy it in a timely manner, have the group web and target paint the dessy and reassign a BC/BS's guns for a few seconds. If any of those ships for a scram, they should be able to easily stop it where it stands. Hell all you really need is a few newbros in scram frigs to keep his mjfg off and if you lack numbers a single hic can stop 3-5 on its own from nearly 40km But any half decent pilot will be able to keep out of the range of a hostile mjfg
Oh yes, wormholespace has plenty of newbros in frigs on standby while having a t3-brawl ... |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2856
|
Posted - 2015.12.04 23:26:48 -
[610] - Quote
RcTamiya wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Rowells wrote:James Shardanii wrote:I see an easy counter to any command dessies trying to jump out parts of your fleet:
Space out your fleet or have a few anti-dessy groups made up of two cruisers or a frig and a cruiser. These groups should worry about nothing but enemy command dessies. Whenever one starts to make a move, the nearest group MWDs to its most likely target, tackles and destroys the dessy. If the firepower of the group is insufficient to destroy it in a timely manner, have the group web and target paint the dessy and reassign a BC/BS's guns for a few seconds. If any of those ships for a scram, they should be able to easily stop it where it stands. Hell all you really need is a few newbros in scram frigs to keep his mjfg off and if you lack numbers a single hic can stop 3-5 on its own from nearly 40km But any half decent pilot will be able to keep out of the range of a hostile mjfg Oh yes, wormholespace has plenty of newbros in frigs on standby while having a t3-brawl ... Even better actually. Faster lock time and decent tracking means ripping through it quickly is definitely an option. And having logistics sit on the hole as a safeguard could be an issue (especially if you send one on both sides).
Which reminds me, does the MJDG have the same rules surrounding cloak activation as the MJD? |
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2856
|
Posted - 2015.12.04 23:28:57 -
[611] - Quote
Also, I keep hearing about 60k ehp fits for these, is that true? Someone can share the fit if it is please. |
Wanda Fayne
The Scope Gallente Federation
126
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 01:06:57 -
[612] - Quote
No way am I flying a ship called Dork... er, Stork... Spork? |
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
2957
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 09:43:38 -
[613] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Also, I keep hearing about 60k ehp fits for these, is that true? Someone can share the fit if it is please.
More like 18K with boss resists for the Pontifex.
I mean, Pontifex, Deacon and hecate walked into a brawl...
~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
|
Irya Boone
Never Surrender.
471
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 10:05:01 -
[614] - Quote
will this ships be allowed in small FW plexes?
CCP it's time to remove Off Grid Boost and Put Them on Killmail too, add Logi on killmails
.... Open that damn door !!
you shall all bow and pray BoB
|
Morrigan LeSante
Senex Legio The OSS
713
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 11:26:36 -
[615] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:Rowells wrote:Also, I keep hearing about 60k ehp fits for these, is that true? Someone can share the fit if it is please. More like 18K with boss resists for the Pontifex. I mean, Pontifex, Deacon and hecate walked into a brawl...
Can get 34.8k with a stork on a first pass, before links and implants. Siege links take it to 49k.
Not quite as impressive on the armor ones, 24k on a ponti at a first quick stab but that stork, 33k on a 90 sig? Ouch (MJGF bloom tbc) |
Mjolnir Spartanus
KARNAGE Templis CALSF
1
|
Posted - 2015.12.06 02:22:27 -
[616] - Quote
Why are we getting a new "Command Destroyers" skill when there is already a Command Ships skill in the game? Can't you just make the new destroyers use that skill since technically Destroyers = Ships? |
Dani Maulerant
Order of the Valkyrie LOADED-DICE
39
|
Posted - 2015.12.06 06:16:36 -
[617] - Quote
Mjolnir Spartanus wrote:Why are we getting a new "Command Destroyers" skill when there is already a Command Ships skill in the game? Can't you just make the new destroyers use that skill since technically Destroyers = Ships?
Assault Frigates-->Heavy Assault Cruisers Electronic Attack Frigates/COVOPS-->Recons (new) T2 Logistic Frigates-->Logistic Cruisers Interdictors-->Heavy Interdictor Cruisers
That's why.
|
Mjolnir Spartanus
KARNAGE Templis CALSF
1
|
Posted - 2015.12.06 06:22:15 -
[618] - Quote
Dani Maulerant wrote:Mjolnir Spartanus wrote:Why are we getting a new "Command Destroyers" skill when there is already a Command Ships skill in the game? Can't you just make the new destroyers use that skill since technically Destroyers = Ships? Assault Frigates-->Heavy Assault Cruisers Electronic Attack Frigates/COVOPS-->Recons (new) T2 Logistic Frigates-->Logistic Cruisers Interdictors-->Heavy Interdictor Cruisers That's why.
Then they should probably rename the Command Ships skill to something like Command Battlecruisers to keep with the naming convention. |
Rek Seven
Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering
2121
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 13:05:59 -
[619] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote: With these ships I'm especially interested in any opinions or insights on the powergrid and CPU numbers, as the ships will probably get used a few different ways and I'm not positive we've accounted for all of them.
If you have any questions or need clarifications please ask, and don't be surprised if there's a typo here and there that needs fixing :)
Thanks !
Why don't you give a PG and a CPU reduction role bonus?
Without a CPU reduction it is too hard to get a good, fully fit ship that utilises links, so you may as well stick to using a command ship and off-grid links (for as long as that's around).
If your mind, is it better that a ship can only fill one of the two roles it has been designed for?
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
LordInvisible
Nova Ardour Dixie Normus.
19
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 13:44:14 -
[620] - Quote
Hmm, I dont like this "feature" either:
- without a dedicated tackler, thats there only focused on catching !possible! Command destroyer, nobody is gonna lock it in 4 seconds (1second is wasted on server tick btw..)
- everything not already running MWD (apart from some frigs) cannot get out of 6km radius in 5 seconds. To accelerate to 1km/s you need 3-4 seconds on a speed fitted cruiser. Then you have to travel for another 3.5km in one second.
- ship is boring outside of this new module usage, total garbage. Doesnt add anything that other ships wouldnt do better and have some other role in fleet at the same time. Stupid bonuses add to this even more: who is gonna launch drones if his only point is to warp 100km away?
- Nerf to drone ships maybe? All the rattlers gonna loose shitton of drones suddenly (mainly sentry drones). Hello smartbombing, insta warping BSs..
- If anything, this kind of feature should be tied up to a battlecruiser or BS.
But CCP already did it, no point in pointing out stupid things they do while there is plenty of others that needs fixing. Its their game afterall.
One question tho: if you fit three WCS, does that negate scram? |
|
RcTamiya
SUPREME MATHEMATICS A Band Apart.
31
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 14:03:26 -
[621] - Quote
LordInvisible wrote:Hmm, I dont like this "feature" either:
- without a dedicated tackler, thats there only focused on catching !possible! Command destroyer, nobody is gonna lock it in 4 seconds (1second is wasted on server tick btw..)
- everything not already running MWD (apart from some frigs) cannot get out of 6km radius in 5 seconds. To accelerate to 1km/s you need 3-4 seconds on a speed fitted cruiser. Then you have to travel for another 3.5km in one second.
- ship is boring outside of this new module usage, total garbage. Doesnt add anything that other ships wouldnt do better and have some other role in fleet at the same time. Stupid bonuses add to this even more: who is gonna launch drones if his only point is to warp 100km away?
- Nerf to drone ships maybe? All the rattlers gonna loose shitton of drones suddenly (mainly sentry drones). Hello smartbombing, insta warping BSs..
- If anything, this kind of feature should be tied up to a battlecruiser or BS.
But CCP already did it, no point in pointing out stupid things they do while there is plenty of others that needs fixing. Its their game afterall.
One question tho: if you fit three WCS, does that negate scram?
To your Question -> No, you're allowed to warp, but your mwd stays blocked.
I hope CCP changes it to only drag fleetmembers, otherwise NOT balanced and yes I do LOVE to abuse it. |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
5582
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 23:55:48 -
[622] - Quote
I expect these are already banned from the next AT. |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
1214
|
Posted - 2015.12.08 07:10:55 -
[623] - Quote
So I was messing about with the Pontifex on Singularity earlier. Sicced the drones on something and MJFGed myself away. Drones kept cheerfully murdering it until it died.
