Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
|
CCP Larrikin
C C P C C P Alliance
638
|
Posted - 2016.11.25 11:24:09 -
[1] - Quote
Hi Space Friends,
Coming with the December release, we're going to be releasing a feature we talked about at EVE Vegas 2016.
Defender Missile Skill The skill, Defender Missiles, will no longer require Missile Launcher Operation. All alpha characters will be able to train this to Level 1. The skill will provide a 10% per level bonus to Defender Missile velocity. No other skills will effect Defender Missiles.
Defender Missiles Defender Missiles will no longer shoot down missiles aimed at you. Instead they will launch at a random bomb (non-structure) within its flight range. A single defender missile will kill any bomb. These defender missiles can only be loaded into a new defender launcher (described below) The Defender Missile I has a base range of 30km (45km at max skills), and a flight time of 3 seconds. During the December patch downtime, all existing defender missiles (and their blueprints) will become the new Defender Missile I
Defender Launchers The Defender Launcher I can only load Defender Missiles. It may only be fit to Destroyer class vessels (Destroyers, Interdictors, Command Destroyers and Tactical Destroyers). Once activated, it will scan local space for any bombs,and if it finds one within range, launch a defender missile to intercept it. If it doesn't find any bombs within range, it will still cycle. The Defender Launcher I has a 120 second reactivation timer. It doesn't require a launcher hardpoint, and has low fitting requirements (10 cpu, 2 powergrid), but uses some capacitor (50gj) to activate.
Command Destroyers Command Destroyers receive at 50% role bonus to decreasing the reactivation timer on Defender Launchers.
Bomb Changes Bombs now have a Minimum Velocity of 1m/s that you must be traveling at before you can launch. This is to fix some issues that can happen when your velocity is 0, causing the bomb not to move and just explode on you.
You can checkout these changes (and more) on Sisi soon. We appreciate any feedback you have!
Cheers, CCP Larrikin and Team Phenomenon
Game Designer | Team Phenomenon | https://twitter.com/CCP_Larrikin
|
|
|
CCP Larrikin
C C P C C P Alliance
638
|
Posted - 2016.11.25 11:24:18 -
[2] - Quote
Reserved
Game Designer | Team Phenomenon | https://twitter.com/CCP_Larrikin
|
|
Capqu
Half Empty
1204
|
Posted - 2016.11.25 12:07:40 -
[3] - Quote
waste of goddamn time
fozzie sov was enough of a nerf to bombing already, this is totally unnecessary
noone is bombing currently in eve because you reliably cannot predict where the fight will be and bombing requires some setup time
these changes would have been good 2 years ago
now adays test and friends are literally flying around in the most bombable doctrines in history but noone can be bothered bombing them because its impossible to predict where engagements will happen and super dds are just better bombs anyway
in adition 0 velocity bombs was some of the hardest **** to pull off and almost never saw any use so removing it for no reason i dont even understand, you just dont want people to be able to innovate?
thanks for the final nail o7 bongers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
Porucznik Borewicz
calamitous-intent Feign Disorder
68
|
Posted - 2016.11.25 12:11:19 -
[4] - Quote
Capqu wrote:waste of goddamn time God bless. |
Khan Wrenth
Ore Oppression Prevention and Salvation
724
|
Posted - 2016.11.25 12:26:33 -
[5] - Quote
My god you guys seem to have some serious love for destroyers lately.
Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
|
James Zimmer
D3RP Clan Elemental Tide
51
|
Posted - 2016.11.25 12:38:55 -
[6] - Quote
A few thoughts:
1. Bombs are generally launched in waves, and defenders will now randomly go after bombs. One bomb wave, and you may destroy every bomb, the next wave, only a single bomb (at least that's how I understand the mechanics as you describe them). That lack of consistency would be frustrating, especially in a game that is significantly less random than other MMOs.
2. Bombers have already gone through several waves of nerfs. IMO. they don't need this nerf.
3. Destroyers are the meta right now, they don't need the help.
4. Command destroyers are already unique and strong. Adding a third fleet assistance role to command destroyers on top of jumping and command bursts would make them too good IMO, though I do appreciate the effort to reward people who bring combined fleets. |
Sentient Blade
Crisis Atmosphere Coalition of the Unfortunate
1764
|
Posted - 2016.11.25 12:39:42 -
[7] - Quote
So in order to guard your fleet effectively, you really need to put these almost directly on top of your existing fleet (which to need them would be something slow and heavy, say battlecruisers or battleships)... But they're destroyers... so realistically one or two bombs gets through and they're going to explode due to the low EHP of destroyers, especially when sig-bloomed by MWD.
They'll probably get annihilated by a small wing of RLML caracals anyway prior to bombs launching, but I'd say a passive bonus resistance to bomb damage wouldn't go amiss when fitting to destroyers. |
Dantelion Shinoni
The Black Squad
29
|
Posted - 2016.11.25 14:00:58 -
[8] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote: Command Destroyers Command Destroyers receive at 50% role bonus to decreasing the reactivation timer on Defender Launchers.
Please do not surcharge Command Destroyers with stuffs they don't need... We are having fun with them and they have a great and defined role in the meta right now.
I don't want to wake up and see them getting nerfed because *they did too much*.
Create a new class of Destroyers, Utility Destroyers or whatever, if you really want a Defender Missile bonus for Destroyers, no need to muddle Command Destroyers to do so. |
Starrakatt
Celtic Anarchy Complaints Department
613
|
Posted - 2016.11.25 14:33:41 -
[9] - Quote
Dantelion Shinoni wrote:Create a new class of Destroyers, Utility Destroyers or whatever, if you really want a Defender Missile bonus for Destroyers, no need to muddle Command Destroyers to do so. We don't need more Destroyers, or in fact small ships love, we need CCP to fix T3c, BLOPS and Battleships.
I think CCP is trying to get Alpha clones involved in fleet as Dessie's pilot with a use, thus the Defender Missiles change (fine enough) and the use of combined fleets (ok).
However, as already stated, Dessies will just be alphaed off the field before Bombers commit. Looks to me like another indirect atempt to fix Battleship's vulnerabilities while trying to not actually touch Battleships.
IMHO, Defenders would have seen such a better use as a battleship module.
Sneaky bastard.
Complaints Department is recruiting!
We got wardecced, ohnoes!
|
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Tactical-Retreat
2104
|
Posted - 2016.11.25 15:19:25 -
[10] - Quote
I like the fact that it motivates people to bring more destroyers to the field, but since this fits on T3Ds, we'll just see brick tanked T3Ds that aren't killable easily. It removes the whole strategic choice of targeting the smaller ships to unleash the bomb run and that's a shame.
Apart fom that, I don't like how it nerfs bombers again. Bombs have already been nerfed already, and lining up a good bombing run can be a PITA, not to mention that one guy that has a disconnect (something that happens quite often to some) will screw up the entire run.
These missiles shouldn't do enough damage to oneshot a bomb. Why not have bombs take two hits to explode for instance? Or maybe introduce a new type of bombs with a 20km diameter area but that can take one defender hit without dying.
And all of this doesn't address the fact that armor tanking is insanely more resistant to bombs than shield tanking. Nerfing bomb damage on both tanks doesn't solve this issue at all.
Signature Tanking Best Tanking
[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr
Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart
|
|
White Tree
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
936
|
Posted - 2016.11.25 15:27:32 -
[11] - Quote
lol
Former member of CSM6.
|
Circumstantial Evidence
367
|
Posted - 2016.11.25 15:50:03 -
[12] - Quote
Solid nerf to lame solo bombers doing lame bombings of rookie ship cyno's for lol's in hostile space. Not writing for sympathy, just sayin'. Solo bombers can have enough trouble with nearby interdictors, (oops - cloaky, didn't see you there!) and interceptors following to celestial warp-away points.
If this is meant primarily as a new option for fleet defense & damage reduction from waves of bombers, Altrue's suggestion of two hits to destroy a bomb seems worth considering.
Also new bomb types with different stats, deployment requirements, or effects: throw bombers a bone while you are nerfing one aspect, it's a good distraction. |
mrjknyazev
MamenkinbI CbInki Space Marines.
8
|
Posted - 2016.11.25 16:02:06 -
[13] - Quote
Khan Wrenth wrote:My god you guys seem to have some serious love for destroyers lately.
It's not like we have some kind of a ship class that serves no purpose right now other than doing anomic agent and team missions. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3135
|
Posted - 2016.11.25 16:22:16 -
[14] - Quote
Sentient Blade wrote:So in order to guard your fleet effectively, you really need to put these almost directly on top of your existing fleet (which to need them would be something slow and heavy, say battlecruisers or battleships)... But they're destroyers... so realistically one or two bombs gets through and they're going to explode due to the low EHP of destroyers, especially when sig-bloomed by MWD.
They'll probably get annihilated by a small wing of RLML caracals anyway prior to bombs launching, but I'd say a passive bonus resistance to bomb damage wouldn't go amiss when fitting to destroyers. A command Dessie could sit 70-130km off the fleet, see bombs, jump in and fire the missiles. Or the other way around if the bombs are the biggest danger.
With the range they offer, there's lots of flexibility in where you need to be. |
|
CCP Larrikin
C C P C C P Alliance
640
|
Posted - 2016.11.25 16:23:33 -
[15] - Quote
Sentient Blade wrote:So in order to guard your fleet effectively, you really need to put these almost directly on top of your existing fleet (which to need them would be something slow and heavy, say battlecruisers or battleships)... But they're destroyers... so realistically one or two bombs gets through and they're going to explode due to the low EHP of destroyers, especially when sig-bloomed by MWD.
They'll probably get annihilated by a small wing of RLML caracals anyway prior to bombs launching, but I'd say a passive bonus resistance to bomb damage wouldn't go amiss when fitting to destroyers.
This is by design. We want to ensure there is plenty of counter-gameplay to destroyers screening a fleet from bombs with defenders.
Altrue wrote:These missiles shouldn't do enough damage to oneshot a bomb. Why not have bombs take two hits to explode for instance? Given the random nature of the defender-to-bomb targeting, this would make defender missiles mostly useless, unless used en-mass.
Altrue wrote:Or maybe introduce a new type of bombs with a 20km diameter area but that can take one defender hit without dying. Thats a cool idea. Part of the effect of this change is that we have additional design room with bombs, such as hardier bombs, or new types of Ewar bombs. To clarify, we're not promising these things, just suggesting at some of the design space this change enables.
Game Designer | Team Phenomenon | https://twitter.com/CCP_Larrikin
|
|
Dantelion Shinoni
The Black Squad
29
|
Posted - 2016.11.25 16:32:17 -
[16] - Quote
Starrakatt wrote: We don't need more Destroyers, or in fact small ships love, we need CCP to fix T3c, BLOPS and Battleships.
One does not prevent the other, what do you have against Small ships? Are you a sizeist??
Starrakatt wrote: I think CCP is trying to get Alpha clones involved in fleet as Dessie's pilot with a use, thus the Defender Missiles change (fine enough) and the use of combined fleets (ok).
However, as already stated, Dessies will just be alphaed off the field before Bombers commit. Looks to me like another indirect atempt to fix Battleship's vulnerabilities while trying to not actually touch Battleships.
Clear as day, and as you said yourself, this is not a bad thing. Giving more things Alphas can do in fleets is an obvious good thing.
And as the comment right after you shows, it won't be that simple to get rid of Defender destroyers, once again it all depends on the players fitting and using the thing.
BCs, Battleships provide affordable firepower, you can't also give them utility otherwise all the ships underneath them become that much useless, the move to have MJDFG on Destroyers was genius and more moves like this can only be a good thing.
Also, new ships are always fun, screw balance.
Starrakatt wrote: IMHO, Defenders would have seen such a better use as a battleship module.
Sizeist! |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3135
|
Posted - 2016.11.25 16:33:25 -
[17] - Quote
So, in regards to how it selects a bomb, is it truly random or does it pick the closest one? |
VCBee 2fast2furious
Aliastra Gallente Federation
28
|
Posted - 2016.11.25 16:37:55 -
[18] - Quote
Just to confirm, do Defender Missiles 2.0 distinguish between friendly and non-friendly bombs? |
Hoshi
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
57
|
Posted - 2016.11.25 16:54:40 -
[19] - Quote
VCBee 2fast2furious wrote:Just to confirm, do Defender Missiles 2.0 distinguish between friendly and non-friendly bombs? There is a difference? A bomb will do damage to whatever is in range when it explodes no matter who launched it. Just don't activate the module if friendlies are bombing close by.
"Memories are meant to fade. They're designed that way for a reason."
|
|
CCP Larrikin
C C P C C P Alliance
640
|
Posted - 2016.11.25 18:28:42 -
[20] - Quote
VCBee 2fast2furious wrote:Just to confirm, do Defender Missiles 2.0 distinguish between friendly and non-friendly bombs? They do not, they target a random bomb within intercept range. It does not consider friendly or non-friendly bombs.
Rowells wrote:So, in regards to how it selects a bomb, is it truly random or does it pick the closest one? Its truly random.
Game Designer | Team Phenomenon | https://twitter.com/CCP_Larrikin
|
|
|
Sentient Blade
Crisis Atmosphere Coalition of the Unfortunate
1764
|
Posted - 2016.11.25 21:08:51 -
[21] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Sentient Blade wrote:So in order to guard your fleet effectively, you really need to put these almost directly on top of your existing fleet (which to need them would be something slow and heavy, say battlecruisers or battleships)... But they're destroyers... so realistically one or two bombs gets through and they're going to explode due to the low EHP of destroyers, especially when sig-bloomed by MWD.
They'll probably get annihilated by a small wing of RLML caracals anyway prior to bombs launching, but I'd say a passive bonus resistance to bomb damage wouldn't go amiss when fitting to destroyers. This is by design. We want to ensure there is plenty of counter-gameplay to destroyers screening a fleet from bombs with defenders.
If this is a design decision, I would suggest that it's a poor one...
There obviously needs to be counterplay, but by introducing the need to pray to RNGesus you've turned a potentially solid idea into something that is utterly wasteful.
My statistics are a little rusty... but as soon as the first missile is launched, every other ship has a 1 in 8 chance of being completely wasted, the second has a 2 in 8 chance of being wasted, the third has a 3 in 8 chance of being wasted, and so on. By the time you've got 4 missiles in the air you're just as likely to completely waste your shot as you are to help your fleet.
This is birthday paradox central.
Someone will have to check my maths as I'm pretty tired, but 1/8 * 2/8 * 3/8 * 4/8 * 5/8 * 6/8 * 7/8 * 8/8 means that if you counter 8 bombers with 8 support destroyers, your chance of destroying every incoming bomb is practically non-existent (0.2%) giving a 99% chance that a bomb is going to explode on top of your anti-bomber ship and likely destroy it.
That's from ONE wave... and in any major fight you're going to have 4 or 5 waves minimum to wreck the EHP of most doctrines.
