|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Skia Aumer
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
320
|
Posted - 2016.07.01 19:40:54 -
[1] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:The current range that warp bubbles are effective (how far from your destination they can pull you out of warp) is a little unclear. This has lead to some 'interesting' possibilities, such as bubble camping a gate with a citadel. Wait a minute. What is the problem again? If it's the lack of information on bubble mechanics - then yes, I can agree, more clarifications would help. If it's citadel camping - then no, I dont see it as a problem. Could you explain why it is? If anything, I'd say interceptor bubble immunity is much worse of a problem for this area of gameplay which is gate camping. |
Skia Aumer
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
321
|
Posted - 2016.07.01 19:57:36 -
[2] - Quote
Querns wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:I'd leave it be.
Eve is all about emergent game play right, these bubbles and citadels are something none of us saw coming, its allowed the owners of space to recraft that space into a fortress (something sov owners have wanted for a while).
As somebody who roams, often alone, I think its nice that the ratters finally have a noticeable defense against roaming gangs and the new ability to redraw the defefnses of your space that players came up with (not CCP) is pretty amazing.
Too often lately the players come up with something and CCP is quick to clamp down on it and remove it from game or remove whatever cool idea the players came up with.
Let it run for a while as is, its honestly not hurting anything at all.
Eh, you'll have a good five weeks or so for the dozen? More? fortizars your coalition built in nullsec for the express purpose of serving as Point Defense drags to farm killmails. I think you'll get your money's worth. Grr PL? I'd like to see a bit more compelling argument. So for the sake of it, could you explain exactly how is "citadel camping" detrimental and why? |
Skia Aumer
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
321
|
Posted - 2016.07.01 20:01:26 -
[3] - Quote
Max Groote wrote:This is a really reasonable change and it makes a lot of sense. The people saying "don't warp gate to gate" don't realise that a gate camp can actually be dealt with by a small group of players, while a citadel cannot. The "don't nerf tools we have" argument doesn't make much sense either, because we would still have the no-risk Intel source that was the watchlist by that logic. A competent gate camp would not let you through unless you're in travel-ceptor. While "citadel camp" is trivial to avoid.
Obil Que wrote:Are solo pvp'er incabable of creating tactical bookmarks, using non-direct gate to gate travel, or shooting the offending bubble outside the range of the PDS? I guess they are too leet for that bullcrap. |
Skia Aumer
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
321
|
Posted - 2016.07.01 20:24:29 -
[4] - Quote
Vic Jefferson wrote:...it's that there was not way for a small roaming gang to deal with them. I never minded when sov-holders dropped a bajillion supers on me - that was fine they put toys on the field and made plays. It's the fact that the use of citadels has absolutely zero risk against a small roaming gang - this characteristically un-eve like. Alright, I see it as a fair point. Now, if we agree that this is a real problem, we could elaborate some solution. For example: if citadel uses its weapons, it becomes vulnerable for 15 minutes. Discuss! |
Skia Aumer
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
321
|
Posted - 2016.07.01 21:04:40 -
[5] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Skia Aumer wrote:I mean, we have an engagement mechanics for ships, which includes 1-minute weapon timer. Why shouldnt similar mechanics be in place for citadels? This removes the defensive and "home field advantage" aspect of Citadels and opens them up massively to trolling, incompetence, and generally defeating of the whole "vulnerability timers" mechanic that's supposed to allow players to be around to defend their expensive stuff without needing to have tons of people online 23/7. Absolutely not. If you're AFK you cannot activate weapons and your citadel remains invulnerable. Citadel does not auto-agress, unlike starbase (POS). If you chose to activate weapons means you are ingame and active and it would only be fair that your citadel can be attacked at this moment. |
Skia Aumer
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
321
|
Posted - 2016.07.01 21:56:46 -
[6] - Quote
Sonya Corvinus wrote:Skia Aumer wrote:Fixing citadels is exactly what I'm talking about. But why do you want them to be removed from gates? Funny how your fix for citadels doesn't change them at all, but instead changes a part of the game that's used far beyond citadels. Why should a space ship that's invulnerable 90% of the time be able to be on grid with a gate? Dude, can you even read? If citadel is agressed -> then it becomes vulnerable. That's what I have suggested. |
Skia Aumer
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
321
|
Posted - 2016.07.01 22:06:04 -
[7] - Quote
Like this:
Skia Aumer wrote:if citadel uses its weapons, it becomes vulnerable for 15 minutes.
|
|
|
|