Is that supposed to happen? Not sure it's even unique to the MJFG, just never really bothered to play with MJDs before.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2857
|
Posted - 2015.12.08 07:16:26 -
[624] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:So I was messing about with the Pontifex on Singularity earlier. Sicced the drones on something and MJFGed myself away. Drones kept cheerfully murdering it until it died.
Is that supposed to happen? Not sure it's even unique to the MJFG, just never really bothered to play with MJDs before. Is it intended? who knows. But it does properly follow the existing mechanics. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2857
|
Posted - 2015.12.08 07:19:48 -
[625] - Quote
Tau Cabalander wrote:I expect these are already banned from the next AT. "It seems the red Team has been jumped outside of the field of play by quite a distance. It looks like they wont have time to make it back before they are disqualified and as warping is illegal well call that a game ladies and gentlemen." |
Grease PaYN
Empire Assault Corp Dead Terrorists
25
|
Posted - 2015.12.08 18:16:55 -
[626] - Quote
It seems the magus and pontifex have a drone hitpoint bonus, this is not stated in the original post of this thread. Intentional? |
suicide
The Exit Plan Test Alliance Please Ignore
29
|
Posted - 2015.12.08 20:34:26 -
[627] - Quote
Fully loaded these command destroyers have 1m20s of cap which almost mandates having an injector if you don't want to end up stranded in space.
|
Trinkets friend
Empty Vessels
2972
|
Posted - 2015.12.09 00:15:36 -
[628] - Quote
Can the Bifrost get 1 more powergrid so I don't need a 1% implant for this fit? TIA!
[Bifrost, Ala Kachuu]
Micro Auxiliary Power Core II Micro Auxiliary Power Core II Damage Control II
Micro Jump Field Generator 10MN Y-S8 Compact Afterburner 5MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive Medium F-S9 Regolith Compact Shield Extender Warp Scrambler II
Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket [Empty High slot]
Small Core Defense Field Extender II Small Core Defense Field Extender II
~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
|
Kaska Iskalar
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2015.12.10 10:02:31 -
[629] - Quote
Never mind. I'm stupid and can't read. |
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
1061
|
Posted - 2015.12.10 20:44:12 -
[630] - Quote
Tau Cabalander wrote:I expect these are already banned from the next AT.
Depends on the collusion.
Not today spaghetti.
|
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
972
|
Posted - 2015.12.10 22:24:17 -
[631] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:So I was messing about with the Pontifex on Singularity earlier. Sicced the drones on something and MJFGed myself away. Drones kept cheerfully murdering it until it died.
Is that supposed to happen? Not sure it's even unique to the MJFG, just never really bothered to play with MJDs before.
That is how drones work. Once you sic them on the target you are within range of; they will attack that target until dead, until killed, or until you call them back. Even if they go out of your control range. |
rsantos
TEC-NOLOGY Sorry We're In Your Space Eh
48
|
Posted - 2015.12.11 16:42:54 -
[632] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:Can the Bifrost get 1 more powergrid so I don't need a 1% implant for this fit? TIA!
[Bifrost, Ala Kachuu]
Micro Auxiliary Power Core II Micro Auxiliary Power Core II Damage Control II
Micro Jump Field Generator 10MN Y-S8 Compact Afterburner 5MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive Medium F-S9 Regolith Compact Shield Extender Warp Scrambler II
Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket [Empty High slot]
Small Core Defense Field Extender II Small Core Defense Field Extender II
How long before a nerf bat thread is started?!
|
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
720
|
Posted - 2015.12.11 17:14:32 -
[633] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:Can the Bifrost get 1 more powergrid so I don't need a 1% implant for this fit? TIA!
[Bifrost, Ala Kachuu]
Micro Auxiliary Power Core II Micro Auxiliary Power Core II Damage Control II
Micro Jump Field Generator 10MN Y-S8 Compact Afterburner 5MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive Medium F-S9 Regolith Compact Shield Extender Warp Scrambler II
Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket [Empty High slot]
Small Core Defense Field Extender II Small Core Defense Field Extender II
Do you not have the CPU for a faction MAPC? The navy one, not thukker. Its like 5-8m last i checked. If you dont have the CPU, meta your dcu and you should be good.
Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
2178
|
Posted - 2015.12.11 18:39:39 -
[634] - Quote
Stitch Kaneland wrote:Trinkets friend wrote:Can the Bifrost get 1 more powergrid so I don't need a 1% implant for this fit? TIA!
[Bifrost, Ala Kachuu]
Micro Auxiliary Power Core II Micro Auxiliary Power Core II Damage Control II
Micro Jump Field Generator 10MN Y-S8 Compact Afterburner 5MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive Medium F-S9 Regolith Compact Shield Extender Warp Scrambler II
Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket [Empty High slot]
Small Core Defense Field Extender II Small Core Defense Field Extender II Do you not have the CPU for a faction MAPC? The navy one, not thukker. Its like 5-8m last i checked. If you dont have the CPU, meta your dcu and you should be good.
Better still, meta the scram.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
720
|
Posted - 2015.12.11 19:05:26 -
[635] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Stitch Kaneland wrote:Trinkets friend wrote:Can the Bifrost get 1 more powergrid so I don't need a 1% implant for this fit? TIA!
[Bifrost, Ala Kachuu]
Micro Auxiliary Power Core II Micro Auxiliary Power Core II Damage Control II
Micro Jump Field Generator 10MN Y-S8 Compact Afterburner 5MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive Medium F-S9 Regolith Compact Shield Extender Warp Scrambler II
Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket [Empty High slot]
Small Core Defense Field Extender II Small Core Defense Field Extender II Do you not have the CPU for a faction MAPC? The navy one, not thukker. Its like 5-8m last i checked. If you dont have the CPU, meta your dcu and you should be good. Better still, meta the scram.
Ah true. That is a better suggestion. T2 scram OH poorly. Meta is same range, better OH and easier to fit (just more expensive).
Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
2178
|
Posted - 2015.12.12 05:13:35 -
[636] - Quote
That silly fit actually works just fine and has plenty of CPU:
Quote:[Bifrost, Bifrost copy 1] Navy Micro Auxiliary Power Core Micro Auxiliary Power Core II Damage Control II
10MN Y-S8 Compact Afterburner Medium F-S9 Regolith Compact Shield Extender 5MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I Micro Jump Field Generator
Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Rocket [empty high slot]
Small Core Defense Field Extender II Small Core Defense Field Extender II
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
PostWithYourMain
Main Corporation
2
|
Posted - 2015.12.12 18:50:35 -
[637] - Quote
These things are complete Eve aids. |
Soden Rah
Aliastra Gallente Federation
32
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 01:35:59 -
[638] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Mr Grape Drink wrote:Does a scram shut it off like a regular MJD? Yes, scram will shut off an active MJFG and will also keep any targets in range of one that fires from taking the jump.
Ok... So I have a question.
Ship A and Ship B are both in the AOE for the MJFG from ship C.
Ship B engages a Scram on Ship A.
Ship C activates MJFG.
Now according to you ship A [which is scrammed] stays where it is... What happens to ship B? |
Terminal Insanity
Pwn 'N Play SpaceMonkey's Alliance
845
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 14:51:20 -
[639] - Quote
these are massively fun
best thing you guys have added to eve since warp bubbles this ***** awesome
The people complaining are just angry they didnt know about these before they were added, and lost their **** while playing station games.
This solves station games, and adds the first new pvp gameplay mechanic in years. And it GREATLY benefits small gangs, which is exactly what null/low needs more of
"War declarations are never officially considered griefing and are not a bannable offense, and it has been repeatedly stated by the developers that the possibility for non-consensual PvP is an intended feature." - CCP
|
Arla Sarain
726
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 15:57:54 -
[640] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:Can the Bifrost get 1 more powergrid so I don't need a 1% implant for this fit? TIA!
[Bifrost, Ala Kachuu]
Micro Auxiliary Power Core II Micro Auxiliary Power Core II Damage Control II
Micro Jump Field Generator 10MN Y-S8 Compact Afterburner 5MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive Medium F-S9 Regolith Compact Shield Extender Warp Scrambler II
Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Nova Rage Rocket [Empty High slot]
Small Core Defense Field Extender II Small Core Defense Field Extender II Use a navy power core. They're cheap. |
|
Igor Zilwicki
Night Raven Task Force United Interests
0
|
Posted - 2015.12.13 16:18:31 -
[641] - Quote
Is anyone getting the error "External factors are preventing your Large Micro Jump Drive from responding to this command"? I find this odd as I am using a "Micro Jump Field Generator". |
Mr Knife
Earl Castle
0
|
Posted - 2015.12.14 20:30:27 -
[642] - Quote
Hi!