With those kind of numbers, and the number of people required to effectively guard against multiple bombs in multiple waves, with such massively diminishing benefits, I see no circumstance where it would not be preferable to field those same people in sebo'd arty / rail destroyers, sit further away outside defensive bubbles, and try to blap the bombers before their bombs detonate. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3135
|
Posted - 2016.11.25 21:21:45 -
[22] - Quote
Sentient Blade wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:Sentient Blade wrote:So in order to guard your fleet effectively, you really need to put these almost directly on top of your existing fleet (which to need them would be something slow and heavy, say battlecruisers or battleships)... But they're destroyers... so realistically one or two bombs gets through and they're going to explode due to the low EHP of destroyers, especially when sig-bloomed by MWD.
They'll probably get annihilated by a small wing of RLML caracals anyway prior to bombs launching, but I'd say a passive bonus resistance to bomb damage wouldn't go amiss when fitting to destroyers. This is by design. We want to ensure there is plenty of counter-gameplay to destroyers screening a fleet from bombs with defenders. If this is a design decision, I would suggest that it's a poor one... There obviously needs to be counterplay, but by introducing the need to pray to RNGesus you've turned a potentially solid idea into something that is utterly wasteful. My statistics are a little rusty... but as soon as the first missile is launched, every other ship has a 1 in 8 chance of being completely wasted, the second has a 2 in 8 chance of being wasted, the third has a 3 in 8 chance of being wasted, and so on. By the time you've got 4 missiles in the air you're just as likely to completely waste your shot as you are to help your fleet. This is birthday paradox central. Someone will have to check my maths as I'm pretty tired, but 1/8 * 2/8 * 3/8 * 4/8 * 5/8 * 6/8 * 7/8 * 8/8 means that if you counter 8 bombers with 8 support destroyers, your chance of destroying every incoming bomb is practically non-existent (0.2%) giving a 99% chance that a bomb is going to explode on top of your anti-bomber ship and likely destroy it. That's from ONE wave... and in any major fight you're going to have 4 or 5 waves minimum to wreck the EHP of most doctrines. With those kind of numbers, and the number of people required to effectively guard against multiple bombs in multiple waves, with such massively diminishing benefits, I see no circumstance where it would not be preferable to field those same people in sebo'd arty / rail destroyers, sit further away outside defensive bubbles, and try to blap the bombers before their bombs detonate. You could do both? It doesn't appear to be meant a solid counter to a whole wave. You diminish their effectiveness, which matches the mechanics of almost every other counter-effect in game.
Even if we assume that on average you'll knock out 4/8 bombs, that mean they need to do twice as many runs, giving you double the opportunities to destroy the bombers. With its small fittings and easy skills, it's an easy addition to any destroyers on your fleet.
Other options to increase effectiveness also exist. If the denfender missiles are staggered over the course of 10 seconds, you can really improve the number of destroyed bombs by waiting until the number of bombs has dropped. |
Zappity
Horde Vanguard. Pandemic Horde
3072
|
Posted - 2016.11.25 21:47:26 -
[23] - Quote
I'd love to see new bomb types. Tracking Disruption or Missile Disruption AoE effects would be interesting.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
|
Sentient Blade
Crisis Atmosphere Coalition of the Unfortunate
1764
|
Posted - 2016.11.25 23:27:30 -
[24] - Quote
Rowells wrote:You could do both? It doesn't appear to be meant a solid counter to a whole wave. You diminish their effectiveness, which matches the mechanics of almost every other counter-effect in game.
Bombs, like all weapons, scale in a liner fashion, they don't have diminishing returns like say, a stasis webifier would.
My point was that your first wave of ships would fire off their missiles, attempting to destroy as many as possible... the chance of destroying all 8 in a wave would be incredibly low, meaning they're more often than not going to end up with the bombs going off in their faces and taking out the rest of the not-overly-tanky destroyers...
Then the next wave hits. |
Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
433
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 00:26:06 -
[25] - Quote
Sentient Blade wrote:Rowells wrote:You could do both? It doesn't appear to be meant a solid counter to a whole wave. You diminish their effectiveness, which matches the mechanics of almost every other counter-effect in game. Bombs, like all weapons, scale in a liner fashion, they don't have diminishing returns like say, a stasis webifier would. My point was that your first wave of ships would fire off their missiles, attempting to destroy as many as possible... the chance of destroying all 8 in a wave would be incredibly low, meaning they're more often than not going to end up with the bombs going off in their faces and taking out the rest of the not-overly-tanky destroyers... Then the next wave hits. Then you stagger the launch of the defenders. You should have enough time to get three distinct Defender waves off.
At the start, you can afford to gamble two/three Defenders as the chance of two picking the same bomb is 1/n for n-bombs. There's a ~65% chance of three Defenders picking different targets out of an eight-bomb wave.
Second round: Assuming the optimistic scenario of 5/8 bombs remaining, a second wave of three Defenders gives you a 48% chance of picking three of the remaining bombs.
That's a 31% chance of reducing bomber DPS by three quarters.
And you have about five seconds left to deal with those last two bombs.
TLDR. Don't blow your load as soon as you see bombs. |
elitatwo
Eve Minions O.U.Z.O. Alliance
1499
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 02:33:36 -
[26] - Quote
Yea-y-ish more stuff for blobb-online. Who even needs to learn to fly when you can just bring even morerer pilots.
Eve Minions is recruiting.
This is the law of ship progression!
Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
|
Nomistrav
Intaki Liberation Front Intaki Prosperity Initiative
360
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 03:51:31 -
[27] - Quote
VCBee 2fast2furious wrote:Just to confirm, do Defender Missiles 2.0 distinguish between friendly and non-friendly bombs?
At <15km, there's no such thing as a friendly bomb :P
Third Place Winner
Pod and Planet Fiction Contest YC114
|
Nomistrav
Intaki Liberation Front Intaki Prosperity Initiative
360
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 04:03:04 -
[28] - Quote
Rawketsled wrote:Sentient Blade wrote:Rowells wrote:You could do both? It doesn't appear to be meant a solid counter to a whole wave. You diminish their effectiveness, which matches the mechanics of almost every other counter-effect in game. Bombs, like all weapons, scale in a liner fashion, they don't have diminishing returns like say, a stasis webifier would. My point was that your first wave of ships would fire off their missiles, attempting to destroy as many as possible... the chance of destroying all 8 in a wave would be incredibly low, meaning they're more often than not going to end up with the bombs going off in their faces and taking out the rest of the not-overly-tanky destroyers... Then the next wave hits. Then you stagger the launch of the defenders. You should have enough time to get three distinct Defender waves off. At the start, you can afford to gamble two/three Defenders as the chance of two picking the same bomb is 1/n for n-bombs. There's a ~65% chance of three Defenders picking different targets out of an eight-bomb wave. Second round: Assuming the optimistic scenario of 5/8 bombs remaining, a second wave of three Defenders gives you a 48% chance of picking three of the remaining bombs. That's a 31% chance of reducing bomber DPS by three quarters. And you have about five seconds left to deal with those last two bombs. TLDR. Don't blow your load as soon as you see bombs.
Honestly, could just have one or two guys in Coraxs/Talwars play the role of Point Defense. Talwar gets a reduction to MWD sig penalty, so already he's going to fair better. Not to mention the missile velocity bonus (though I dunno if that'll affect defender missiles) would help out a bit. Slap them full of defender missiles and you have one or two guys who defend the fleet while the rest focus on their jobs. Bombing runs are situational anyway, so I don't really see a lot of fleet doctrines including one bay loaded with Defender Missiles on all ships for something that may or may not happen.
Besides, carry a Mobile Depot for refitting purposes and those guys can just switch out anyway.
Zappity wrote:I'd love to see new bomb types. Tracking Disruption or Missile Disruption AoE effects would be interesting.
Sort of like a Chaff Grenade. I like it.
Third Place Winner
Pod and Planet Fiction Contest YC114
|
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
431
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 07:06:24 -
[29] - Quote
Glad to see defender missiles getting some love. YAY, more reasons for destroyers to be used.
Not sure if this is the kind of healthy love they need, however. Not sure why the mechanics would prevent this from becoming a proper PDS to shoot down non-friendly missiles, but I suppose it was easier to code it to shoot down slow moving bombs than fast moving missiles.
I see a potential problem with this system however: if multiple bombs are launched and you have multiple destroyers armed with defender missiles: are they smart enough to not shoot the same target? If 3 defender missiles fire at 5 bombs, will 2 bombs survive or 4?
Cloaking is the closest thing to a "Pause Game" button one can get while in space.
|
Capqu
Half Empty
1208
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 08:13:00 -
[30] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote: Its truly random.
truly random is a concept, not an obtainable operation
what you mean to say it is sufficiently complex such that you cannot predict the outcome with available measurements and observations
this is not a serious post, more some attempted humour being injected into my life which my doctor (medical variety) says i sorely require
-capqu m.d. (mathematics variety)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
|
Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
433
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 09:18:55 -
[31] - Quote
Petrified wrote:Glad to see defender missiles getting some love. YAY, more reasons for destroyers to be used.
Not sure if this is the kind of healthy love they need, however. Not sure why the mechanics would prevent this from becoming a proper PDS to shoot down non-friendly missiles, but I suppose it was easier to code it to shoot down slow moving bombs than fast moving missiles.
I see a potential problem with this system however: if multiple bombs are launched and you have multiple destroyers armed with defender missiles: are they smart enough to not shoot the same target? If 3 defender missiles fire at 5 bombs, will 2 bombs survive or 4? Have a re-read of the posts in this thread. |
Grookshank
Jump Drive Appreciation Society
125
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 09:22:36 -
[32] - Quote
Can you please explain the reasoning for this change?
Bombing fleets is already not done that much anymore. Now you introduce a noskill/random/semi-automatic bomb killing missile and make it work for alphas. So large blops put their alphas in cheap destroyers to be safe from any bombing. Do you think this in engaging gameplay for alpha characters? Why do you think bombing is too strong to need a nerf? Why do you further strengthen large blobs against smaller groups?
I simply can't understand it. |
Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
433
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 09:34:15 -
[33] - Quote
Grookshank wrote:Can you please explain the reasoning for this change?
Bombing fleets is already not done that much anymore. Now you introduce a noskill/random/semi-automatic bomb killing missile and make it work for alphas. So large blops put their alphas in cheap destroyers to be safe from any bombing. Do you think this in engaging gameplay for alpha characters? Why do you think bombing is too strong to need a nerf? Why do you further strengthen large blobs against smaller groups?
I simply can't understand it. I imagine it's in anticipation of some forthcoming Battleship changes. |
Cristl
515
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 09:55:09 -
[34] - Quote
Sentient Blade wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:Sentient Blade wrote:So in order to guard your fleet effectively, you really need to put these almost directly on top of your existing fleet (which to need them would be something slow and heavy, say battlecruisers or battleships)... But they're destroyers... so realistically one or two bombs gets through and they're going to explode due to the low EHP of destroyers, especially when sig-bloomed by MWD.
They'll probably get annihilated by a small wing of RLML caracals anyway prior to bombs launching, but I'd say a passive bonus resistance to bomb damage wouldn't go amiss when fitting to destroyers. This is by design. We want to ensure there is plenty of counter-gameplay to destroyers screening a fleet from bombs with defenders. If this is a design decision, I would suggest that it's a poor one... There obviously needs to be counterplay, but by introducing the need to pray to RNGesus you've turned a potentially solid idea into something that is utterly wasteful. My statistics are a little rusty... but as soon as the first missile is launched, every other ship has a 1 in 8 chance of being completely wasted, the second has a 2 in 8 chance of being wasted, the third has a 3 in 8 chance of being wasted, and so on. By the time you've got 4 missiles in the air you're just as likely to completely waste your shot as you are to help your fleet. This is birthday paradox central. Someone will have to check my maths as I'm pretty tired, but 1/8 * 2/8 * 3/8 * 4/8 * 5/8 * 6/8 * 7/8 * 8/8 means that if you counter 8 bombers with 8 support destroyers, your chance of destroying every incoming bomb is practically non-existent (0.2%) giving a 99% chance that a bomb is going to explode on top of your anti-bomber ship and likely destroy it. That's from ONE wave... and in any major fight you're going to have 4 or 5 waves minimum to wreck the EHP of most doctrines. With those kind of numbers, and the number of people required to effectively guard against multiple bombs in multiple waves, with such massively diminishing benefits, I see no circumstance where it would not be preferable to field those same people in sebo'd arty / rail destroyers, sit further away outside defensive bubbles, and try to blap the bombers before their bombs detonate. Your stats are indeed pretty rusty, I'll give more detail when I'm not on a mobile.
However, an obvious failing seems to be: what if a bomber wing fires one bomb before the main wave. Won't all defenders then fire towards that, leaving the main bomb wave to hit unmolested? |
Capqu
Half Empty
1208
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 10:22:08 -
[35] - Quote
to the above: assuming each bomb is equally likely to be hit [unlikely in practise], the probability of 8 destroyers destroying 8 bombs if all 8 destroyers fire their defender missile at the same time while all 8 bombs are in range is as follows ( 8! / 8^8 ) = .0024~ just under 1/400 basically
all these launchers will do is make bombing require more people, not be harder or more interesting, just more tedious and frustrating as the fc herds a bag of spiders to make it increasingly likely that a full wave of bombs lands, the bombers have to add more bombs to each wave. whereas before you would launch exactly max bombs per wave, now you will probably want to launch max+3 or 4 to have a high chance of a full hit
this just exasperates all the boring parts of bombing (especially in tidi), where non-fc bomber fleet members literally just sit cloaked for hours. it doesn't provide any interesting game play, it just nerfs an already dying way of 3rd partying or supplementing your main fleet
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
Capqu
Half Empty
1208
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 10:27:36 -
[36] - Quote
and like i previously said, fozziesov and being unable to predict the location of engagements already severely hampers a bomber wings ability to influence an engagement. adding more required pilots per bomb wave through these launchers just ensures less people will be willing to try it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
Ammzi
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
1916
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 10:41:41 -
[37] - Quote
From a game balancing perspective this makes absolutely no sense unless you plan to roll back the bomber nerfs from 2013. Bombers with bomb launchers are used rarely in any large engagement now-a-days due to the distributed multi-grid fights across several systems making the logistics and strategy of a bomber fleet quite complicated.
But now you wish to take the remaining and small usability of bombers and throw that completely out by giving an I-WIN button to counter bombs. Where is the logic in this? Usually these balance posts are preluded by motivation for a particular nerf or boost. I.e. "We will that bombers in general are too powerful in the current game play". But there's no such explanation given here - possibly hinting that you don't have a legitimate motivation.
This change will lead to simply extinguishing an interesting and dynamic combat mechanic in EVE. |
elitatwo
Eve Minions O.U.Z.O. Alliance
1499
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 11:58:57 -
[38] - Quote
Ammzi wrote:...Bombers with bomb launchers are used rarely in any large engagement now-a-days due to the distributed multi-grid fights across several systems...