Sorry, did not find it here.
Does using of MJFG activate any timer for user and/or for affected pilots?
Does using of MJFG give possibility to take off HICs with there opened bubles?
Does using of MJFG affects cyno-ships and other ships in states that forbiding movement?
Thank you. |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
972
|
Posted - 2015.12.14 20:35:50 -
[643] - Quote
Igor Zilwicki wrote:Is anyone getting the error "External factors are preventing your Large Micro Jump Drive from responding to this command"? I find this odd as I am using a "Micro Jump Field Generator".
Can't be used in hisec. |
Igor Zilwicki
Night Raven Task Force United Interests
0
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 00:16:58 -
[644] - Quote
Thank you! |
Miles Aweigh
European Crew. Northern Army
0
|
Posted - 2015.12.16 10:10:40 -
[645] - Quote
Interesting little ships these Command Destroyers, some fun to be had - even if they do challenge competence at maneuver with a little random trololol.
Anyway, as ever the cunning eve player has found ways to maximise the effect with consequences that may have been unforeseen, so I would like to suggest one slight change in their operation.
Consider fleet A, a collection of DPS and Tackle sitting tight on 2 command destroyers. The fleet is 100km from its targets. Destroyer one aligns to the target and activates its MJFG. A second or two later the second destroyer activates its MJFG. The fleet is jumped onto its target by the first micro-jump device. A second after it lands the device on the second command destroyer activates and jumps the entire fleet and target away.
This is a very cunning plan, and kudos to those who thought it up, however there is little option for the defenders to counter with only a second to react.
(TLDR) my suggestion - entering warp/jump by any means resets the activation time for a MJFG. If we are going to have these little spoilers, lets have at least a fighting chance to defend against them. |
TinkerHell
Nocturnal Romance Cynosural Field Theory.
214
|
Posted - 2015.12.16 11:38:22 -
[646] - Quote
Why oh why does a command Destroyer MJD Bastioned Marauders away? Seems a bit silly...
(These command destroyers are still a horrible idea) |
Ncc 1709
Fusion Enterprises Ltd Phoenix Company Alliance
229
|
Posted - 2015.12.17 13:26:22 -
[647] - Quote
so, they can move marauders and hictors which cannot warp them selfs.... hell, bastion marauders are immune to e-war...
what went wrong with the coding? |
Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
551
|
Posted - 2015.12.17 13:47:10 -
[648] - Quote
this change has been needed a long time coming. finally messing up station gaming.
Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
|
RcTamiya
SUPREME MATHEMATICS A Band Apart.
54
|
Posted - 2015.12.21 09:17:41 -
[649] - Quote
Flyinghotpocket wrote:this change has been needed a long time coming. finally messing up station gaming.
during your invu.-timer, you can't get dragged away from station with a CD, as result, undocking/dockinggames are still a thing ... sadly. |
Owen Levanth
Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration
435
|
Posted - 2015.12.23 15:01:32 -
[650] - Quote
I've never seen it brought up, but can a command destroyer take cloaked ships with it?
Would be funny if someone jumped off from, let's say a gate, and took a couple cloaked stalkers with him instead of leaving them behind. |
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2878
|
Posted - 2015.12.24 04:24:38 -
[651] - Quote
Owen Levanth wrote:I've never seen it brought up, but can a command destroyer take cloaked ships with it? Would be funny if someone jumped off from, let's say a gate, and took a couple cloaked stalkers with him instead of leaving them behind. Unless it's from a gate cloak (invulnerable) then yes it can (at least that's what they said). |
Nyalnara
The Unchained Club
196
|
Posted - 2015.12.25 11:03:07 -
[652] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Owen Levanth wrote:I've never seen it brought up, but can a command destroyer take cloaked ships with it? Would be funny if someone jumped off from, let's say a gate, and took a couple cloaked stalkers with him instead of leaving them behind. Unless it's from a gate cloak (invulnerable) then yes it can (at least that's what they said).
I think i remember testing it, and yes, cloacked ships follow.
French half-noob.
CEO of [.TUC.] The Unchained Club
Founder of [DEUPP] Dark Evil Undead Ponies Productions
In case of ponies, keep calm and start running.
|
Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
551
|
Posted - 2015.12.28 01:07:14 -
[653] - Quote
RcTamiya wrote:Flyinghotpocket wrote:this change has been needed a long time coming. finally messing up station gaming. during your invu.-timer, you can't get dragged away from station with a CD, as result, undocking/dockinggames are still a thing ... sadly. right.... soooo when your not invuln. you get jumped 100km away. so not still a thing.
Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2479
|
Posted - 2015.12.28 16:07:45 -
[654] - Quote
Flyinghotpocket wrote:RcTamiya wrote:Flyinghotpocket wrote:this change has been needed a long time coming. finally messing up station gaming. during your invu.-timer, you can't get dragged away from station with a CD, as result, undocking/dockinggames are still a thing ... sadly. right.... soooo when your not invuln. you get jumped 100km away. so not still a thing.
Except you can just dock when you lose your invuln and the undock back and keep on station gaming. It's more of a pain in the ass but still stupid. |
Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
551
|
Posted - 2015.12.29 04:51:27 -
[655] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Flyinghotpocket wrote:RcTamiya wrote:Flyinghotpocket wrote:this change has been needed a long time coming. finally messing up station gaming. during your invu.-timer, you can't get dragged away from station with a CD, as result, undocking/dockinggames are still a thing ... sadly. right.... soooo when your not invuln. you get jumped 100km away. so not still a thing. Except you can just dock when you lose your invuln and the undock back and keep on station gaming. It's more of a pain in the ass but still stupid. um no. if you just dock up when you loose invuln. then your not station gaming. you might as well not even be at that station. the whole reason that you clearly arnt getting about it upsetting station games is you can jump the dps away. ffs.
Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
|
d0cTeR9
Oceanic Death Squad SpaceMonkey's Alliance
304
|
Posted - 2015.12.30 20:32:21 -
[656] - Quote
Is it normal that a bastion marauder can get MJD away?...
Been around since the beginning.
|
Droidster
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
121
|
Posted - 2016.01.07 19:44:01 -
[657] - Quote
I think the Micro Jump Field Generator concept is kind of gimmicky.
From a design standpoint I suggest focusing on making standard play more solid and balanced.
Adding new, gimmicky features detracts from the game. Sure, there will be a bunch of gung-ho players who always hype up gimmicky stuff ("Oh yeah, that sounds really cool blah blah"). There is tendency to pay too much attention to "cheerleaders" and ignore the silent majority.
Another issue with weird gimmicky features is that often introduce unintended effects and create exploits that generate a lot of ill will and annoyance, not to mention developer effort to clean up the mess.
Rather than spend dev time trying to figure out how to fix complex gimmicky exploits, I recommend focusing on "normal play".
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
972
|
Posted - 2016.01.07 21:22:12 -
[658] - Quote
Ncc 1709 wrote:so, they can move marauders and hictors which cannot warp them selfs.... hell, bastion marauders are immune to e-war...
what went wrong with the coding?
So if it does it to Bastioned Marauders, does it do it to cynos? |
Thor Kerrigan
The High and Mighty Carebear Abortion Clinic
655
|
Posted - 2016.01.14 01:51:46 -
[659] - Quote
Estella Osoka wrote:Ncc 1709 wrote:so, they can move marauders and hictors which cannot warp them selfs.... hell, bastion marauders are immune to e-war...
what went wrong with the coding? So if it does it to Bastioned Marauders, does it do it to cynos?
Last we tested, no.
|
Ubiquitous Newt
The F-Bombers
6
|
Posted - 2016.01.15 04:31:21 -
[660] - Quote
CCP should have given the "blink" ability to battleships, for any number of reasons. |
|
Alexander Otium
Caldari State Regulars
1
|
Posted - 2016.01.15 09:01:18 -
[661] - Quote
Ubiquitous Newt wrote:CCP should have given the "blink" ability to battleships, for any number of reasons.
Micro Jump drive.
Quote:I think the Micro Jump Field Generator concept is kind of gimmicky.
You can use them to counter kitey fleets or assist brawling ships by jumping them right into the enemy instead of them needing to close the gap themselves. You can pull people's drones away, you can deal with people hugging a station more easily, you can pull logi out of harm's way or throw enemy logi into harm's way. To me, it's anything but a simple gimmick, it has a lot of potential uses and options for counterplay. |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
920
|
Posted - 2016.01.20 01:03:42 -
[662] - Quote
I just fought a Stork on TQ in a cruiser explicitly designed to bait and kill small ships and lost because-- as I found out post-fight when I did a killboard search on the dude I fought-- you made a destroyer that does 250DPS while packing 22k EHP and a hundred-dps passive tank all while making zero fitting compromises (still fits its gimmick module, still has a utility high and the CPU to fit a cloak).
Thanks for putting yet another group of stupidly powerful, tiny ships into this game so its even easier for people to pad their killboard stats. On a scale of 1 to 10, how much do you guys actually hate fun? |
Natheniel
Mostly Sober Dead Terrorists
67
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 00:09:04 -
[663] - Quote
Leave the micro jump field generator alone in lowsec!
It's really added a great dynamic to fleet fights and its ended the station hugging shitlords! It has helped with the link problems too!
Ccplease don't take it away from us.
"Life is as a storm, one must be prepared for the hardship and scorn. But with in this is a light, one for which we must fight. For hope is our weapon and our dreams are our shield. When fully armed we can not be felled from the field."
|
ShadowOzera1
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
0
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 00:29:50 -
[664] - Quote
Please do not remove micro jump field generators from lowsec. People are actually having fun with this mechanic and shoving these ships into Null/WH's only doesn't anything to the problems that they may have. If the concern is with double jumping with mjfg's, then make a cooldown timer for being able to be jumped. Personally I find double jumping to be very fun since it takes a bit of practice to make it actually work. When it doesn't, then hilarity happens.
Please don't take our fun away. It's a wonderful dynamic adding mechanic. |
Xelfin Darlander
Rapid Withdrawal
0
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 00:41:33 -
[665] - Quote
I just saw on Singularity that the Micro Jump Field Generator cannot be activate in lowsec now. If it makes it to TQ, that's terrible because it's a really fun mechanic. Yes, been a victim of it, still fun.
I hope we can still use the MJFG in lowsec, it's one of the few ways to deal with link alts, and it's an incredibly fun mechanic.
|
Jakkan Wrath
Black Shark Cult
0
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 01:33:57 -
[666] - Quote
Please Do NOT remove MJFG from Lowsec, it was a great addition to the game and has made so many different tactics available. it has made people think about playing in a different way which i think is good for eve to keep evolving and not stagnate. |
Rina Kondur
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
129
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 02:17:16 -
[667] - Quote
+1 to NOT removing the MJD Generator from lowsec. These are amazing in a place that lacks to tools to hold things down like bubbles and such. This is a crazy good tool for combating kiting fleets and fast pilots with links and implants. CCPls. |
James Msyu
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
0
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 02:17:36 -
[668] - Quote
Don't remove the MJFG from lowsec. It's made station games fun again. |
Tibo Paralian
Dirt 'n' Glitter Local Is Primary
60
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 02:18:59 -
[669] - Quote
I approve of changes, no more station games! |
Techno36
Dirt 'n' Glitter Local Is Primary
23
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 02:33:54 -
[670] - Quote
CCPls don't remove MJFG from lowsec |
|
Arno Rafe
Dirt 'n' Glitter Local Is Primary
0
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 02:33:55 -
[671] - Quote
The amount of meta this brings to lowsec brawls is amazballs, CCPls dont remove this wonderful toy.
DnG Slack leaks
"THERE'S NO CONTENT IN LOWSEC THEY AREN'T PART OF THE PLAYERBASE" -- Chadrick Frakes
"WHY DO PEOPLE HATER LOWSEC" -- Wocks Zhar
"CCP komred get over yourself kommand dessies are good" - Jebi Vjetar 2016
"I personally love the mjfg tactics they're awesomme" -- aureus fenix
|
Sumo Sabezan
SniggWaffe WAFFLES.
1
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 02:37:16 -
[672] - Quote
Do not remove MJD dessies from low sec. |
Impeh Man
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
1
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 02:51:24 -
[673] - Quote
Do not ban the usage of Micro Jump Field Generators in Low-Sec - They're one of the few bits of new content that actually makes Low-Sec more interesting. |
General Twitch
Alwar Fleet Alwar Alliance
2
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 02:55:51 -
[674] - Quote
Please don't remove the MJFG from low sec. It's an entertaining mechanic and a useful tool for outnumbered fleets. |
Juan Mileghere
Incident Command Local Is Primary
35
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 03:03:37 -
[675] - Quote
Oh no, we've made things more balanced, we can't have that! LETS REBUFF THE ISHTAR WHILE WE'RE AT IT
Blobbing Explained
|
Queen Oramara
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 03:09:13 -
[676] - Quote
If this is even considered I will be taking my 10 toons selling them and quitting. EVE is one of the last decent player run games and I'm over children not getting there way so they tell daddy over and over until he beats his wife.
For lack of a better word pu44ies wine about getting killed and wine about ships being OP because the skill of the ones dying is that of a downsy child when it comes to pvp that isn't bloby.
So many great ships have fallen prey to the nerf gun because 'elite pvpers' aka scrubs, are to bad to learn how to pvp and instead rely on the gangs to win. Real PVP is that of a solo warrior. Asking CCP to help you cause you ******* suck is your own problem. Get better scrubs and stop crying over pixels.
Everyone is getting real sick of the ones who just can't mold and conform with the idea that maybe you're not as good as your think. Go sit in your hulk in jita and cry in local. No one wants your here.
Don't like what I have to say? Well you read the entire bit so stop bitching.
Bring back my f***** Gila |
wappo choula
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 03:26:16 -
[677] - Quote
Please CCP Don't Take my Fun away from me! This has created so much content and so many new interesting tactics. It would be a crime to see it gone. |
Moarkus Drayson
Ganja Labs Exodus.
3
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 03:30:52 -
[678] - Quote
The next strain of cannabis hybrid I grow will be called "don't ban MJFGs in lowsec". |
shelly's Jihad
Sudden Death. Exodus.
9
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 03:35:58 -
[679] - Quote
I don't even fly the CMD Dessy but man the content that they have driven in lowsec has really brought life to the party. There are so many neat tactics for both small and large fleets using these great new ships. You guys finally brought a new idea to the game that i really enjoy and now you want to make it so only one part of the pvp community can use them... how lame is that please don't try and fix something that isn't broken. Listen to your player base we are all screaming to keep this extraordinary content driver. |
Sebastian Sinulf
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
1
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 03:38:50 -
[680] - Quote
Please don't remove the MJFG from low sec |
|
Xelfin Darlander
Rapid Withdrawal
5
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 03:43:15 -
[681] - Quote
Tibo Paralian wrote:I approve of changes, no more station games!
I don't think that gets rid of station games at all. It just goes back to station games being idiotic. |
Ulthanon Kaidos
BOVRIL bOREers Mining CO-OP RAZOR Alliance
21
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 03:48:19 -
[682] - Quote
CCP, please don't take this away from lowsec.
If you need to nerf it, remove or nerf the "double jump" ability as it currently exists, but don't remove the whole ability from lowsec. |
Genghis Tron
The Art of Warp Heroes and Villains
45
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 03:50:58 -
[683] - Quote
CCP, please don't remove this from Low-Sec, thank you.
BOOM SHAKALAKA
|
Marshmallow
The Art of Warp Heroes and Villains
1
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 03:52:51 -
[684] - Quote
CCP, please don't remove this from Low-Sec, thank you. |
Altaen
calamitous-intent Feign Disorder
140
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 03:59:09 -
[685] - Quote
Removing MJFG from low-sec would be extremely sad.
I heard that there were some issues with them in FW complexes, I haven't used them or encountered them there myself, so I can't say if it's a problem, but removing them from all of low-sec is not the solution. |
Wubbles
The Art of Warp Heroes and Villains
0
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 03:59:46 -
[686] - Quote
CCP, please don't remove this from Low-Sec, thank you. |
goober buds
Militaris Industries Northern Coalition.