This is a good thing, not a bad thing.
Eve Minions is recruiting.
This is the law of ship progression!
Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
|
Grookshank
Jump Drive Appreciation Society
125
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 12:02:49 -
[39] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:Ammzi wrote:...Bombers with bomb launchers are used rarely in any large engagement now-a-days due to the distributed multi-grid fights across several systems... This is a good thing, not a bad thing. Yes, removing gameplay options is good. Let's rat, mine, stay safe tethered on citadels and only move out for arranged fun fights :/ |
Ilian Amarin
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
22
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 12:08:10 -
[40] - Quote
While i personally agree with the idea of this concept. Its execution, in my opinion, is pretty bad.
Having the defender missile randomly choose a bomb is just outright stupid.
Just make it rather quick for a dessie (~2-3s) to lock onto a bomb and make the defender launcher a targeted attack against the bomb that kills it.
Also please give us EWar bomb types, for e.g. Tracking Disruption, Sensor Dampening with an AOE timed effect. Kind of like an inverse command burst.
And those bombs should take like 2 defender missiles to take out. |
|
Martin Gregor
Kriegsmarinewerft Goonswarm Federation
9
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 12:31:07 -
[41] - Quote
I don't see any need for this in the current meta. Sure, defender missiles are pretty useless right now, but making bombs useless just to make defender missiles useful is a very bad trade. |
Lumpymayo
Jebediah Kerman's Junkyard and Spaceship Parts Co. V. O. I. D.
105
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 12:31:34 -
[42] - Quote
I've been telling new players for a month now not to train bombers because of this nerf. The Counter play to the Counter Play against bombers is not to fly them anymore.
Welcome to Destroyers Online. |
James Cowpet
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 12:39:19 -
[43] - Quote
The physicist in me is triggered. |
Dejara Thoris
Alea Iacta Est Universal Blades of Grass
5
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 12:44:54 -
[44] - Quote
Do missile guidance disruptors work on these new Defender missiles? |
Loran Chelien
4.20ly Mining Range Circle-Of-Two
0
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 12:45:52 -
[45] - Quote
What if a defender missile is going after a bomb and that bomb gets blown up by another defender missile, does it retarget to another bomb? |
Daktar Jaxs
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
54
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 12:46:11 -
[46] - Quote
this is a dumb idea, i hate you |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
18211
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 12:50:08 -
[47] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Hi Space Friends, Coming with the December release, we're going to be releasing a feature we talked about at EVE Vegas 2016. Defender Missile SkillThe skill, Defender Missiles, will no longer require Missile Launcher Operation. All alpha characters will be able to train this to Level 1. The skill will provide a 10% per level bonus to Defender Missile velocity. No other skills will effect Defender Missiles. Defender MissilesDefender Missiles will no longer shoot down missiles aimed at you. Instead they will launch at a random bomb (non-structure) within its flight range. A single defender missile will kill any bomb. These defender missiles can only be loaded into a new defender launcher (described below) The Defender Missile I has a base range of 30km (45km at max skills), and a flight time of 3 seconds. During the December patch downtime, all existing defender missiles (and their blueprints) will become the new Defender Missile IDefender LaunchersThe Defender Launcher I can only load Defender Missiles. It may only be fit to Destroyer class vessels (Destroyers, Interdictors, Command Destroyers and Tactical Destroyers). Once activated, it will scan local space for any bombs,and if it finds one within range, launch a defender missile to intercept it. If it doesn't find any bombs within range, it will still cycle. The Defender Launcher I has a 120 second reactivation timer. It doesn't require a launcher hardpoint, and has low fitting requirements (10 cpu, 2 powergrid), but uses some capacitor (50gj) to activate. You can only fit one defender launcher. Command DestroyersCommand Destroyers receive at 50% role bonus to decreasing the reactivation timer on Defender Launchers. Bomb ChangesBombs now have a Minimum Velocity of 1m/s that you must be traveling at before you can launch. This is to fix some issues that can happen when your velocity is 0, causing the bomb not to move and just explode on you. You can checkout these changes (and more) on Sisi soon. We appreciate any feedback you have! Cheers, CCP Larrikin and Team Phenomenon
Excellent change, long overdue.
"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."
Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
|
Capqu
Half Empty
1213
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:00:16 -
[48] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:
Excellent change, long overdue.
state ur reasoning
[read: make up some reasoning now u brown-nosing pizza ****]
oh wait i forgot u just blindly agree with anything that nerfs things u don't do nor ever will do
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
Olmeca Gold
Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc.
30
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:01:51 -
[49] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Hi Space Friends, Coming with the December release, we're going to be releasing a feature we talked about at EVE Vegas 2016. Defender Missile SkillThe skill, Defender Missiles, will no longer require Missile Launcher Operation. All alpha characters will be able to train this to Level 1. The skill will provide a 10% per level bonus to Defender Missile velocity. No other skills will effect Defender Missiles. Defender MissilesDefender Missiles will no longer shoot down missiles aimed at you. Instead they will launch at a random bomb (non-structure) within its flight range. A single defender missile will kill any bomb. These defender missiles can only be loaded into a new defender launcher (described below) The Defender Missile I has a base range of 30km (45km at max skills), and a flight time of 3 seconds. During the December patch downtime, all existing defender missiles (and their blueprints) will become the new Defender Missile IDefender LaunchersThe Defender Launcher I can only load Defender Missiles. It may only be fit to Destroyer class vessels (Destroyers, Interdictors, Command Destroyers and Tactical Destroyers). Once activated, it will scan local space for any bombs,and if it finds one within range, launch a defender missile to intercept it. If it doesn't find any bombs within range, it will still cycle. The Defender Launcher I has a 120 second reactivation timer. It doesn't require a launcher hardpoint, and has low fitting requirements (10 cpu, 2 powergrid), but uses some capacitor (50gj) to activate. You can only fit one defender launcher. Command DestroyersCommand Destroyers receive at 50% role bonus to decreasing the reactivation timer on Defender Launchers. Bomb ChangesBombs now have a Minimum Velocity of 1m/s that you must be traveling at before you can launch. This is to fix some issues that can happen when your velocity is 0, causing the bomb not to move and just explode on you. You can checkout these changes (and more) on Sisi soon. We appreciate any feedback you have! Cheers, CCP Larrikin and Team Phenomenon
Hey CCP,
I just want to urge you to think about this question: when was the last time you have seen a bombing run evaporating an entire fleet? They instantly get posted on reddit, and you can see it happens perhaps once in a month, if one is to give an optimist estimate. There has been plenty of large fights during past months, but no proper bombing runs anyone has ever showed off. This means bombing is already close to be eliminated from meta.
Now I believe you have all those nullsec people as CSM and overrepresent them in the feedback you keep hearing, and they keep telling you how there is no counterplay to bombing runs. But this is because they have never been behind one. The main challenge of a bombing run today is setting it up, and finding a proper fleet to bomb. I would safely say more than %70 of the doctrines people are using are not bombable, because it simply takes too many waves for fleet to die, and they can simply warp off. Furthermore, bombable fleets are everywhere as well. Hurricanes are all over nullsec fights, which shows being bombable does not significantly limit people to unbombable doctrines. So here is already one counterplay; warping off. Here is another: having 5-10 ceptors circling your fleet trying to decloak people. Here is another: Never standing still.
Thus there are already huge countermeasures to bombing, but they are all indirect, thus people are not aware the relation between these and countering bombruns. And then when they die to that bombrun they complain how it was impossible to evade.
I get that these changes give alphas meaningful gameplay, while also giving people chance to directly respond to bombruns, which are in themselves interesting. BUT PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD do not push bombing out of the meta even more. It is one of the most fun, most interesting combat mechanics in Eve, such that you featured it before everything else in This is Eve. Now you are making it so that nobody takes out bombing fleets anymore.
If you really want anti-bomb missiles so much because they are an interesting mechanic, you definitely need to buff bombing to keep it inside meta. This can be done in the form of increasing the amount of bombs you can explode next to each other, enabling ewar bombs to be exploded next to damage bombs, introducing t2 bombs, or combinations of these.
I hope you can hear our voice at times over those null people you keep listening a lot.
Olmeca Bombers Bar FC |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2588
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:16:21 -
[50] - Quote
Olmeca Gold wrote:Now I will say this and I will get downvoted to hell as every time
http://i.imgur.com/ujc3Y7s.png
Olmeca Gold wrote: believe you have all those nullsec people as CSM and overrepresent them in the feedback you keep hearing
There's a remedy for this.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
Olmeca Gold
Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc.
30
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:28:50 -
[51] - Quote
Querns wrote:There's a remedy for this.
What if I want to just play a balanced game, and make my opinions about what makes it better heard, but and not make the game a huge deal in my real life? Or what if I don't care about achieving a huge organization, or just don't want to play the game in that way as a part of such an organization? Because this is how the majority who is not a part of NC/PC/Goons feels like. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2588
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:33:42 -
[52] - Quote
Olmeca Gold wrote:Querns wrote:There's a remedy for this. What if I want to just play a balanced game, and make my opinions about what makes it better heard, but and not make the game a huge deal in my real life? Or what if I don't care about achieving a huge organization, or just don't want to play the game in that way as a part of such an organization? Because this is how the majority who is not a part of NC/PC/Goons feels like.
The remedy is to vote, not to join a large power bloc.
I wouldn't worry too much, though. After our complete and total defeat in the Casino Wars, you probably won't see much of GSF on the CSM next year.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Kasia en Tilavine
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
88
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:34:40 -
[53] - Quote
I think everyone appreciates the effort to make the defender missiles and their skills actually do something. But as a dozen people have already said.... nobody bombs anymore. Bombs are so lacking in utility or efficacy, this is the gravestone of bombing as a whole. Unless this release is PAIRED with a whole new suite of bombs, "bombing" will be all but forgotten.
Here is a list of crazy new utility to bombing that you could include:
High speed bombs that travel (and detonate) faster High range bombs that go faster with the same travel time Proximity bombs that detonate when a ship is within 50% of its explosion range E-war bombs that produce a single use of effects like the supers aoe projections Shrapnel bombs that do enormous damage to drones, but very little to ships High radius bombs with lower damage and better application persistent effect bombs that produce an aoe affect bubble that travels with it during its entire flight time
If you're going to let people shut down bombing runs, you need to make sure people want to bomb. |
Olmeca Gold
Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc.
30
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:36:01 -
[54] - Quote
Querns wrote:Olmeca Gold wrote:Querns wrote:There's a remedy for this. What if I want to just play a balanced game, and make my opinions about what makes it better heard, but and not make the game a huge deal in my real life? Or what if I don't care about achieving a huge organization, or just don't want to play the game in that way as a part of such an organization? Because this is how the majority who is not a part of NC/PC/Goons feels like. The remedy is to vote, not to join a large power bloc. I wouldn't worry too much, though. After our complete and total defeat in the Casino Wars, you probably won't see much of GSF on the CSM next year.
Well actually I wish DBRB was CSM or something, at least some bomber voice would be heard, and he is the only one FC from null that I know. And you will prolly be replaced by other null people, so that changes nothing from our perspective. |
Chance Ravinne
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services WiNGSPAN Delivery Network
672
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:36:20 -
[55] - Quote
This will be the fourth or fifth nerf to bombing runs in what, one and a half years? It seemed to me on CSM X that the signal radius, warp speed, bomb flight time, and input broadcasting nerfs succeeded in reducing abusive bombing runs.
As other users pointed out, it doesn't seem bombing runs are so oppressive that they need a fourth nerf. Perhaps this would be the time to consider rolling back one or two of the previous nerfs? Doing so will actively encourage more Defender Missile pilots anyway.
You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
|
Capqu
Half Empty
1213
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:36:29 -
[56] - Quote
Kasia en Tilavine wrote:I think everyone appreciates the effort to make the defender missiles and their skills actually do something. But as a dozen people have already said.... nobody bombs anymore. Bombs are so lacking in utility or efficacy, this is the gravestone of bombing as a whole. Unless this release is PAIRED with a whole new suite of bombs, "bombing" will be all but forgotten.
Here is a list of crazy new utility to bombing that you could include:
...
If you're going to let people shut down bombing runs, you need to make sure people want to bomb.
you're a new person but i like you a lot thanks for the post very eloquent [not sarcasm]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2588
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:36:47 -
[57] - Quote
Kasia en Tilavine wrote:I think everyone appreciates the effort to make the defender missiles and their skills actually do something. But as a dozen people have already said.... nobody bombs anymore. Bombs are so lacking in utility or efficacy, this is the gravestone of bombing as a whole. Unless this release is PAIRED with a whole new suite of bombs, "bombing" will be all but forgotten.
"No one" bombs any more because the entire game flies T3Cs, or other sig-tanking doctrines whose primary benefit is resistance to bombs. Providing counterplay other than training Strategic Cruisers opens up quite a bit of room for other ships to actually get used in nullsec.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Capqu
Half Empty
1213
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:37:24 -
[58] - Quote
Olmeca Gold wrote:Querns wrote:Olmeca Gold wrote:Querns wrote:There's a remedy for this. What if I want to just play a balanced game, and make my opinions about what makes it better heard, but and not make the game a huge deal in my real life? Or what if I don't care about achieving a huge organization, or just don't want to play the game in that way as a part of such an organization? Because this is how the majority who is not a part of NC/PC/Goons feels like. The remedy is to vote, not to join a large power bloc. I wouldn't worry too much, though. After our complete and total defeat in the Casino Wars, you probably won't see much of GSF on the CSM next year. Well actually I wish DBRB was CSM or something, at least some bomber voice would be heard, and he is the only one FC from null that I know. And you will prolly be replaced by other null people, so that changes nothing from our perspective.
fear not the csm, reddit is the true battleground
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2588
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:38:54 -
[59] - Quote
Olmeca Gold wrote: Well actually I wish DBRB was CSM or something, at least some bomber voice would be heard, and he is the only one FC from null that I know. And you will prolly be replaced by other null people, so that changes nothing from our perspective.
So vote, and be the change you wish to see.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Olmeca Gold
Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc.
30
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:39:33 -
[60] - Quote
Querns wrote:Kasia en Tilavine wrote:I think everyone appreciates the effort to make the defender missiles and their skills actually do something. But as a dozen people have already said.... nobody bombs anymore. Bombs are so lacking in utility or efficacy, this is the gravestone of bombing as a whole. Unless this release is PAIRED with a whole new suite of bombs, "bombing" will be all but forgotten.
"No one" bombs any more because the entire game flies T3Cs, or other sig-tanking doctrines whose primary benefit is resistance to bombs. Providing counterplay other than training Strategic Cruisers opens up quite a bit of room for other ships to actually get used in nullsec.
This is plain wrong. Hurricanes, feroxes, etc. etc. are everywhere. |
|
Olmeca Gold
Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc.
30
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:40:26 -
[61] - Quote
Querns wrote:Olmeca Gold wrote: Well actually I wish DBRB was CSM or something, at least some bomber voice would be heard, and he is the only one FC from null that I know. And you will prolly be replaced by other null people, so that changes nothing from our perspective.