0
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 04:00:18 -
[687] - Quote
Ccp please don't remove the mjfg from low sec it adds so much more depth |
Hadley
The Art of Warp Heroes and Villains
0
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 04:03:39 -
[688] - Quote
CCP, please don't remove this from Low-Sec, thank you. |
Marth Young
Eternal Beings I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
5
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 04:04:13 -
[689] - Quote
The MJD is a amazing aspect to pvp. Please do not remove it from low sec. |
Darius Caliente
The Pinecone Squad Rote Kapelle
117
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 04:06:47 -
[690] - Quote
Removing MJFG from low-sec is an awful. This simply should not happen.
|
|
Cousteau
The Art of Warp Heroes and Villains
1
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 04:09:09 -
[691] - Quote
CCP, please don't remove this from Low-Sec, thank you. |
BAJRAN BALI
Black Fox Marauders
60
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 04:09:23 -
[692] - Quote
I don't see why your removing it from low sec? MJD desi are great on some level, but without a counter are broken. Maybe remove chaining them or make them where you only jump fleet members.
YouTube: kds119
Twitter: @realkds119
Blog: derptw.blogspot.com
|
Electronica
Learn Jita Heroes and Villains
0
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 04:10:15 -
[693] - Quote
CCP, please don't remove this from Low-Sec, thank you. |
Nathan Myakis
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
3
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 04:10:29 -
[694] - Quote
Please do not remove the MJFD from lowsec. If need be, reduce the jump distance OR disallow double jumps, but please keep them in lowsec. |
Cara Forelli
Meticulously Indifferent
1475
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 04:16:33 -
[695] - Quote
What in the world reason would there be for removing MJFG from lowsec? How is their use there any different from in nullsec? If that change goes ahead, I won't take my command destroyer to nullsec, I'll stop flying it entirely. And I will be deeply discontented in a way that has never before been managed by CCP.
Adventures
New player with questions? Join my public channel in game: House Forelli
Titan's Lament
|
Xian Ailux-Gao
Run and Gun Mercenary Corps FETID
1
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 04:19:49 -
[696] - Quote
I can't understand why this feature should be removed from lowsec? There are ways to counter it. You scrubs who chooses to die in lowsec, instead of whining and crying to CCP, use your brains and figure it out.
Keep this feature in lowsec and allow the fun to continue. Otherwise this just another way of saying "F*ck you very much for playing" to all of us who actually bought theese ships.
|
Orob Ninebands
Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance
57
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 04:34:17 -
[697] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:I just fought a Stork on TQ in a cruiser explicitly designed to bait and kill small ships and lost because-- as I found out post-fight when I did a killboard search on the dude I fought-- you made a destroyer that does 250DPS while packing 22k EHP and a hundred-dps passive tank all while making zero fitting compromises (still fits its gimmick module, still has a utility high and the CPU to fit a cloak).
Thanks for putting yet another group of stupidly powerful, tiny ships into this game so its even easier for people to pad their killboard stats. On a scale of 1 to 10, how much do you guys actually hate fun?
Oh my, could you cry some more?
Wah.... I got killed in my cruiser by a dessy.... Wahh....
Maybe you shouldn't fight things that you don't know what they are capable of. Do your research, moron. Don't cry like a baby because you died due to lack of research. |
soulkayn hooligan
Spirit Unlimited La Division Bleue
0
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 04:39:09 -
[698] - Quote
realy why remove command destro utility in ls ? just people need learn play ^^ |
Aratosh
Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition
4
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 04:42:48 -
[699] - Quote
The MJFG is working extremely well in Lo Sec. It is providing content and it has put an end to idiotic station games. No-one is unhappy about its use in Lo-Sec. Please do not remove it. |
Tikktokk Tokkzikk
Wilderness
293
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 04:56:01 -
[700] - Quote
MJFG is what kept me from burning out in December! Please don't remove it! |
|
Selto Black
Pan Galactic Gargle Blasters Ocularis Inferno
9
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 05:23:46 -
[701] - Quote
CCPls do not remove mjfg from lowsec. |
lampard25
Red Celestial
0
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 05:31:22 -
[702] - Quote
CCP, please don't remove this from Low-Sec, thank you. |
Jo Bethany
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
1
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 05:35:23 -
[703] - Quote
Dearest CCP, please rethink removing the use of the micro-jump field generator in low sec. It's revitalized and breathed a lot of life into our fleets of late and we love it very much. |
Lou Arnoux
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 05:38:08 -
[704] - Quote
Please do not remove MJFGs from lowsec. |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
3485
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 05:42:05 -
[705] - Quote
removing a module is not the right way to balance it.
how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
|
Aaril
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
19
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 05:50:32 -
[706] - Quote
You develop a new module which has done much to help create content and mitigate station games, and then remove it from low sec when it still practically brand new? This change should not go through. |
knobber Jobbler
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
585
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 05:50:47 -
[707] - Quote
Removing the MJFG from low sec is a terrible idea. It adds dynamism to fights. Don't kill that. |
Cala Wrynnn
Victory or Whatever
0
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 05:52:49 -
[708] - Quote
Please do not remove MJFGs from lowsec. |
Malphas Inanis
Amarrian Investment and Trade Company
12
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 06:03:23 -
[709] - Quote
Don't disable them in lowsec
This is one of the hardest lessons for humans to learn. We cannot admit that things might be neither good nor evil, neither cruel nor kind, but simply callous GÇô indifferent to all suffering, lacking all purpose.
|
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
715
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 06:06:45 -
[710] - Quote
Literally garbage if these are removed from lowsec. Such a fun feature (and especially if T2 logi are allowed in smalls in FW these need to stay TBH). |
|
Kegen Vyvorant
Catastrophic Overview Failure
3
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 06:18:13 -
[711] - Quote
Don't remove these from lowsec. What the hell CCP. |
ubermarmalade2
Prime Militia
2
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 06:34:46 -
[712] - Quote
Please do not remove MJFGs from lowsec.
|
Atomsk Vanalot
Prime Militia
2
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 06:35:33 -
[713] - Quote
Please do not remove MJFGs from lowsec.
|
Aralieus
Shadowbane Syndicate
297
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 06:59:12 -
[714] - Quote
Removing from low sec will kill a unique and much needed mechanic from the arsenal of those who play the game to have fun. I can understand a few limitation being placed on it but completely removing it seems heavy handed and short sighted.
Please do not remove from empire space.
Oderint Dum Metuant
|
Eris Tsasa
Sky Fighters
1
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 06:59:47 -
[715] - Quote
Until I can bubble and launch bombs in lowsec, remove these from lowsec, why not right?
|
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
1095
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 07:00:00 -
[716] - Quote
I cannot comment on value of MJD dessies in lowsec, but I must point out how something got almost sneaked into the game. Silently, with no feedback treads, no notes, no warning, nothing. Again.
Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
|
Tethys Luxor
Prima Gallicus
13
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 07:10:40 -
[717] - Quote
CCP, please don't remove this from Low-Sec, thank you.
Do not bring back the old station game. |
Aralieus
Shadowbane Syndicate
297
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 07:12:36 -
[718] - Quote
If they're removed from low sec many will just simply stop flying them effectively killing a ship you just introduced to the game.
This should really be thought thru more
Oderint Dum Metuant
|
Lilia Emunah
Core World Solutions
3
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 07:17:30 -
[719] - Quote
This is stupid? Against empire policy? This is lowsec. This is where lawbreakers live.
If they want to keep it like that, then maybe give a criminal flag when using MJD where it can be observed by the so called empire. Telling me I can't do something because it's against policy is stupid. It's terrible handwaveium logic.
Disclaimer: I don't even live in lowsec and I think this is bad. |
Nyalnara
The Unchained Club
197
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 07:41:52 -
[720] - Quote
As a powerful tool to break enemy formations, MJFG is heavily used by small groups when they need to fight bigger numbers. Remove that, and most of FW will go back to big, large blobs doing 50+ jumps finding no fight, because they won't engage something their size they're not sure to win, and because smaller groups won't engage them, because they will not be able to split the bigger group to even the playing field...
CCP, Please don't remove MJFG from LS, because it would nerf the gameplay of pretty much everybody who dislike blobs.
French half-noob.
CEO of [.TUC.] The Unchained Club
Founder of [DEUPP] Dark Evil Undead Ponies Productions
In case of ponies, keep calm and start running.
|
|
Vic Jefferson
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
838
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 07:57:45 -
[721] - Quote
Please do not remove MJFGs from lowsec.
Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM XI
|
Sartyva
Space Pioneers Odin's Call
0
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 08:29:54 -
[722] - Quote
Please do not remove the MJFG from lowsec |
Skyler Hawk
The Tuskers The Tuskers Co.
67
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 08:40:23 -
[723] - Quote
Vic Jefferson wrote:Please do not remove MJFGs from lowsec.
|
Captain Cean
Holy Cookie
44
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 08:40:43 -
[724] - Quote
Dont do this its only time since years that stupid station and gate games stoped |
Maccian
Soul Takers
39
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 08:55:10 -
[725] - Quote
I know nothing has been announced, but just in case; please don't disable the micro jump drive for command dessies in low sec. They opened up a whole new dimension of PVP game play that added to the challenge and fun of EVE. I've died multiple times directly because of these as well as my corpies got killed because of them many occasion, and as annoying as they are at times, they are very fun and challenging to have around.
I'm all for some sort of Nerf, maybe make the cycle time longer, or reduce the jump range by 50%, but please don't remove the ability completely. |
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1790
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 08:56:07 -
[726] - Quote
Dear CCP
What is the driving reason to consider removing the use of the Micro jump field generator in Lowsec? It appears to be achieving all of it's potential goals, and providing interesting challenging content?
Are there examples where it is unbalancing gameplay, other than in a desireable way? (IE n+1 is no longer auto win?)
Whilst I understand some vocal people might dislike losing the ability to automatically win every time, is that not a better thing for the health of the game and wider playerbase?
Is any "nerf" actually necessary? As a "nerf" to cripple them is just a way of saying you shouldn't have created them in the first place.
They are currently an effictive tool in the right hands, not an overpowered one. You made a good decision Inventing these, stand by a good decision.
I am pretty much unable to see why you would wish to consider hamstringing the command destroyer as soon as it starts to show potential?
It will be interesting to see your response.
PS Reddit is not amused. Command destroyers appear very popular in their current form.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
Tura Azui
Shadows of Earth Alternate Allegiance
0
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 09:01:39 -
[727] - Quote
Please do not remove MJFGs from lowsec. |
Brass Goover
Holy Cookie
0
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 09:01:43 -
[728] - Quote
CCP, please don't remove this from Low-Sec, thank you.
This Module gives small gangs and fleets in lowsec so much fun and new tactical options. |
Ria Nieyli
39799
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 09:17:28 -
[729] - Quote
James Msyu wrote:Don't remove the MJFG from lowsec. It's made station games fun again.
Come Citadel you will be unable to dock if pointed. Much better solution than having MJFG. |
Ria Nieyli
39799
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 09:21:57 -
[730] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:Dear CCP
What is the driving reason to consider removing the use of the Micro jump field generator in Lowsec? It appears to be achieving all of it's potential goals, and providing interesting challenging content?
Are there examples where it is unbalancing gameplay, other than in a desireable way? (IE n+1 is no longer auto win?)
Whilst I understand some vocal people might dislike losing the ability to automatically win every time, is that not a better thing for the health of the game and wider playerbase?
Is any "nerf" actually necessary? As a "nerf" to cripple them is just a way of saying you shouldn't have created them in the first place.
They are currently an effictive tool in the right hands, not an overpowered one. You made a good decision Inventing these, stand by a good decision.
I am pretty much unable to see why you would wish to consider hamstringing the command destroyer as soon as it starts to show potential?
It will be interesting to see your response.
PS Reddit is not amused. Command destroyers appear very popular in their current form.
MJFG is a bad mechanic and should be removed entirely.
The fact of the matter is that it scales with the size of your fleet extremely well, while it punishes smaller gangs disproportionally. Let's see what happens in a mid-sized gang vs large gang, if you're the mid-sized gang's FC. You chain 2 command destroyers and jump some of their fleet away. They kill the destroyer, warp to a ping, warp back to their fleet and carry on. They would take some losses, but it would be hard from a winning move. Just annoying. Now, if you're in the mid-sized gang and the same happens to you, there might not be a fleet left to get back to. It's simply, a "win more" mechanic. |
|
Duke Livingstone
Free Throbbing Veinal Penii For Spacmens FETID
0
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 09:37:42 -
[731] - Quote
Queen Oramara wrote:If this is even considered I will be taking my 10 toons selling them and quitting. EVE is one of the last decent player run games and I'm over children not getting there way so they tell daddy over and over until he beats his wife.
For lack of a better word pu44ies wine about getting killed and wine about ships being OP because the skill of the ones dying is that of a downsy child when it comes to pvp that isn't bloby.
So many great ships have fallen prey to the nerf gun because 'elite pvpers' aka scrubs, are to bad to learn how to pvp and instead rely on the gangs to win. Real PVP is that of a solo warrior. Asking CCP to help you cause you ******* suck is your own problem. Get better scrubs and stop crying over pixels.
Everyone is getting real sick of the ones who just can't mold and conform with the idea that maybe you're not as good as your think. Go sit in your hulk in jita and cry in local. No one wants your here.
Don't like what I have to say? Well you read the entire bit so stop bitching.
Bring back my f***** Gila
Can I has your stuffs |
Jakkan Wrath
Black Shark Cult
6
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 09:47:22 -
[732] - Quote
Ria Nieyli wrote:epicurus ataraxia wrote:Dear CCP
What is the driving reason to consider removing the use of the Micro jump field generator in Lowsec? It appears to be achieving all of it's potential goals, and providing interesting challenging content?
Are there examples where it is unbalancing gameplay, other than in a desireable way? (IE n+1 is no longer auto win?)
Whilst I understand some vocal people might dislike losing the ability to automatically win every time, is that not a better thing for the health of the game and wider playerbase?
Is any "nerf" actually necessary? As a "nerf" to cripple them is just a way of saying you shouldn't have created them in the first place.
They are currently an effictive tool in the right hands, not an overpowered one. You made a good decision Inventing these, stand by a good decision.
I am pretty much unable to see why you would wish to consider hamstringing the command destroyer as soon as it starts to show potential?
It will be interesting to see your response.
PS Reddit is not amused. Command destroyers appear very popular in their current form. MJFG is a bad mechanic and should be removed entirely. It takes control of your ship and moves it 100km. It makes positioning worthless. The fact of the matter is that it scales with the size of your fleet extremely well, while it punishes smaller gangs disproportionally. Let's see what happens in a mid-sized gang vs large gang, if you're the mid-sized gang's FC. You chain 2 command destroyers and jump some of their fleet away. They kill the destroyer, warp to a ping, warp back to their fleet and carry on. They would take some losses, but it would be hard from a winning move. Just annoying. Now, if you're in the mid-sized gang and the same happens to you, there might not be a fleet left to get back to. It's simply, a "win more" mechanic.
there are many ways to counter this, just because its a bit harder then just sitting and pressing f1 does not mean it should be removed. they could nerf it if it truly is such a bad idea. no need to remove it adds so much dynamic to the game. or rather then destroy the MJFG then make another module which inhibits it or something. there is no need to remove them from lowsec or entirely. |
Yngvar ayShorn
Einheit X-6
689
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 09:59:11 -
[733] - Quote
Please do not remove MJFGs from lowsec.
21 Tage EVE testen! -->> Klick mich <<--
|
Mizhara Del'thul
T.R.I.A.D Ushra'Khan
572
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 10:11:56 -
[734] - Quote
When even people so utterly **** at low and nullsec PvP as me manage to have so much fun both solo and in fleets with the MJFG, it's a sign that it was a much needed addition to the game. Removing it would be a terrible mistake.
I've used it successfully and catastrophically, and had it used against me successfully and catastrophically. The one thing all of these events had in common was that it was fun as hell and made me want to have some more fun.
Just making it a T3D replacement in small plexes would be the worst mistake you've made in a long time. |
Nornamor Invaldiname
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 10:16:03 -
[735] - Quote
Please do not remove MJFGs from lowsec. They make small plexes hilarious :D |
Esnaelc Sin'led
The Unchained Club
50
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 10:26:28 -
[736] - Quote
Nice joke CCP Rise !!
What ?
Not a joke ?
Please do not do that. I've always thought that you (CCP as a whole) had awsome ideas since CCP Seagull is at command, but this ? Really ? What would be the reason to do this ?
Don't, please. It adds so much to the game, specially in LowSec, you just cannot. |
Ria Nieyli
39813
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 10:49:33 -
[737] - Quote
Jakkan Wrath wrote:there are many ways to counter this, just because its a bit harder then just sitting and pressing f1 does not mean it should be removed. they could nerf it if it truly is such a bad idea. no need to remove it adds so much dynamic to the game. or rather then destroy the MJFG then make another module which inhibits it or something. there is no need to remove them from lowsec or entirely.
Do you not understand that the very thing you're saying that the MJFG helps against can and will make even greater use of it? This game's core design means that no matter what it is, just having more people will make you benefit more from it. Your entire arguement that it will make it harder for a blob is invalid because it will make it even harder for smaller fleets facing the blob. |
Korotani
Air The Initiative.
21
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 10:50:46 -
[738] - Quote
I want an explanation from CCP regarding this. Command destroyers require skill to use effectively. CCP always trumpets the fact that Eve is not safe, getting jumped off a station or away from your fleet is a perfect example of HTFU.
It's not in high sec so all players that don't want to get involved don't have to. So CCP should let people have their toys, it's a sandbox for a reason.
Trust no one.-á
|
Ria Nieyli
39813
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 11:02:43 -
[739] - Quote
Korotani wrote:I want an explanation from CCP regarding this. Command destroyers require skill to use effectively. CCP always trumpets the fact that Eve is not safe, getting jumped off a station or away from your fleet is a perfect example of HTFU.
It's not in high sec so all players that don't want to get involved don't have to. So CCP should let people have their toys, it's a sandbox for a reason.
If you want to move someone, bump him. Jumping them 100km away with zero counterplay is horrible. |
Solanus Omaristos
Dirt 'n' Glitter Local Is Primary
21
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 11:09:12 -
[740] - Quote
Oh come on CCP, I've still yet to train into Command Dessies and you insist on removing the ability to use them where I live??
Please don't remove them from lowsec. They've injected life into the meta here, and are fun to fight with and against. Don't destroy a path in the sandbox. |
|
El Space Mariachi
Leather Club Paisti Syndicate
197
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 11:17:21 -
[741] - Quote
I'd wager the bulk of the MJF's usage is in lowsec and neutering it would be another instance of CCP teasing a bonkers game-changing feature only to completely gut it to the point of uselessness after feedback (see : MJU). If you didn't consider the implications for A BUTTON THAT MOVES EVERYTHING NEARBY 100KM AWAY and how it might be used in station games that's more a problem with your design and implementation process than how the players use it.
While from the off I thought it was game-breaking and ridiculous, the feature's providing great content and amusement for many. Bluemelon wouldn't have lost his latest tourney ship without the MJF. Why effectively kill a new mechanic that is actually seeing use and is positively received by the bulk of the community and ending the scourge of station games?
Reconsider and don't ban the MJF in lowsec.
edit : Rise just tweeted that they're not removing them and it's a mistake??? Well okay
gay gamers for jesus
|
Korotani
Air The Initiative.
21
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 11:21:00 -
[742] - Quote
Ria Nieyli wrote:Korotani wrote:I want an explanation from CCP regarding this. Command destroyers require skill to use effectively. CCP always trumpets the fact that Eve is not safe, getting jumped off a station or away from your fleet is a perfect example of HTFU.
It's not in high sec so all players that don't want to get involved don't have to. So CCP should let people have their toys, it's a sandbox for a reason. If you want to move someone, bump him. Jumping them 100km away with zero counterplay is horrible. There's HTFU, then there's this, which is plain unfun.
Well CCP appear to have made a mistake and it's staying for now. Yay!
We had a gang jump in to our system, command dessie tried to jump us so we scrammed it. Dead CD.
A double jump off a station means they are more prepared than you, HTFU.
Trust no one.-á
|
Minty Aroma
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
62
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 11:23:56 -
[743] - Quote
Do NOT remove the MJDG effect from Lowsec - it is an amazing new thing to have and will turn fights back to the one sided n+1 feel they had before the Command Destroyers were implemented.
At the moment, smaller fleets can actually do something to split up larger fleets and kill elements off, other than try to kite the enemy (which is boring to all save for the larger fleet's logi), plus the larger fleet can use them to stop a kiting fleet by launching ships at them! |
Scarlett Stolas
Cherry-Poppers
42
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 11:25:31 -
[744] - Quote
As a low-sec PvP player, I feel like the MJF is a very interesting mechanic that increases the skill ceiling for the game and has improved the meta game by allowing new and interesting tactics that are relient on teamwork. Please reconsider removing this module from low sec. |
Ria Nieyli
39814
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 11:28:30 -
[745] - Quote
Korotani wrote:Ria Nieyli wrote:Korotani wrote:I want an explanation from CCP regarding this. Command destroyers require skill to use effectively. CCP always trumpets the fact that Eve is not safe, getting jumped off a station or away from your fleet is a perfect example of HTFU.
It's not in high sec so all players that don't want to get involved don't have to. So CCP should let people have their toys, it's a sandbox for a reason. If you want to move someone, bump him. Jumping them 100km away with zero counterplay is horrible. There's HTFU, then there's this, which is plain unfun. Well CCP appear to have made a mistake and it's staying for now. Yay! We had a gang jump in to our system, command dessie tried to jump us so we scrammed it. Dead CD. A double jump off a station means they are more prepared than you, HTFU.
A double jump has no counterplay. Seems to me that you just want gimmicky kills that take little skill. |
Morrigan LeSante
Senex Legio The OSS
1107
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 11:37:10 -
[746] - Quote
Chill people. It was an accident.
https://twitter.com/CCP_Rise/status/690107533642633216 |
Scarlett Stolas
Cherry-Poppers
42
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 12:40:37 -
[747] - Quote
Grand, that's wonderful news. |
Korotani
Air The Initiative.
21
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 14:38:19 -
[748] - Quote
Ria Nieyli wrote:Korotani wrote:Ria Nieyli wrote:Korotani wrote:I want an explanation from CCP regarding this. Command destroyers require skill to use effectively. CCP always trumpets the fact that Eve is not safe, getting jumped off a station or away from your fleet is a perfect example of HTFU.
It's not in high sec so all players that don't want to get involved don't have to. So CCP should let people have their toys, it's a sandbox for a reason. If you want to move someone, bump him. Jumping them 100km away with zero counterplay is horrible. There's HTFU, then there's this, which is plain unfun. Well CCP appear to have made a mistake and it's staying for now. Yay! We had a gang jump in to our system, command dessie tried to jump us so we scrammed it. Dead CD. A double jump off a station means they are more prepared than you, HTFU. A double jump has no counterplay. Seems to me that you just want gimmicky kills that take little skill.
I'll take whatever MJFG kills and deaths come my way and I'll enjoy it :)
Trust no one.-á
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2896
|
Posted - 2016.02.01 00:55:25 -
[749] - Quote
Ria Nieyli wrote:Korotani wrote:Ria Nieyli wrote:Korotani wrote:I want an explanation from CCP regarding this. Command destroyers require skill to use effectively. CCP always trumpets the fact that Eve is not safe, getting jumped off a station or away from your fleet is a perfect example of HTFU.
It's not in high sec so all players that don't want to get involved don't have to. So CCP should let people have their toys, it's a sandbox for a reason. If you want to move someone, bump him. Jumping them 100km away with zero counterplay is horrible. There's HTFU, then there's this, which is plain unfun. Well CCP appear to have made a mistake and it's staying for now. Yay! We had a gang jump in to our system, command dessie tried to jump us so we scrammed it. Dead CD. A double jump off a station means they are more prepared than you, HTFU. A double jump has no counterplay. Seems to me that you just want gimmicky kills that take little skill. The best counter play has been to set up a scram chain. I have seen it employed before to strong effect. Mostly seen it on battleships either to hug a gate or undock, or to stay in range of their triage. |
Lake Askiras
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2016.03.30 06:54:03 -
[750] - Quote
Hey CCP Rise! Have you looked at command dessies since introduction, they seem really over powered atm? On small scale people are getting ganked because of them left and right, on large scale they work pretty well.
If you are doing small scale, on gate or station you really have no defense against it since you wont be able to lock the command dessie in time to scram it or kill it. You will get booshed of the gate or station to the loving arms of 20 of his best friends and ganked. This really breaks the small/solo meta where gate used to be way for you to split the enemy to more manageable size to fight them outnumbered.