So vote, and be the change you wish to see.
Thats really idealist of you :) |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2588
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:41:32 -
[62] - Quote
Olmeca Gold wrote:Querns wrote:Kasia en Tilavine wrote:I think everyone appreciates the effort to make the defender missiles and their skills actually do something. But as a dozen people have already said.... nobody bombs anymore. Bombs are so lacking in utility or efficacy, this is the gravestone of bombing as a whole. Unless this release is PAIRED with a whole new suite of bombs, "bombing" will be all but forgotten.
"No one" bombs any more because the entire game flies T3Cs, or other sig-tanking doctrines whose primary benefit is resistance to bombs. Providing counterplay other than training Strategic Cruisers opens up quite a bit of room for other ships to actually get used in nullsec. This is plain wrong. Hurricanes, feroxes, etc. etc. are everywhere.
Tell that to DBRB, who can mysteriously never find any of those when he's online.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Capqu
Half Empty
1213
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:41:51 -
[63] - Quote
Querns wrote:Kasia en Tilavine wrote:I think everyone appreciates the effort to make the defender missiles and their skills actually do something. But as a dozen people have already said.... nobody bombs anymore. Bombs are so lacking in utility or efficacy, this is the gravestone of bombing as a whole. Unless this release is PAIRED with a whole new suite of bombs, "bombing" will be all but forgotten.
"No one" bombs any more because the entire game flies T3Cs, or other sig-tanking doctrines whose primary benefit is resistance to bombs. Providing counterplay other than training Strategic Cruisers opens up quite a bit of room for other ships to actually get used in nullsec.
completely wrong
the most common fleet doctrine in nullsec currently is an mwd shield hurricane bother super easy to bomb
on an unrelated i think you should have to actually get at least 1 killmail in the past 3 months to post on these forums because then theres a chance you might actually know what youre talking about probably not tho at least in your case
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2588
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:42:24 -
[64] - Quote
Olmeca Gold wrote:Querns wrote:Olmeca Gold wrote: Well actually I wish DBRB was CSM or something, at least some bomber voice would be heard, and he is the only one FC from null that I know. And you will prolly be replaced by other null people, so that changes nothing from our perspective.
So vote, and be the change you wish to see. Thats really idealist of you :)
It's how we get folks onto the CSM. It's not hard; you just vote, instead of not voting.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2588
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:43:49 -
[65] - Quote
Capqu wrote: on an unrelated i think you should have to actually get at least 1 killmail in the past 3 months to post on these forums because then theres a chance you might actually know what youre talking about probably not tho at least in your case
Ah, the killboard shame. How it burns!
Why the heck would I want to use Querns, the character, to get kills? He can't even fly a super.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Capqu
Half Empty
1213
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:44:18 -
[66] - Quote
i said unrelated note nothing to do with u fine poster
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2588
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:45:59 -
[67] - Quote
Also, none of my characters have an API on zkb :ssh:
(i still don't really shoot mans with Querns though so zkb is probably pretty accurate)
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Samsara Toldya
Academy of Contradictory Behaviour
1239
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:51:17 -
[68] - Quote
So... the "random" part.
Let's say there is a bombing wing with 11 bombers while there are 10 destroyers with d.i.c.k.s. cycling on grid.
Bomber 1 decloakes and launch a bomb.
10 d.i.c.k.s. get triggert by nearby bomb and shoot down the single bomb, causing 120 seconds cooldown on every d.i.c.k.
Remaining 10 bombers decloak and launch bombs.
Very random.
Or do all d.i.c.k.s. on grid communicate with each other and only a single defender missile is fired when there is only one bomb nearby? |
Olmeca Gold
Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc.
30
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:52:20 -
[69] - Quote
Querns wrote:Olmeca Gold wrote:Querns wrote:Olmeca Gold wrote: Well actually I wish DBRB was CSM or something, at least some bomber voice would be heard, and he is the only one FC from null that I know. And you will prolly be replaced by other null people, so that changes nothing from our perspective.
So vote, and be the change you wish to see. Thats really idealist of you :) It's how we get folks onto the CSM. It's not hard; you just vote, instead of not voting.
I mean I just stated I didn't want more of nullsec in CSM even though I would have preferred if that will be the case at least bomber FCs being CSM. So im not voting for you.
The people I vote do not win. Because they cant get votes unless they have backing of organized nullsec groups. So its no remedy. |
Olmeca Gold
Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc.
30
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:53:28 -
[70] - Quote
Samsara Toldya wrote:So... the "random" part.
Let's say there is a bombing wing with 11 bombers while there are 10 destroyers with d.i.c.k.s. cycling on grid.
Bomber 1 decloakes and launch a bomb.
10 d.i.c.k.s. get triggert by nearby bomb and shoot down the single bomb, causing 120 seconds cooldown on every d.i.c.k.
Remaining 10 bombers decloak and launch bombs.
Very random.
Or do all d.i.c.k.s. on grid communicate with each other and only a single defender missile is fired when there is only one bomb nearby?
Depends on how they do things. But they at least have time and means to communicate, or even decide beforehand who launches when. |
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2588
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:53:41 -
[71] - Quote
Olmeca Gold wrote: The people I vote do not win. Because they cant get votes unless they have backing of organized nullsec groups. So its no remedy.
Then organize your own group? You don't even have to blue them or fly with them.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Spark Progenitori
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
8
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 13:54:16 -
[72] - Quote
Does this mean you can buff bombers back up again? Having every dictor, t3d, and CD in a fleet with a defender launcher means you need an exceptional amount of bombers in multiple waves to make an impact.
Like, can we not have cloaked ships decloak each other again? This is a dramatic QOL item for running bomber fleets.
also some variety in bombs would be cool: velocity, range, aoe, maybe even other effects along the lines of void bombs (web, sensor strength, tracking disruption) |
Olmeca Gold
Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc.
30
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 14:00:31 -
[73] - Quote
Querns wrote:Olmeca Gold wrote: The people I vote do not win. Because they cant get votes unless they have backing of organized nullsec groups. So its no remedy.
Then organize your own group? You don't even have to blue them or fly with them.
The problem is having to go through such an effort to make your voice heard. Because it is not like people who actually goes through this effort has a more valuable voice. I think posting here is enough effort to spend for such a goal, but definitely not organizing a campaign, as most do.
The entire CSM system is broken. CCP should rely on carefully reading these forums instead of elections with insignificant turnout to make people feel heard. I mean there is just 2 people who does not represent those nullsec fleets, and 4 people who is entirely independent from NC PL or Goons. Would it be surprising to keep hearing changes which primarily benefits organized big nullsec fleets? |
Olmeca Gold
Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc.
30
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 14:03:24 -
[74] - Quote
Spark Progenitori wrote:Does this mean you can buff bombers back up again? Having every dictor, t3d, and CD in a fleet with a defender launcher means you need an exceptional amount of bombers in multiple waves to make an impact.
Like, can we not have cloaked ships decloak each other again? This is a dramatic QOL item for running bomber fleets.
also some variety in bombs would be cool: velocity, range, aoe, maybe even other effects along the lines of void bombs (web, sensor strength, tracking disruption)
Cloaked ships do not decloak each other already. it was a proposed change but never went alive. |
Winter Archipelago
Autumn Industrial Enterprises
798
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 14:17:54 -
[75] - Quote
Quote:Bombs now have a Minimum Velocity of 1m/s that you must be traveling at before you can launch. This is to fix some issues that can happen when your velocity is 0, causing the bomb not to move and just explode on you. This honestly makes me a little sad. It was a fun little quirk of bombs.
For the Newbies: The 8 Golden Rules - The Magic 14 Skills - Finding the Right Corp - EVE University Wiki
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2588
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 14:27:52 -
[76] - Quote
Olmeca Gold wrote:Querns wrote:Olmeca Gold wrote: The people I vote do not win. Because they cant get votes unless they have backing of organized nullsec groups. So its no remedy.
Then organize your own group? You don't even have to blue them or fly with them. The problem is having to go through such an effort to make your voice heard. Because it is not like people who actually goes through this effort has a more valuable voice. I think posting here is enough effort to spend for such a goal, but definitely not organizing a campaign, as most do. The entire CSM system is broken. CCP should rely on carefully reading these forums instead of elections with insignificant turnout to make people feel heard. I mean there is just 2 people who does not represent those nullsec fleets, and 4 people who is entirely independent from NC PL or Goons. Would it be surprising to keep hearing changes which primarily benefits organized big nullsec fleets?
Nah. The CSM works because it allows for the representation of a much larger number of players. A forum post can be made by anyone.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Winter Archipelago
Autumn Industrial Enterprises
798
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 14:36:31 -
[77] - Quote
Here's my question on this: will the new defender launchers only fire a Defender Missile at the start of their cycle, or will it be at any point during their active cycle? Because if it's at any point, then there's no reason not to keep them cycling constantly, but if it's only when they begin their cycle, then it actually adds a (small amount of) strategic element into the change.
If it's only at the beginning of the cycle, that isn't so bad, but if it's at any point during the cycle, that makes it pretty powerful.
If it is at any point, how about a bit of a drawback to using these, then (beyond a small amount of cap)? Destroyers are small ships and benefit from sig tanking (especially T3D's). While the Defender Launcher is cycling, give a +100% sig bloom (double the sig) since the launcher is actively scanning for incoming for bombs.
If it's only at the beginning of the cycle, though, then these aren't going to be nearly as detrimental to bombing as people are thinking (still a nerf, yes, but not a nerf with a crippling nerf).
For the Newbies: The 8 Golden Rules - The Magic 14 Skills - Finding the Right Corp - EVE University Wiki
|
Malakai Asamov
Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition.
39
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 14:37:26 -
[78] - Quote
Why would you not announce the details of this new feature at EDU in person? |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2588
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 14:38:04 -
[79] - Quote
Malakai Asamov wrote:Why would you not announce this new feature at EDU in person?
It was announced at Eve Vegas.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Malakai Asamov
Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition.
39
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 14:39:20 -
[80] - Quote
Querns wrote:Malakai Asamov wrote:Why would you not announce this new feature at EDU in person? It was announced at Eve Vegas.
Details? Better yet why would you not leak this on a pub crawl?
|
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2588
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 14:41:51 -
[81] - Quote
Malakai Asamov wrote:Querns wrote:Malakai Asamov wrote:Why would you not announce this new feature at EDU in person? It was announced at Eve Vegas. Details? Better yet why would you not leak this on a pub crawl?
Pretty much everything in the dev blog was talked about during an Eve Vegas presentation. In fact, one fact that was at the presentation that isn't in the post is that they were initially gonna call this module something that was a backronym for "DICKS." I'm a little sad that the joke was removed, but eh.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Whisperen
Delta vane Corp. Mordus Angels
54
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 14:42:05 -
[82] - Quote
Why not give this to assault frigates? Some more ships need to be able to bomb maybe a t2 Attack BC or a T2 BS with just frigate bombers and a hard counter on a destroyer hull i doubt this will see much action. |
Angry RedGummyBear
Dystopian Heaven Circle-Of-Two
13
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 14:55:48 -
[83] - Quote
Capqu wrote: on an unrelated i think you should have to actually get at least 1 killmail in the past 3 months to post on these forums because then theres a chance you might actually know what youre talking about probably not tho at least in your case
THINK OF THE LOGI BROS |
Infrequent
Mass Collapse It Must Be Jelly Cause Jam Don't Shake
99
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 15:07:50 -
[84] - Quote
Are you actually kidding me right now!? Do you have any idea of the effect this is going to have, nullsec groups that are already entrenched with their shiny fleets will now just use their alpha proxy alliances to screen off bombers at will, you have effectively killed bombing runs in nullsec pvp, keeping in mind that bombing runs are not even that common anymore nor are they OP, this is ridiculous. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1276
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 15:59:31 -
[85] - Quote
I don't think command destroyers need another special thing they can do. just the unique gamebreaking jump module is enough stuff for a class |
Icarus Narcissus
Pathway to the Next
43
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 16:25:16 -
[86] - Quote
Will these modules also impact guided bombs from structures?
|
Vivace Naaris
OpSec. Wrong Hole.
4
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 16:36:48 -
[87] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:VCBee 2fast2furious wrote:Just to confirm, do Defender Missiles 2.0 distinguish between friendly and non-friendly bombs? They do not, they target a random bomb within intercept range. It does not consider friendly or non-friendly bombs. Rowells wrote:So, in regards to how it selects a bomb, is it truly random or does it pick the closest one? Its truly random.
So the distance of two bombs from the launch point will not make a difference? If one is 5km, another 15 or 20km, it could just as easily go for the 15-20km one?
|
Luckyyy Strike
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
1
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 16:39:28 -
[88] - Quote
maybe balance the nerf by making the bombs explode even after the bombers death...but i bet on legacy code |
Nova Valentis
The Bombers Bar
0
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 16:50:31 -
[89] - Quote
Hello,
i am definitly biased on this topic since bombing is the only thing that brought me into this game and for me FCing a successfull bombrun is still the best thing in any game ever. Ever. By far.
Reading the threat it seems as if most people find the nerf too harsh and unneeded, i have to agree in some parts. It seems like bombingruns aren't a big factor in the game anymore and i strongly believe it's due to the phoebe bombing nerfs and the way sov. warfare has changed and gotten more mobile. People obviously not willing to spend hours of creating at least six bookmarks for every point of interest ideally at least 1k in distance in each system of a cluster where a fight could happen, plus a few systems on where those two fleets hopefully fighting meet doesnt make it more appealling.
I see how making a useless skill usefull to balance something that was unbalanced half a decade ago sounds appealing. I also see the possibility of large groups strongly benefiting from this. But noone can really predict what will happen so i'd take the challenge and see how it pans out
IF Bombers get unnerfed to pre-phoebe conditions:
1. Warpspeed 2. Agility 3. 10 second bombtime
Why? 1&2 to get bombers in position quicker for bombingruns. 3. Most doctrines can warp out in under 10 seconds without propmod anyway. But having to wait 6s for each following wave is an additional nerf to bombingruns if you do waves.
- some of the reasons bombers got the harsh phoebe nerf are gone from the game now anyway: i.e. IS-boxing bombers - Maybe the reason people dont want to fly battleships as much is due to their warpspeed, not only the abstract fear of 50 bombers.
This would give low SP players a real opportunity to have a meaningfull impact in big nullsec fights, even with a shitton of counters available to their targets.
@CCP i really hope you take the above proposition into consideration. Additional insight: when i try to get new FCs interested in trying to do bombing runs and they say "but it sounds so complicated" i answer: "no you only need to know tactic A, B, variation of B, C, D, F, practice them multiple times probably without any success, these two FC ships, learn all of the common NS doctrines, know each weakpoint and warpouttime, have cloaky dictors everywhere, coordinate everything down to the second have contacts in every major alliance, spend hours of preparation and if you're lucky they don't bring T3s nor blueball and forget how not to get bombed. It'll work 30% of the time, everytime. Oh and you actually gotta FC so a newbro doesnt decloak everyone." - then in those moments i realize why people rather do something else.
|
Sbrodor
Oscura Simmetria The Volition Cult
176
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 17:16:57 -
[90] - Quote
Please CCP remove bomber from game at all so you can apply freely the N+1 > N fight tecnique.
eve online sometime is great DESPITE ccp nerf and modification.
why not introduce the t2 bomb? all single equipment of eveonline have t2 spec?
You nerfed BOMBER to hell , damage overtake of bombs eachother, 12 sec launch time, damage of void and lockbraker, useless dumb ******** void focused bomb with 1m range, useless lockbraker bomb, no t2 bomb, and again smartbomb wall, MJD device for avoid bomb run and now the defender missiles? you need that? make the bomb have the 50% chance of autotrigger inside bombe please NOW cause the CSM10 cry and cry for the next fleet wiped out of bomber....
You cancelled every bomber bar i know except ossim and few other bomber bar maybe could be nice ask to some bomba master before introducing nerf over nerf.
i think this defender missile is stupid and useless and we will continue to bomb and wasting fleet like every single day and if u want specialize even more the bomb run i ask to submit the t2 bomb with more range, more damage, more power.
this is stupid and un-necessary. |
|
Nova Valentis
The Bombers Bar
0
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 17:46:52 -
[91] - Quote
Sbrodor wrote:why not introduce the t2 bomb? .
Yeah that would be something really nice! T2 Bombs! !
I agree on almost everything you say, but the focused void bombs work in small engagements only in big fights they're kinda useless. I also would change the lockbreaker into something more interesting. Noone really uses them, for reasons. |
Olmeca Gold
Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc.
30
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 17:48:05 -
[92] - Quote
Winter Archipelago wrote:Quote:Bombs now have a Minimum Velocity of 1m/s that you must be traveling at before you can launch. This is to fix some issues that can happen when your velocity is 0, causing the bomb not to move and just explode on you. This honestly makes me a little sad. It was a fun little quirk of bombs.
You have no idea how big my plans were for this little feature :S |
Olmeca Gold
Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc.
30
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 17:50:05 -
[93] - Quote
Querns wrote: Nah. The CSM works because it allows for the representation of a much larger number of players. A forum post can be made by anyone.
You mean like maybe %10 of the player base, who only does sov nullsec?
Or else I dont know how you can explain only one of them not having ties to nullsec blob alliances.
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2588
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 17:57:42 -
[94] - Quote
Olmeca Gold wrote:Querns wrote: Nah. The CSM works because it allows for the representation of a much larger number of players. A forum post can be made by anyone.
You mean like maybe %10 of the player base, who only does sov nullsec? Or else I dont know how you can explain only one of them not having ties to nullsec blob alliances.
Easy -- they don't vote. If they truly outnumber sov nullsec the way you assert, it should be a breeze for them to elect any candidate they want.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Sbrodor
Oscura Simmetria The Volition Cult
176
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 18:03:50 -
[95] - Quote
CSM will alway WHINE when they wipe from bombers... was in CSM 9 .. CSM10... CSM 11...
|
Nova Valentis
The Bombers Bar
0
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 18:13:08 -
[96] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote: Bomb Changes Bombs now have a Minimum Velocity of 1m/s that you must be traveling at before you can launch. This is to fix some issues that can happen when your velocity is 0, causing the bomb not to move and just explode on you.
Why? This one is the single coolest legacy code and even tho almost noone actually uses it to their advantage it's a cool option to have. If someone really dies not beeing aligned, well he kind of deserves it.
Legacy code that should be changed regarding bombing is gates eating bombs. 0 damage to gate shows up all of the ships around the gate wont get damaged. Happens to a certain percentage of bomber each time a gate is bombed.
Or maybe that's on purpose. anyone know? |
Mila Strelok
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
46
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 18:32:58 -
[97] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:The Defender Launcher I has a 120 second reactivation timer. Cycle time or reload ammo time? |
Nova Valentis
The Bombers Bar
0
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 18:40:31 -
[98] - Quote
Kasia en Tilavine wrote:I think everyone appreciates the effort to make the defender missiles and their skills actually do something. But as a dozen people have already said.... nobody bombs anymore. Bombs are so lacking in utility or efficacy, this is the gravestone of bombing as a whole. Unless this release is PAIRED with a whole new suite of bombs, "bombing" will be all but forgotten.
Here is a list of crazy new utility to bombing that you could include:
High speed bombs that travel (and detonate) faster High range bombs that go faster with the same travel time Proximity bombs that detonate when a ship is within 50% of its explosion range E-war bombs that produce a single use of effects like the supers aoe projections Shrapnel bombs that do enormous damage to drones, but very little to ships High radius bombs with lower damage and better application persistent effect bombs that produce an aoe affect bubble that travels with it during its entire flight time
If you're going to let people shut down bombing runs, you need to make sure people want to bomb.
Hey there, i like you. You should fly with Bombers Bar ;) Also your bomb ideas really would make me want to go out and try them. It's not even asked much, or too crazy like cov. ops destroyer or battlecruiser. I'd add focused damage bombs to the mix! with small AoE and big explosion radius. And T2 bombs!
|
Porucznik Borewicz
calamitous-intent Feign Disorder
68
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 20:00:11 -
[99] - Quote
Luckyyy Strike wrote:maybe balance the nerf by making the bombs explode even after the bombers death...but i bet on legacy code Yeah, I bet CCP would not manage to get it to work anyway. |
Kathy WickedTrade
Stellar Squadron
0
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 20:40:23 -
[100] - Quote
Read Olmeca Gold's post again guys its simply a really good written post! |
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
2775
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 21:24:31 -
[101] - Quote
Chance Ravinne wrote:This will be the fourth or fifth nerf to bombing runs in what, one and a half years? It seemed to me on CSM X that the signal radius, warp speed, bomb flight time, and input broadcasting nerfs succeeded in reducing abusive bombing runs.
As other users pointed out, it doesn't seem bombing runs are so oppressive that they need a fourth nerf. Perhaps this would be the time to consider rolling back one or two of the previous nerfs? Doing so will actively encourage more Defender Missile pilots anyway.
I completely agree. These should have been added back in 2013. Adding them now feels like you are micturating on a horse carcass that has already been beaten to death and burned.
Also, as trivial as it may be, will bombs generate killmails if I shoot them down? Because psychologically, you want to give people a tangible reward for being good at this role. A killmail will do that.
Or, give them some aspect that requires ship fitting skill, flying skill, or something. As it is now,it's going to be very much a keep at range on fleet anchor, pray no killmail-whoring pilot takes a shot at me, and then wait for bombs. Then push button and pray.
Additionally, I know you all think that this needs to be a module for more than one kind of destroyer, but we don't need these on Command Destroyers or T3D's. If you want some progression, have them fit on T1 Destroyers and Interdictors. Then add a Battlecruiser sized variant as well.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
652
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 21:41:35 -
[102] - Quote
What if: Bombs detonated when destroyed?
That would reduce the need of multi-waved bomb run, would allow to mix various bomb types and other fun opportunities: get in front of fleet at 10-15 km, fire them bombs at fleet and LET defenders destroy their own fleet.
Opinions are like assholes. Everybody got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks.
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
2775
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 21:47:10 -
[103] - Quote
Capqu wrote:Malcanis wrote:
Excellent change, long overdue.
state ur reasoning [read: make up some reasoning now u brown-nosing pizza ****] oh wait i forgot u just blindly agree with anything that nerfs things u don't do nor ever will do
He's trolling you.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
1098
|
Posted - 2016.11.26 22:29:35 -
[104] - Quote
Mila Strelok wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:The Defender Launcher I has a 120 second reactivation timer. Cycle time or reload ammo time?
Technically neither. A reactivation timer or reactivation delay would be how long it takes before the module is allowed to cycle again, basically like a cool-down, but doesn't come into play until the module is commanded by the user to stop cycling. The reload timer would be a separate stat all together and may be a different duration.
"Tomahawks?"
"----in' A, right?"
"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."
"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."
|
Harlock Munba
Brand Newbros Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2016.11.27 03:04:41 -
[105] - Quote
Dear all,
Buckle your seatbelts, because in 5 retardedly simple words i am going to storytell you a tiny thing that i only learned myself since i started flying with BB, so sit down and enjoy the experience of my 4-am-CCP-induced-self-hatred-fuelled-writing-extravaganza.
RIGHT.NOW.BOMBING.IS.UNDERWHELMING.
Now if we disregard everybody's personal / alliance interests, then everybody must admit: Adding defender missiles , with the current state of bombing, would architect the demise of the whole idea of bombing, since it is already quite underwhelming. Ofc it might have not become as ludicrous as some say, but there are already tons and tons of ways to counter a bombing run that basically happens once in a lifetime, somewhere in the depths of New Eden... People saying that bombs are OP..pls...bombs are retardedly far from OP. Also infiltrating a sufficiently-sized bomber fleet that is to at least try and achieve the "omg my 100 cane fleet was rekt by bombs" won't be easy from the begining, because of the microscopic fuel bays of BLOPs (but that is another story).
So all things aside, with an already niche role in eve, what would be the purpose to push it more down the drain?
I do encourage the new meta, since eve should never stagnate and stay in one place, in fact, it will never stay the same, BUT @CCP , please try to be impartial, and take into consideration both sides . If this change is bout to happen, the only way to make peace is to add the defender missiles AND buff the SB or generally the whole SB entourage as already mentioned in one of the previous posts. Un-nerfing bombing is the most logical and fair set of events that one would expect from the devs. I even wanted to use the word "balanced" but lately it seems to be a taboo thing in Eve.
It's take it or leave it.
Conclusion: CCP, pls don't be hasty and already start posting defender missiles stats and vids on the YT channel, ready to launch it. Below the dfender missiles info, we are expecting bombing changes.
|
Nomistrav
Intaki Liberation Front Intaki Prosperity Initiative
362
|
Posted - 2016.11.27 04:42:28 -
[106] - Quote
Capqu wrote:and like i previously said, fozziesov and being unable to predict the location of engagements already severely hampers a bomber wings ability to influence an engagement. adding more required pilots per bomb wave through these launchers just ensures less people will be willing to try it edit also so u know im not talkin out of my ass https://zkillboard.com/character/1107018389/topalltime/ almost 3,000 confirmed kills in a purifier on my main (noone uses their main to bomb anymore) my corporation was and still is by far the #1 bombing corp in the game https://zkillboard.com/ship/12038/topalltime/ we only used purifiers for bombing, almost never torping i fc'd some bomber fleets in my time in PANDEMIC LEGION (aka the best alliance in the game) also, but the above fozziesov changes to predicting where fights would happen rendered it an effort in wasting everyones time on a lot of occasions. i do not think this is a flaw of fozziesov, nor something that needs changing mind you, I'm just trying to illustrate that bombing is a dying activity and does not need the assisted suicide attempted in this thread
You bring a lot of interesting points to the table, but I believe that this is (potentially) a good thing as it only offers greater evidence and justification for a revamp of Stealth Bombers' bomb-launching capabilities. New and more varied bombs, being the first that come to mind.
Capqu wrote:Malcanis wrote:
Excellent change, long overdue.
state ur reasoning [read: make up some reasoning now u brown-nosing pizza ****] oh wait i forgot u just blindly agree with anything that nerfs things u don't do nor ever will do
And no sooner did I think you were someone who was reasonable and brought valid logic to the table, you go and pull this
The first step to diplomacy is a sincere desire to listen.
|
Borat Guereen
Chao3 Chao3 Alliance
76
|
Posted - 2016.11.27 06:48:10 -
[107] - Quote
Excellent change and a nice way to make defender missiles and destroyers at the same time more useful, while encouraging battleship fleet again... I am a little sad to see bombing at 0 m/s go, though.
Candidate for CSM XII
Check our Minarchist Space Project!
|
HarlyQ
harlyq syrokos investment station Goonswarm Federation
126
|
Posted - 2016.11.27 06:59:41 -
[108] - Quote
Capqu wrote:waste of goddamn time
fozzie sov was enough of a nerf to bombing already, this is totally unnecessary
noone is bombing currently in eve because you reliably cannot predict where the fight will be and bombing requires some setup time
these changes would have been good 2 years ago
now adays test and friends are literally flying around in the most bombable doctrines in history but noone can be bothered bombing them because its impossible to predict where engagements will happen and super dds are just better bombs anyway, not to mention the general power creep of ehp/speed making bombs harder than ever to land
in adition 0 velocity bombs was some of the hardest **** to pull off and almost never saw any use so removing it for no reason i dont even understand, you just dont want people to be able to innovate?
thanks for the final nail o7 bongers
here is a suggestion because i guess i should be constructive
make them target drones or anyone using ecm on you instead I think this is a great counter to bombers. You now no longer can just toss bombs and hope for hits you now must launch lots of bombs hoping to get past the dicks system.
In closing you sir are a massive cry baby because you are finally getting some counter play other than smartbombs. Also if you have trouble getting off bombs on a fleet you are just terrible fc. |
Olmeca Gold
Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc.
49
|
Posted - 2016.11.27 08:10:17 -
[109] - Quote
By the way, there are lost of posts here, such as Nova's or Chance Ravinne's, which argue removing some previous nerfs would balance this nerf. Make no mistake. While other changes related to bombing (warp speed, agility, fozsesov etc.) had indirect impacts on the position of bombing in meta, DICKs are a direct intervention on how they work. A possible agility or warp speed unnerf won't change anything in the ability to land these bombs, which is the challenge in the first place. If we desire bombing to have its fair place in meta, DICKs can only be balanced by direct buffs on them (reducing the flight time, increasing the amount of bombs you can explode at the same time, giving more damage options via t2 bombs, etc etc.). |
Basil Vulpine
Blueprint Haus Blades of Grass
78
|
Posted - 2016.11.27 14:03:38 -
[110] - Quote
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris wrote:What if: Bombs detonated when destroyed?
That would reduce the need of multi-waved bomb run, would allow to mix various bomb types and other fun opportunities: get in front of fleet at 10-15 km, fire them bombs at fleet and LET defenders destroy their own fleet.
That'll be a bit harsh on the bombers that haven't warped out in the 3 second travel time of the defender missile. |
|
Gizzie Haslack
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2016.11.27 15:33:24 -
[111] - Quote
Hound, Torps, Painter, blap the destroyers ( they'll have less guns in play because of defender turrets if I understand this correctly ), and that's the path clear for the bombing wave.
So wolfpack goes in first.
More people will be able to jump away from what I can see, unless they are scrammed AT THE SAME TIME as wolfpack does it's things on the destroyers.
It'll be tricky on both sides.
ECM Bomber Wave & Wolf Pack hit at same time. Dessies pop, and no-one can run. Defenders launch drones. If the Bomb-droppers can get in fast they'll nail the drones when the bombs go off.