Please consider making the spool up timer on the MJD mod bit longer, which would allow bigger ships (BC/BS) to get lock on scram on the command dessie. I mean if you scram him you are still taking the aggro, so you on gate or station you will still have 60seconds weapons timer, not to mention possibly the gate guns too.
|
|
ACESsiggy
Pandemic Horde Inc.
50
|
Posted - 2016.04.14 11:48:19 -
[751] - Quote
Pretty cool stuff. Can't wait for these new ships to go live on Tranquility. However there's one concern with jump drive and the mechanic of pulling fleet members. It seems you can use it multiple times pulling the fleet 100 - 200 -300km off of original location. As long as you and the fleet time it right of course. Is this intended?
GÇ£The open-minded see the truth in different things: the narrow-minded see only the differences.GÇ¥
|
DrysonBennington
Eagle's Talon's
276
|
Posted - 2016.05.05 16:34:28 -
[752] - Quote
A smaller ship like a destroyer should never be able to warp off larger ships like battle cruisers and battleships. The field generated would be too much strain on the destroyers systems to handle warping that much mass too 100km.
Larger ships however would not have a problem warping off a large number of smaller ships as their systems would be able to handle a larger number of smaller ships that would have an equal amount of mass comparable to their own mass.
I therefore suggest that a Command Class capable of warping off ships of their same class based on mass be designed for Cruiser, Battle Cruiser and the Battleship classes. |
Milostiev
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
9
|
Posted - 2016.05.12 12:41:30 -
[753] - Quote
Lake Askiras wrote:Hey CCP Rise! Have you looked at command dessies since introduction, they seem really over powered atm? On small scale people are getting ganked because of them left and right, on large scale they work pretty well.
If you are doing small scale, on gate or station you really have no defense against it since you wont be able to lock the command dessie in time to scram it or kill it. You will get booshed of the gate or station to the loving arms of 20 of his best friends and ganked. This really breaks the small/solo meta where gate used to be way for you to split the enemy to more manageable size to fight them outnumbered.
Please consider making the spool up timer on the MJD mod bit longer, which would allow bigger ships (BC/BS) to get lock on scram on the command dessie. I mean if you scram him you are still taking the aggro, so you on gate or station you will still have 60seconds weapons timer, not to mention possibly the gate guns too.
This really, the spool timer is messed up once you get into 4/4 skill levels and above.
An AOE mod with under 6s spool time, which makes it impossible to disable in bigger ships, or if they have more than 1 (with already have a 1-2s delay because of the targeting delay). The only practical counter is to not stick around gates and dock/undock which are the very things you need to separate gangs as solo.
I am shocked at the fact that CCP has learned nothing from the Orthrus+RLML debacle. Who would have thought it, the blob actually adopting the actual ship/weapon that is designed to break up the blob ?
Atm this is too powerfull when you are the underdog, solo or in very small fleet, because the blob will employ it, but nerfing it to remove it from low-sec will boost blobs too much in that particular location.
|
Poranius Fisc
State War Academy Caldari State
32
|
Posted - 2016.05.22 18:30:17 -
[754] - Quote
Actually, I've seen these used in sucession. It seems theres no penalty so you can daisy chain these as long as you have ships to continue and they are in the field. jumped out 3 times to be a little less than 290km from a POS and than they just held me there and damped me to the point of useless and waiting for something big enough to come in a kill me.
It was pretty smart. |
Elenahina
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
886
|
Posted - 2016.06.02 16:11:29 -
[755] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Quote:Please do not release this without there being a competent counter because this will honestly kill all fleet combat which isn't cerbs and ishtars. If this kind of tactic becomes really common it is always an option to either defend your logi/fleet with long range scrams to use on the incoming Command Dessies or, if you don't have another option, simply scram your own fleet.
Why are you scramming me?!?! I'm helping! Honest!
(I know this is old, but I can't help but laugh).
Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
2764
|
Posted - 2016.06.05 08:50:38 -
[756] - Quote
Ria Nieyli wrote:
A double jump has no counterplay. Seems to me that you just want gimmicky kills that take little skill.
you see two CDs 100km off
quick scram your friend and have him scram you OR start burning trying to get out of the way you only need to alter your direction slightly if your piloting is better than his aiming boom you win
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
2764
|
Posted - 2016.06.05 08:51:58 -
[757] - Quote
double
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Dornier Pfeil
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2016.06.23 20:55:45 -
[758] - Quote
I read several comments people expressing dislike for the name stork. I don't think it's such a bad name. It could have been worse. Much, much, worse. |
Calael Aeg
Pavillon Rouge Opera Mundi
0
|
Posted - 2016.08.08 15:10:12 -
[759] - Quote
Editing : Nothing. I was thinking about tactical destroyers which are overpowered for their price. |
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
2413
|
Posted - 2016.08.13 02:56:28 -
[760] - Quote
DrysonBennington wrote:A smaller ship like a destroyer should never be able to warp off larger ships like battle cruisers and battleships. The field generated would be too much strain on the destroyers systems to handle warping that much mass too 100km.
Larger ships however would not have a problem warping off a large number of smaller ships as their systems would be able to handle a larger number of smaller ships that would have an equal amount of mass comparable to their own mass.
I therefore suggest that a Command Class capable of warping off ships of their same class based on mass be designed for Cruiser, Battle Cruiser and the Battleship classes. This is a very good point. Mass limits please.
CCP Fozzie GǣWe can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-tonGǪ in null sec anomalies. Gǣ*
Kaalrus pwned..... :)
|
|
Cade Windstalker
549
|
Posted - 2016.08.15 02:08:56 -
[761] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:DrysonBennington wrote:A smaller ship like a destroyer should never be able to warp off larger ships like battle cruisers and battleships. The field generated would be too much strain on the destroyers systems to handle warping that much mass too 100km.
Larger ships however would not have a problem warping off a large number of smaller ships as their systems would be able to handle a larger number of smaller ships that would have an equal amount of mass comparable to their own mass.
I therefore suggest that a Command Class capable of warping off ships of their same class based on mass be designed for Cruiser, Battle Cruiser and the Battleship classes. This is a very good point. Mass limits please.
This isn't grounded in mechanics or gameplay, it's just badly justified fluff. It's making a lot of assumptions about how warp drives work and about how large they are and how much power they take. There's no indication anywhere in any of the fluff that this is the case, the Command Destroyer just has specialized systems that allow it to extend it's warp field out around it and bring other ships with it. |
Infinity Ziona
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
2441
|
Posted - 2016.09.01 08:00:58 -
[762] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:DrysonBennington wrote:A smaller ship like a destroyer should never be able to warp off larger ships like battle cruisers and battleships. The field generated would be too much strain on the destroyers systems to handle warping that much mass too 100km.
Larger ships however would not have a problem warping off a large number of smaller ships as their systems would be able to handle a larger number of smaller ships that would have an equal amount of mass comparable to their own mass.
I therefore suggest that a Command Class capable of warping off ships of their same class based on mass be designed for Cruiser, Battle Cruiser and the Battleship classes. This is a very good point. Mass limits please. This isn't grounded in mechanics or gameplay, it's just badly justified fluff. It's making a lot of assumptions about how warp drives work and about how large they are and how much power they take. There's no indication anywhere in any of the fluff that this is the case, the Command Destroyer just has specialized systems that allow it to extend it's warp field out around it and bring other ships with it. Not really.
To MJD a battleship in a battleship requires a fitting of 77cpu and 1375MW and 4.2GW activation. To MJD a a fleet of battleships in a command destroyer only requires fitting of 31CPU and 5MW and 0.5GW activation.
Command Destroyer MJDF should have the following limitations:
The distance should be based on mass of the ship being jumped. For large hulls the distance should be around 50km, for medium hulls, 75km, for small hulls 100km.
This doesn't require any significant change to the game or the ships themselves. This also prevents multiple jumps without some planning as you will end up with any frigs, dessies, inties around your CD, but you lose the larger ships.
To counter this could arrange the jump so you have multiple command destroyers in line with the first jump at 50 and 75 but it takes more work and coordination instead of just bunching up 20 CD and staggering the MJDFG's.
Its an elegant solution to a overpowered problem.
CCP Fozzie GǣWe can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-tonGǪ in null sec anomalies. Gǣ*
Kaalrus pwned..... :)
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 26 :: [one page] |