Then general Whalers go in to do their thing.
Oooh, this won't be easy....
.
I'm new to Bombers, so if I've made a mistake just say so :) |
Gizzie Haslack
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2016.11.27 15:39:27 -
[112] - Quote
The problem is that bombers fly like a brick, and Cov Ops Scanner Frigates are... Not punchy enough shall we say.
I can rig a Cov Up Frigate to scare a Bomber in a 1-on-1 by the looks of it, but...
A nippier Rapid Light Missile Covert Ops Frigate ( not Torps, Rapid Lights ) wouldn't go a miss about now. Shame I don't know of one.
.
I'm not opposed to you bringing in 'Patriot Missiles'. It's more that Bombers fly like a brick. I'm surprised CCP have not brought a true 'stealth fighter' into play yet is all.
Might just be me. I'm only 2.5 months into the game :) |
Gizzie Haslack
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2016.11.27 16:06:09 -
[113] - Quote
Bringing my 2 posts together, in my fevered little newbie mind, I am seeing:
Defender haulers with Defender Dessie Escorts & Frigate 'Anti-bomber' Wings. Some drones too natch.
Someone like BB having to take that on using High Speed Wolfpack 'stuff', high speed ECM experts, Bombs, Whalers, and something anti-frigate too.
Hence the desire for a 3rd Cov Ops role deploying Rapid Light Launchers instead of Torps.
Even if you were shot down you wouldn't give a pap. That would be amazing to fly.
.
I'm of the opinion that little ships in swarms are where the cool kids are at. |
Brokk Witgenstein
Extreme Agony Mordus Angels
869
|
Posted - 2016.11.27 18:36:11 -
[114] - Quote
Gizzie Haslack wrote: Hence the desire for a 3rd Cov Ops role deploying Rapid Light Launchers instead of Torps.
Battle Cheetahs! Though rapid lights is pushing it a little ;-) |
Nova Valentis
The Bombers Bar
16
|
Posted - 2016.11.27 19:17:38 -
[115] - Quote
Gizzie Haslack wrote:Bringing my 2 posts together, in my fevered little newbie mind
Haha, what you write is very funny to read, but nope, not how those things work. Afaik the new launcher is supposed to not use up a weapon slot. The only thing in your post that would be fun is more cov. ops ships. Sister of Eve thinking about making destroyers and battlecruisers? I'd love a rapid light cloaky other than the rapier, but i fear that could be too overpowered. |
Brigadine Ferathine
The Valiant Vanguard The Volition Cult
118
|
Posted - 2016.11.28 00:07:07 -
[116] - Quote
Khan Wrenth wrote:My god you guys seem to have some serious love for destroyers lately. I'm ok with that though :) |
Maenth
The Thirteen Provinces
28
|
Posted - 2016.11.28 08:22:24 -
[117] - Quote
Before saying whether this might be good or bad, I want to know what problem this would solve or what gameplay this really opens up; then we can figure out if it's good or bad.
Also, why should it be restricted to destroyers?
Right now I'm just seeing it as an unnecessary thing, which doesn't really accomplish anything.
"Should we bring a Defender missile shield?" "Do you think they're going to bomb us?" "I doubt it." "Yeah probably not. I'd rather bring more TP and dps."
The very questionable effectiveness is rather dissuading.
MAYBE, If the Defender missile system did cycle quickly and could shoot down missiles and damage bombs (so multiple missiles would destroy a bomb) then it might give the coverage required to be more reliable, and also a cool factor for throwing out a little swarm of anti-missile missiles (if one ship had multiple launchers) ... and cycling quickly instead of slowly, but then having a long reload time .... I think this style would have a cool factor and degree of reliability that might be compelling enough to try. Definitely multiple launchers per ship contributing to the missile/bomb defense of the fleet, and not a class restriction. If people want to put defender-missile-launchers on their battleships instead of heavy guns, let them!
Drones. Drones are a means to an end. An end to the ruthless Caldari 'progress' machines. An end to the barbaric 'redemption' proposed by the Amarr. What they see as chaos shall be my perfect order, merely beyond their comprehension.
|
Professor Humbert
Project Fruit House Solyaris Chtonium
30
|
Posted - 2016.11.28 09:55:59 -
[118] - Quote
Trying to find more fleet roles for the null-sec alphas, perhaps? What's next? Defender missiles shooting down bubbles, eh? |
|
CCP Larrikin
C C P C C P Alliance
646
|
Posted - 2016.11.28 11:17:04 -
[119] - Quote
Icarus Narcissus wrote:Will these modules also impact guided bombs from structures? Nope. :)
Vivace Naaris wrote:So the distance of two bombs from the launch point will not make a difference? If one is 5km, another 15 or 20km, it could just as easily go for the 15-20km one? Correct.
Mila Strelok wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:The Defender Launcher I has a 120 second reactivation timer. Cycle time or reload ammo time? Its nether. Its the reactivation delay like on a cloaking module.
Dejara Thoris wrote:Do missile guidance disruptors work on these new Defender missiles? They don't. But I think they probably could...what do you think?
Loran Chelien wrote:What if a defender missile is going after a bomb and that bomb gets blown up by another defender missile, does it retarget to another bomb? The defender missile won't re-target another bomb. It will wander off into the distance like all missiles fired at something that is destroyed or leaves grid before the missile hits. Lost, and alone :(
Malakai Asamov wrote:Why would you not announce the details of this new feature at EDU in person? Because I'm not at EDU :(
Spark Progenitori wrote:also some variety in bombs would be cool: velocity, range, aoe, maybe even other effects along the lines of void bombs (web, sensor strength, tracking disruption) Variety in bombs is something we're looking at :)
Game Designer | Team Phenomenon | https://twitter.com/CCP_Larrikin
|
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions O.U.Z.O. Alliance
1507
|
Posted - 2016.11.28 11:41:28 -
[120] - Quote
Professor Humbert wrote:Trying to find more fleet roles for the null-sec alphas, perhaps? What's next? Defender missiles shooting down bubbles, eh?
That would make an excellent replacement for the tanking subsystem of sleeper cruisers.
Eve Minions is recruiting.
This is the law of ship progression!
Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
|
|
Capqu
Half Empty
1234
|
Posted - 2016.11.28 11:50:38 -
[121] - Quote
sorry for being rude
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
3317
|
Posted - 2016.11.28 11:52:53 -
[122] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Bomb Changes Bombs now have a Minimum Velocity of 1m/s that you must be traveling at before you can launch. This is to fix some issues that can happen when your velocity is 0, causing the bomb not to move and just explode on you.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAAA!
can we just keep this? its a little bit of randomness that could really spice up a fight if a pilot screws up
BLOPS Hauler
|
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
2690
|
Posted - 2016.11.28 13:18:41 -
[123] - Quote
+1 for actively trying to get Alphas more involved and creatively adding utility to something that has been pretty useless since time immemorial.
-1 for buffing already strong T2/T3 Destroyers. They already do a lot, and do it really well, so why add even more utility?
I haven't done a bombing run in ages so I won't comment on that beyond to say that if CCP were planning on introducing new flavors of bombs, it would seem that the time to do that would be along with these changes, not after them.
Two questions: Do mission NPCs still use defender missiles (I haven't run a mission, let alone in a missile boat, in years), and if so will these new mechanics change how they operate?
Relatively Notorious By Association
My Many Misadventures
I predicted FAUXs
|
Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners Test Alliance Please Ignore
14955
|
Posted - 2016.11.28 13:39:49 -
[124] - Quote
This is a great idea. I don't think ti will work practically, meaning working on this is a waste of time, but thanks for at least trying.
Effectively it will just mean that FCs will give orders to have enemy dessies scrubbed 1st (their low levels of EHP mean reps ain't goina do squat in a fleet fight) so at the end of the day, not much will change. If you'd put them on cruisers or battlecruisers then that would have opened up the fleet meta to battleship doctrines again, because bigger ships could survive because of their higher hpm pools. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
3318
|
Posted - 2016.11.28 13:41:54 -
[125] - Quote
Would love to see more focused bombs. I think with these damage variants would not be op as a prepared fleet could counter them now
BLOPS Hauler
|
Gizzie Haslack
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2016.11.28 15:04:31 -
[126] - Quote
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:Gizzie Haslack wrote: Hence the desire for a 3rd Cov Ops role deploying Rapid Light Launchers instead of Torps.
Battle Cheetahs! Though rapid lights is pushing it a little ;-)
Rapid lights need less power. So take a bomber chassis, but in a smaller power-plant ( reducing inertia in theory ), and you're away. Possibly add some Micro-Warpdrive support as well.
You might even be able to fit another mid-power slot too. Weee!
3 rapid lights, small turret, & cloak? 2 rapid lights, bomb launcher, small turret, & cloak?
They would be soooo much fun :)
.
I'll get back to topic now ;) |
Moac Tor
Cyber Core Stain Confederation
739
|
Posted - 2016.11.28 20:57:24 -
[127] - Quote
Not really sure the reason for this move. For small and medium gang it has little to no effect, and from what I hear bombers aren't much of a thing in large scale fleet ops nowadays either.
Any chance you could elaborate as to the reasoning for this change Larikin. I can think of many other things in much greater need of being fixed than bombers currently (AFs and medium artillery for example).
Modulated ECM Effects
An Alternative to Skill Trading
|
Moac Tor
Cyber Core Stain Confederation
739
|
Posted - 2016.11.28 21:06:15 -
[128] - Quote
Chance Ravinne wrote:This will be the fourth or fifth nerf to bombing runs in what, one and a half years? Except this is not a nerf because no one will be basing a fleet doctrines around the use of defender missiles. Bombers are hardly overwhelming currently and there are many more important roles for destroyers to fulfil.
I doubt anyone will use them much like now. (this is based on the assumption that CCP don't release new types of bomb with useful effects, and if they do it won't be for a very long time if at all).
Modulated ECM Effects
An Alternative to Skill Trading
|
Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
579
|
Posted - 2016.11.29 15:31:29 -
[129] - Quote
dont ******* nerf the destroyers into 0.0 coffins. nobody wants to take up and see their destroyer got nerfed because it did 'to much in 0.0'
Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
|
Olmeca Gold
Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc.
52
|
Posted - 2016.11.29 15:47:40 -
[130] - Quote
Moac Tor wrote:Not really sure the reason for this move. For small and medium gang it has little to no effect, and from what I hear bombers aren't much of a thing in large scale fleet ops nowadays either.
Any chance you could elaborate as to the reasoning for this change Larikin. I can think of many other things in much greater need of being fixed than bombers currently (AFs and medium artillery for example).
I feel like this is CCP trying hard to give alpacas a proper role in null fights |
|
Olmeca Gold
Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc.
52
|
Posted - 2016.11.29 15:49:40 -
[131] - Quote
Moac Tor wrote:Chance Ravinne wrote:This will be the fourth or fifth nerf to bombing runs in what, one and a half years? Except this is not a nerf because no one will be basing a fleet doctrines around the use of defender missiles. Bombers are hardly overwhelming currently and there are many more important roles for destroyers to fulfil. I doubt anyone will use them much like now. (this is based on the assumption that CCP don't release new types of bomb with useful effects, and if they do it won't be for a very long time if at all).
It is not hard to spend one slot for any generic t3 dessie, command dessie or dictor you are using for general purposes anyway. You need those in any big null fighti and every dessie will fit them, because why not. |
Olmeca Gold
Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc.
52
|
Posted - 2016.11.29 15:57:09 -
[132] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:This is a great idea. I don't think ti will work practically, meaning working on this is a waste of time, but thanks for at least trying.
Effectively it will just mean that FCs will give orders to have enemy dessies scrubbed 1st (their low levels of EHP mean reps ain't goina do squat in a fleet fight) so at the end of the day, not much will change. If you'd put them on cruisers or battlecruisers then that would have opened up the fleet meta to battleship doctrines again, because bigger ships could survive because of their higher hpm pools.
Sorry for being blunt but your post is clueless.
1) You realize bomb damage is not like smartbomb damage, that it scales with sig radius, and dessies can very well tank multiple waves right? It is probably harder to properly bomb to kill a t3 dessie than a battlecruiser. The generic battlecruiser will die way earlier even.
2) Have you ever checked how many recent battlereports are out there with Feroxes, Machariels, Hurricanes or Rattlesnakes? This is not 2 years ago. Bombing does not have too much of an effect on doctrine choices anymore, unless you know there is a specific bombing fleet coming for you. |
Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners Test Alliance Please Ignore
14959
|
Posted - 2016.11.29 19:54:46 -
[133] - Quote
Olmeca Gold wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:This is a great idea. I don't think ti will work practically, meaning working on this is a waste of time, but thanks for at least trying.
Effectively it will just mean that FCs will give orders to have enemy dessies scrubbed 1st (their low levels of EHP mean reps ain't goina do squat in a fleet fight) so at the end of the day, not much will change. If you'd put them on cruisers or battlecruisers then that would have opened up the fleet meta to battleship doctrines again, because bigger ships could survive because of their higher hpm pools. Sorry for being blunt but your post is clueless. 1) You realize bomb damage is not like smartbomb damage, that it scales with sig radius, and dessies can very well tank multiple waves right? It is probably harder to properly bomb to kill a t3 dessie than a battlecruiser. The generic battlecruiser will die way earlier even.
If you don't know what's being said, , read it again, then ask for clarification. I never said anything about Dessies being bombed, said " FCs will give orders to have enemy dessies scrubbed 1st". You know, with guns?
|
Moac Tor
Cyber Core Stain Confederation
739
|
Posted - 2016.11.29 20:56:01 -
[134] - Quote
Olmeca Gold wrote:Moac Tor wrote:Chance Ravinne wrote:This will be the fourth or fifth nerf to bombing runs in what, one and a half years? Except this is not a nerf because no one will be basing a fleet doctrines around the use of defender missiles. Bombers are hardly overwhelming currently and there are many more important roles for destroyers to fulfil. I doubt anyone will use them much like now. (this is based on the assumption that CCP don't release new types of bomb with useful effects, and if they do it won't be for a very long time if at all). It is not hard to spend one slot for any generic t3 dessie, command dessie or dictor you are using for general purposes anyway. You need those in any big null fighti and every dessie will fit them, because why not. To use them you'd need to position your T3 destroyers on top of your battleships and capitals, both of which have little manoeuvrability. Therefore it seems to me to be highly undesirable to anchor your highly mobile T3 destroyer fleet to your highly immobile capital and battleship fleet.
Modulated ECM Effects
An Alternative to Skill Trading
|
Arronicus
Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc.
1568
|
Posted - 2016.11.30 11:15:30 -
[135] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:Professor Humbert wrote:Trying to find more fleet roles for the null-sec alphas, perhaps? What's next? Defender missiles shooting down bubbles, eh? That would make an excellent replacement for the tanking subsystem of sleeper cruisers.
... what? There's no STRATEGIC cruiser Defense subsystem that has anything to do with bubbles. |
Captain Campion
Campion Corp.
32
|
Posted - 2016.11.30 14:07:39 -
[136] - Quote
Make them work on any ship. Make them 1-shot a drone if there's no bomb around. |
Soldarius
O C C U P Y Test Alliance Please Ignore
1542
|
Posted - 2016.11.30 15:42:42 -
[137] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote: Bomb Changes Bombs now have a Minimum Velocity of 1m/s that you must be traveling at before you can launch. This is to fix some issues that can happen when your velocity is 0, causing the bomb not to move and just explode on you.
RIP suicide bombing.
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3138
|
Posted - 2016.11.30 19:54:40 -
[138] - Quote
Moac Tor wrote:Olmeca Gold wrote:Moac Tor wrote:Chance Ravinne wrote:This will be the fourth or fifth nerf to bombing runs in what, one and a half years? Except this is not a nerf because no one will be basing a fleet doctrines around the use of defender missiles. Bombers are hardly overwhelming currently and there are many more important roles for destroyers to fulfil. I doubt anyone will use them much like now. (this is based on the assumption that CCP don't release new types of bomb with useful effects, and if they do it won't be for a very long time if at all). It is not hard to spend one slot for any generic t3 dessie, command dessie or dictor you are using for general purposes anyway. You need those in any big null fighti and every dessie will fit them, because why not. To use them you'd need to position your T3 destroyers on top of your battleships and capitals, both of which have little manoeuvrability. Therefore it seems to me to be highly undesirable to anchor your highly mobile T3 destroyer fleet to your highly immobile capital and battleship fleet. Not really.
You could anchor them on the fleet, but that would be unnecessary. The range of a max-skilled missile is 45km, and with bombs clocking in a 12 second timer, you have about 9 (7-8 conservative estimate), to get where you're needed.
If you fly a Dessie in a large fleet like that, you'll probably either be to small to really matter on the list of priority to kill, or off the main fight making pings or dogfighting other light tackle. If you see bombs on grid you could immediately warp to your fleet and fire off the module.
But that aside, I know there are very many skilled dictors that can operate in the danger zone under normal circumstances. |
Moac Tor
Cyber Core Stain Confederation
740
|
Posted - 2016.11.30 22:47:40 -
[139] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Not really.
You could anchor them on the fleet, but that would be unnecessary. The range of a max-skilled missile is 45km, and with bombs clocking in a 12 second timer, you have about 9 (7-8 conservative estimate), to get where you're needed. 12 seconds is not a lot. You need to take into account server lag, the fact that your going to miss a few server ticks however fast you and your connection are, in game travel time to get within range of the bomb, and then travel time of the missile to the bomb.
Modulated ECM Effects
An Alternative to Skill Trading
|
Olmeca Gold
Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc.
52
|
Posted - 2016.12.01 17:21:42 -
[140] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Olmeca Gold wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:This is a great idea. I don't think ti will work practically, meaning working on this is a waste of time, but thanks for at least trying.
Effectively it will just mean that FCs will give orders to have enemy dessies scrubbed 1st (their low levels of EHP mean reps ain't goina do squat in a fleet fight) so at the end of the day, not much will change. If you'd put them on cruisers or battlecruisers then that would have opened up the fleet meta to battleship doctrines again, because bigger ships could survive because of their higher hpm pools. Sorry for being blunt but your post is clueless. 1) You realize bomb damage is not like smartbomb damage, that it scales with sig radius, and dessies can very well tank multiple waves right? It is probably harder to properly bomb to kill a t3 dessie than a battlecruiser. The generic battlecruiser will die way earlier even. If you don't know what's being said, , read it again, then ask for clarification. I never said anything about Dessies being bombed, said " FCs will give orders to have enemy dessies scrubbed 1st". You know, with guns?
Sorry, your actual point was a further hyphotetical so I assumed you just didn't know how bombs work which was the simpler scenario. What you are saying presumes that the bombing fleet has is working together with one of the fleets on ground against the other side., and in close coordination, while they often are independent third parties, or at least not in close coordination with the friendly fleet. E.g. DBRB often takes a bomber fleet to NCPL vs CO2/TEST fights.
Also in a skirmish if what you are primarying is enemy dessies, while you need to primary main body of the enemy, just because you have friendly bombers around, then you might already be paying the price by losing your own ships. If there is a price then the bomber group might already be worth taking. |
|
Algarion Getz
Aideron Corp
251
|
Posted - 2016.12.02 14:56:21 -
[141] - Quote
Bombing gets nerfed even more? Wat. Have i missed some buffs to bombs or does CCP just want to beat them to death with the nerfbat?
I dont like that the defender missiles become such a niche weapon. Why not keep them like they are now, but add the ability to destroy bombs? For balance reasons, it should take multiple missiles to destroy a bomb.
Also, destroyers dont need another buff. The restriction is not necessary. |
Gizzie Haslack
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2016.12.02 18:18:07 -
[142] - Quote
Algarion Getz wrote:Bombing gets nerfed even more? Wat. Have i missed some buffs to bombs or does CCP just want to beat them to death with the nerfbat?
I dont like that the defender missiles become such a niche weapon. Why not keep them like they are now, but add the ability to destroy bombs? For balance reasons, it should take multiple missiles to destroy a bomb.
Also, destroyers dont need another buff. The restriction is not necessary.
If you look at the Patriot missile systems that exist now they're actually quite big.
They do miss on occasion, but one hit is enough to at least put a missile ( unguided ) off course. Which in space is enough to consider it destroyed.
Will defender missiles always hit? That would be HIGHLY unrealistic if so. |
Jerghul
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
34
|
Posted - 2016.12.04 02:19:39 -
[143] - Quote
Nice idea.
Gives alpha pilots a defined role and a nice attempt to knock a chip off the blob with a different kind of support role (dessies can do more than just guard for bombs, but the sum of that *stuff* has to compete with the opportunity cost of lost primary dps).
Also helpful for rounding errors in fitting skillz with that low power cpu high slot module
All told a nice quality of life change...
T2 bombs would compliment the defender missile nicely (buff the bombers and with t2 bombs adding emphasis to the need for defender missiles).
Blocked list: Teckos, Sonya, Wander, Baltec1
|
Brigadine Ferathine
The Valiant Vanguard The Volition Cult
122
|
Posted - 2016.12.04 02:27:35 -
[144] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Nice idea.
Gives alpha pilots a defined role and a nice attempt to knock a chip off the blob with a different kind of support role (dessies can do more than just guard for bombs, but the sum of that *stuff* has to compete with the opportunity cost of lost primary dps).
Also helpful for rounding errors in fitting skillz with that low power cpu high slot module
All told a nice quality of life change...
T2 bombs would compliment the defender missile nicely (buff the bombers and with t2 bombs adding emphasis to the need for defender missiles). I want bombs to be relevant again :(
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
3345
|
Posted - 2016.12.04 12:48:09 -
[145] - Quote
so i know this is going to sound strange and i doubt it will be considered but here goes.
can defenders please keep their current functionality as well if loaded into a standard launcher? I know they are not used much but i do have 2 fits that use them and it feels really good when you micro right and can reduce around 1/4 of an enemy's dps while only giving up a small amount of your own. Now i will be honest i have never used these fits outside of FW but they were fun and i'm sure no one would say over powered lol
BLOPS Hauler
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
3345
|
Posted - 2016.12.04 12:49:25 -
[146] - Quote
Jerghul wrote:Nice idea.
Gives alpha pilots a defined role and a nice attempt to knock a chip off the blob with a different kind of support role (dessies can do more than just guard for bombs, but the sum of that *stuff* has to compete with the opportunity cost of lost primary dps).
Also helpful for rounding errors in fitting skillz with that low power cpu high slot module
All told a nice quality of life change...
T2 bombs would compliment the defender missile nicely (buff the bombers and with t2 bombs adding emphasis to the need for defender missiles).
if they are focused bombs i'm down.
BLOPS Hauler
|
Nova Valentis
The Bombers Bar
16
|
Posted - 2016.12.05 02:27:15 -
[147] - Quote
Brigadine Ferathine wrote:Jerghul wrote:Nice idea.
Gives alpha pilots a defined role and a nice attempt to knock a chip off the blob with a different kind of support role (dessies can do more than just guard for bombs, but the sum of that *stuff* has to compete with the opportunity cost of lost primary dps).
Also helpful for rounding errors in fitting skillz with that low power cpu high slot module
All told a nice quality of life change...
T2 bombs would compliment the defender missile nicely (buff the bombers and with t2 bombs adding emphasis to the need for defender missiles). I want bombs to be relevant again :(
me too bro, me too! |
Nova Valentis
The Bombers Bar
16
|
Posted - 2016.12.05 02:28:08 -
[148] - Quote
Capqu wrote:sorry for being rude
but could you answer some actual feedback now instead of just repeating what you already said in the OP for people who literally didnt bother reading it
what that guy said. |
ryan meyer
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2016.12.06 05:25:32 -
[149] - Quote
Bomb Changes Bombs now have a Minimum Velocity of 1m/s that you must be traveling at before you can launch. This is to fix some issues that can happen when your velocity is 0, causing the bomb not to move and just explode on you.
CCPLEASE CAN WE NOT DO THIS CHANGE there really isnt a problem with the bomb launch at all its just some ppl are bad and its kinda like telling them that ya know that they messed up and are bad and should be bad |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
3750
|
Posted - 2016.12.06 08:35:33 -
[150] - Quote
ryan meyer wrote:Bomb Changes Bombs now have a Minimum Velocity of 1m/s that you must be traveling at before you can launch. This is to fix some issues that can happen when your velocity is 0, causing the bomb not to move and just explode on you.
CCPLEASE CAN WE NOT DO THIS CHANGE there really isnt a problem with the bomb launch at all its just some ppl are bad and its kinda like telling them that ya know that they messed up and are bad and should be bad Now please tell me where in game it tells you that your facing is a purely visual construct and the server represents you purely by a velocity. Players should not have to have in depth knowledge of the physics engine behind the game to know what effect something will have. |
|
Khan Wrenth
Ore Oppression Prevention and Salvation
731
|
Posted - 2016.12.06 15:19:27 -
[151] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Now please tell me where in game it tells you that your facing is a purely visual construct and the server represents you purely by a velocity. Players should not have to have in depth knowledge of the physics engine behind the game to know what effect something will have. Devil's advocate - you think a great many players invest enough time to train into a stealth bomber, join a group to make use of a mass bombing run...but haven't played enough to know that movement mitigates damage and that's generally a good idea to be moving in combat? Or that nobody in the bombing group will make mention that movement is necessary for a bomb run?
I say Devil's Advocate because I'm not against the change in any way shape or form, but the reasoning seems a bit silly. And yes, the fix is already being done so it's not like dev resources can be repurposed elsewhere at this stage, but this seems like an incredibly niche situation and that maybe some time would have been better spent elsewhere.
Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
3367
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 02:05:23 -
[152] - Quote
Professor Humbert wrote:Trying to find more fleet roles for the null-sec alphas, perhaps? What's next? Defender missiles shooting down bubbles, eh?
to be fair this is an idea the community has bean bringing up for years in regards to defenders working against bombs
BLOPS Hauler
|
Nana Skalski
Taisaanat Kotei
21816
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 12:48:21 -
[153] - Quote
Capqu wrote:these changes would have been good 2 years ago
Probably it was on the timeline and they came to that feature just now.
Every part of a game helps to tell a story =ƒôò =ƒÜÇ
Where is Angry CONCORD guy when you need him
GëíGïüGëí GÖÑ Osprey
|
Gizzie Haslack
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 12:58:33 -
[154] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Professor Humbert wrote:Trying to find more fleet roles for the null-sec alphas, perhaps? What's next? Defender missiles shooting down bubbles, eh? to be fair this is an idea the community has bean bringing up for years in regards to defenders working against bombs
Considering how BB melted down an entire fleet on Sunday Night I can see why they say it, but...
Bombers can't be insured. They are expensive to run. Unlike a Caracal or BLAH. If you want to take away our blappage then you have to give us something back.
I'm not opposed to Patriot Missile systems, but Bombing is chuffing expensive ( including the ammo too. 6m a shot etc ).
If Cov & Black Ops got limited cover on our Insurance ( 20m max payout for a Nemesis ), instead of pretty-much none ( 5m max ), then I would be a LOT happier. Game Balance is Game Balance. It costs about 35m to fit a bomber, and that's with just Torpedoes in it. And we're only covered for about 5m...
Or there is no point in flying Cov Ops. Basically.
There is a business argument that Cov & Black Ops are 'high risk high reward', but if you Take Away Our Guns (tm) then where is the adjustment for the lower reward ( as in, more of us will be shot down )?
I know winning gets you the Cargo, but what if the Cargo is naff? Cargo is luck. It's not very reliable on it's own.
Take away some of our power and you'll have to compensate us for the higher casualty rate we'll suffer, or there is no point in flying these expensive uninsurable Ships. Even though they are important to the game. Important?
Sisters of Eve have normalised Cov Ops tech now ( we need the Black Holes etc ), so surely the Insurance Firms will have to keep up with this change from 'plausable deniability' to 'normal exploration' if the Cov Ops role is still important for stuff. Especially with our risks going up to do it with these new Defender Missiles coming in to play.
We are just exploring; & Low, Null, & WH space can be rough. Why are we the only ones in Frigates who can't get cover? |
Frostys Virpio
Yet another corpdot.
3005
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 15:47:28 -
[155] - Quote
Gizzie Haslack wrote:
We are just exploring; & Low, Null, & WH space can be rough. Why are we the only ones in Frigates who can't get cover?
Because you decided to fly TII maybe? |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18475
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 19:59:28 -
[156] - Quote
Why the change to stationary bombs? I always saw it as a valid tactic to drop one of these if you found yourself tackled. A suicide bomb if you will. |
Gizzie Haslack
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 21:26:36 -
[157] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Gizzie Haslack wrote:
We are just exploring; & Low, Null, & WH space can be rough. Why are we the only ones in Frigates who can't get cover?
Because you decided to fly TII maybe?
There were perks to flying T2, that are now being reduced. To the point where there is no point? Be careful on that one.
|
Croc Evil
Croc's Family Business
14
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 22:00:13 -
[158] - Quote
Defender Missiles looks to me basically how to rework one not used thing to another rare used thing.
Bomb launch change is very strange IMHO. Wouldn't it be better to guarantee bomb always fly 3km/s from ship front even for ship at 0 speed? I understand it is easier to put simple condition in the code than to switch bomb parameters evaluation from movement vector to ship orientation vector. |
Cade Windstalker
624
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 22:33:57 -
[159] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Why the change to stationary bombs? I always saw it as a valid tactic to drop one of these if you found yourself tackled. A suicide bomb if you will.
I would assume because the behavior is unintuitive and is mostly unexpected and detrimental to the majority of players that experience it. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
3760
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 23:24:16 -
[160] - Quote
Croc Evil wrote:Defender Missiles looks to me basically how to rework one not used thing to another rare used thing.
Bomb launch change is very strange IMHO. Wouldn't it be better to guarantee bomb always fly 3km/s from ship front even for ship at 0 speed? I understand it is easier to put simple condition in the code than to switch bomb parameters evaluation from movement vector to ship orientation vector. There is no such thing in the code as ship orientation vectors. There is only movement. Ship Orientation is a purely client side graphics render based on the movement vector, and changing the codebase to have an actual ship orientation would be a huge project. |
|
Cade Windstalker
624
|
Posted - 2016.12.07 23:57:51 -
[161] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Croc Evil wrote:Defender Missiles looks to me basically how to rework one not used thing to another rare used thing.
Bomb launch change is very strange IMHO. Wouldn't it be better to guarantee bomb always fly 3km/s from ship front even for ship at 0 speed? I understand it is easier to put simple condition in the code than to switch bomb parameters evaluation from movement vector to ship orientation vector. There is no such thing in the code as ship orientation vectors. There is only movement. Ship Orientation is a purely client side graphics render based on the movement vector, and changing the codebase to have an actual ship orientation would be a huge project.
This, that's why ships tend to act weirdly for certain functions at 0m/s, and why align time is calculated from a standing start and is the same regardless of initial 'orientation' unless the ship is already moving. |
Onslaughtor
Phoenix Naval Operations Phoenix Naval Systems
174
|
Posted - 2016.12.08 03:38:23 -
[162] - Quote
The removal of the 0ms bomb drop will be missed. Could we see some kind of specialty bomb to replace it.
My gut tells me that these defender missiles will over all not do as well as we hope, while also killing off the use of bombs more so than it has by other meta factors. Of which having read some of the other posts in this thread others can explain better.
With that in mind I think CCP should start looking at other non stealth ships to let us fit bomb launchers too. Or removing or lessening bomb wave limits so that we have more options to getting around the need for just more bombing alts to get good runs.
Not sure if its a good idea, but I would get great personal joy if all battleships could fit bomb launchers as a utility. |
Glathull
Warlock Assassins
1266
|
Posted - 2016.12.08 03:48:02 -
[163] - Quote
Given what's been said about the random bomb selection and the behavior of the missiles after a bomb has been destroyed, I don't see this as a hard counter to bombs. I see it as adding some amount of mitigation. I don't think that in practice it will be all that bad for bombers. Throw in the additional incentive for new players to get involved meaningfully and have to learn to coordinate, and it's probably a net positive.
The thing that I don't like about it is giving the bonus to command destroyers. We have enough reasons to fly destroyers right now. I'd prefer to see keep the ability to fit them to t1 destroyers (for Alphas) and add the ability for assault frigates to fit them, and put the bonus there.
But maybe that's just because I love my AFs.
I honestly feel like I just read fifty shades of dumb. --CCP Falcon
|
Brokk Witgenstein
Extreme Agony Mordus Angels
903
|
Posted - 2016.12.08 04:10:24 -
[164] - Quote
A cunning masterplan. Talk CCP into putting defenders on Assault Frigs; plea for additional PG/CPU to be able to fit these modules, even though we never intend to use them; and eventually end up with assault frigs finally allowing some room for creativity. Brilliant! \o/ |
Cade Windstalker
624
|
Posted - 2016.12.08 04:15:32 -
[165] - Quote
I don't think AFs are the right hull for this sort of thing. It doesn't fit their other roles and bonuses for one.
I do agree that this won't kill bomb use though. It's mitigation and there will be ways around it, whether that's with clever bomb deployment timings or just throwing more bombs at the problem. Right now though Bombs are far too useful and powerful for anyone to seriously consider abandoning them, and similarly this will probably push large fleet FCs to form squads of Command Destroyers for a mix of range control and bomb defense.
Worst cases for this change are either they have to tone it down a little, or it doesn't have a significant impact on fleet comps and things stay more or less as they are. |
Gizzie Haslack
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2016.12.08 08:58:30 -
[166] - Quote
Glathull wrote:Given what's been said about the random bomb selection and the behavior of the missiles after a bomb has been destroyed, I don't see this as a hard counter to bombs. I see it as adding some amount of mitigation. I don't think that in practice it will be all that bad for bombers. Throw in the additional incentive for new players to get involved meaningfully and have to learn to coordinate, and it's probably a net positive.
The thing that I don't like about it is giving the bonus to command destroyers. We have enough reasons to fly destroyers right now. I'd prefer to see keep the ability to fit them to t1 destroyers (for Alphas) and add the ability for assault frigates to fit them, and put the bonus there.
But maybe that's just because I love my AFs.
AF's eh? Not a bad idea.
But with Bomb Prices so high I am still wary about making it pointless to use Cov-Ops. If Defender Missiles are too good ( unrealistically good compared to Patriot Missile systems ) then a lot of people won't be able to afford to fly Bombers/ T2.
Which isn't great, let's be honest. They're just frigates after all.
Why train when there is no point? And then you lose ship choice, which means losing part of the fun of this game.
I've revised my view to thus:
Defender Missiles for AF's and Dessies. 50% accuracy or summat.
Insurance for T2 ships adapting to the new Sisters of EVE " we need the wormholes " by paying out 15-20m for a 35m Bomber ( instead of the current 5m tops ). Do you need those Wormholes or not?
That would keep game balance. Blapping uninsurable ships more ( what Defenders are about, let's be honest ) would certainly damage the Sisters of EVE initiative, as hunting Cloakies would become more of an option.
I may fly with BB, but the first thing I looked into was how to kill them. I won't say it here, but ISK warfare is a problem for BB if the enemy do certain things. And Defenders are about ISK warfare.
If there is no loot/ less loot, and the ships cost a fortune, then who is going to bother? Serious question. Fun is fun, but if it is too hard to get the ISK then fun will suffer. |
Olmeca Gold
Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc.
58
|
Posted - 2016.12.08 11:35:04 -
[167] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:I don't think AFs are the right hull for this sort of thing. It doesn't fit their other roles and bonuses for one.
I do agree that this won't kill bomb use though. It's mitigation and there will be ways around it, whether that's with clever bomb deployment timings or just throwing more bombs at the problem. Right now though Bombs are far too useful and powerful for anyone to seriously consider abandoning them, and similarly this will probably push large fleet FCs to form squads of Command Destroyers for a mix of range control and bomb defense.
Worst cases for this change are either they have to tone it down a little, or it doesn't have a significant impact on fleet comps and things stay more or less as they are.
Oh god not you again :)
People did abandon bombing except a few FCs. Right now a successful bombrun happens every once in a month maybe even two months, compared to what we had 1 or 2 years ago that is a really low rate of occurance. Stats speak for themselves. Do you seriously think that is powerful or in its right place in meta? Have you ever tried to bomb a fleet, or are you aware of the multiple nerfs that has been done on bombing the last year? You like organization and coordination. Do yo know how much of these is needed to land a successful run, and even then every single type of fleet can avoid dying with a simple warp off? |
Olmeca Gold
Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc.
58
|
Posted - 2016.12.08 15:24:01 -
[168] - Quote
Looks like CCP heard the majority feedback and at least postponed this change from December 13th release.
Thanks CCP for hearing us out and not rushing this change. |
Frostys Virpio
Yet another corpdot.
3007
|
Posted - 2016.12.08 17:50:27 -
[169] - Quote
Gizzie Haslack wrote:
But with Bomb Prices so high I am still wary about making it pointless to use Cov-Ops. If Defender Missiles are too good ( unrealistically good compared to Patriot Missile systems ) then a lot of people won't be able to afford to fly Bombers/ T2.
Missiles in EVE always hit. There is no missing with missiles. Who care if it's better than patriot? The game does not have to follow any real life concern. It only does so when it fitting game play wise and balance wise. |
Ransu Asanari
V0LTA WE FORM V0LTA
514
|
Posted - 2016.12.08 19:03:09 -
[170] - Quote
Quote:Bomb Changes Bombs now have a Minimum Velocity of 1m/s that you must be traveling at before you can launch. This is to fix some issues that can happen when your velocity is 0, causing the bomb not to move and just explode on you.
Is there a technical reason for the change to have a minimum bomb velocity? Because otherwise you are killing a valid PVP tactics that was very inventive and difficult to pull off. You can see a few videos of it being done here (Doomcats):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VK36gWs_1g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcaL8T-T2XM
I would be very disappointed to see this removed from game without some kind of justification. |
|
Sbrodor
Oscura Simmetria The Volition Cult
181
|
Posted - 2016.12.08 19:06:00 -
[171] - Quote
i support again the no need of that.
in same way give us t2 bomb heavly skill intensive or a bomber cruiser or something making bomber not daily nerfed. |
Glathull
Warlock Assassins
1267
|
Posted - 2016.12.08 21:28:27 -
[172] - Quote
Olmeca Gold wrote:Looks like CCP heard the majority feedback and at least postponed this change from December 13th release.
Thanks CCP for hearing us out and not rushing this change.
Where did you see that?
I honestly feel like I just read fifty shades of dumb. --CCP Falcon
|
Sarah Umbra
Bishop.
0
|
Posted - 2016.12.08 22:53:27 -
[173] - Quote
If this change goes through in the near future, I would like to know if defender missiles on current NPC will changed with this.
Will NPC currently fitted with defender missiles be or not be able to hit incoming missiles if this change is confirmed? |
Olmeca Gold
Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc.
58
|
Posted - 2016.12.09 11:57:56 -
[174] - Quote
Glathull wrote:Olmeca Gold wrote:Looks like CCP heard the majority feedback and at least postponed this change from December 13th release.
Thanks CCP for hearing us out and not rushing this change. Where did you see that?
I just didn't see the defender missile changes talked about in here in Dec 13 release notes (except the 0 velocity bombing change) |
Rthulhu Voynich
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2016.12.09 15:36:48 -
[175] - Quote
Patchnotes-Update:
"Changed the behavior of Defender Missiles, you can find out more here." |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
6293
|
Posted - 2016.12.09 16:57:51 -
[176] - Quote
Olmeca Gold wrote:Looks like CCP heard the majority feedback and at least postponed this change from December 13th release.
Thanks CCP for hearing us out and not rushing this change.
Quote: Changed the behavior of Defender Missiles, you can find out more here.
nope.
Bear in mind, people arguing against something are almost always louder than people who like it. So 'majority feedback' is a harder thing to quantify than 'how many people posted'.
Woo! CSM XI!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
Olmeca Gold
Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc.
58
|
Posted - 2016.12.09 19:02:35 -
[177] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote: Bear in mind, people arguing against something are almost always louder than people who like it. So 'majority feedback' is a harder thing to quantify than 'how many people posted'.
This is one factor but it's not that simple. There are other factors. A CSM of all people should be aware of this.
People tend to argue (even in feedback forums) taking their only own playstyle into account rather than the general goodness of the game, so if some playstyle is played less, it is gonna be defended less. We both can agree people who bomb are less than people who get bombed. This has been a way bigger factor in general in feedback forums than the "negative feedback expressed more" factor, and also is a great factor in this topic which would otherwise have been filled with negative feedback even to a way greater degree.
I think in this case the feedback, both in here and on reddit, immensely is against the change, especially considering the fact that many null FCs or capsuleers (who usually are the targets of bombing activity) also have the same stance. This can be seen if the discussions are closely analyzed.
If CCP goes along with it either they know something we don't (entirely possible), or they prioritize empowering alphas over bombing meta balance (debatable but bad choice imho for everyone including alphas), or there is not much point to these feedback forums because they don't pay attention.
You guys make us (every FC seeking content with a 20+ man bomber fleet at his/her disposal) wanna conduct bombing runs less and less each small change. Using these bombers to hotdrop on people seem way more rewarding and fun. And people with objectives (destroy citadel, enemy fleet etc) will just prefer taking other ships out. Just so you know where you keep pushing people. As a bombing FC this is the first time ever I come to this forums and make a significant case. Maybe this can show at least I'm not the type of dude who screams at forums whenever his playstyle is nerfed. |
Chenguang Hucel-Ge
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
23
|
Posted - 2016.12.09 22:28:59 -
[178] - Quote
I'm not into PvP that much, but hey, defenders sound way too OP. Still, If you insist on adding one, please do it, but not without a tool to counter this one.
Behold, duds.
We have Bomb Launcher and then we add another launcher, let's call it "Bar I". Same fitting requirements of Bomb Launcher, roughly on par everything else. The difference is charge used. It's a dud, let's call it "Misericorde I". Cheaper than carbon, does no damage at all. The trick though, these are launched 3 per cycle, allowing for mild space saturation, thus providing some damage loss mitigation at cost of extra man on the field. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
3383
|
Posted - 2016.12.10 13:40:41 -
[179] - Quote
Chenguang Hucel-Ge wrote:I'm not into PvP that much, but hey, defenders sound way too OP. Still, If you insist on adding one, please do it, but not without a tool to counter this one.
Behold, duds.
We have Bomb Launcher and then we add another launcher, let's call it "Bar I". Same fitting requirements of Bomb Launcher, roughly on par everything else. The difference is charge used. It's a dud, let's call it "Misericorde I". Cheaper than carbon, does no damage at all. The trick though, these are launched 3 per cycle, allowing for mild space saturation, thus providing some damage loss mitigation at cost of extra man on the field.
nope the counter is bluff runs/more bombs per run 7 is no longer the holy number
BLOPS Hauler
|
Gizzie Haslack
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2016.12.10 13:48:09 -
[180] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Chenguang Hucel-Ge wrote:I'm not into PvP that much, but hey, defenders sound way too OP. Still, If you insist on adding one, please do it, but not without a tool to counter this one.
Behold, duds.
We have Bomb Launcher and then we add another launcher, let's call it "Bar I". Same fitting requirements of Bomb Launcher, roughly on par everything else. The difference is charge used. It's a dud, let's call it "Misericorde I". Cheaper than carbon, does no damage at all. The trick though, these are launched 3 per cycle, allowing for mild space saturation, thus providing some damage loss mitigation at cost of extra man on the field. nope the counter is bluff runs/more bombs per run 7 is no longer the holy number
Launching duds for the real bombs to hide amongst is a reasonable strategy. If the defenders chase a dud then that is handy stuff. |
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
3384
|
Posted - 2016.12.11 01:40:58 -
[181] - Quote
Gizzie Haslack wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Chenguang Hucel-Ge wrote:I'm not into PvP that much, but hey, defenders sound way too OP. Still, If you insist on adding one, please do it, but not without a tool to counter this one.
Behold, duds.
We have Bomb Launcher and then we add another launcher, let's call it "Bar I". Same fitting requirements of Bomb Launcher, roughly on par everything else. The difference is charge used. It's a dud, let's call it "Misericorde I". Cheaper than carbon, does no damage at all. The trick though, these are launched 3 per cycle, allowing for mild space saturation, thus providing some damage loss mitigation at cost of extra man on the field. nope the counter is bluff runs/more bombs per run 7 is no longer the holy number Launching duds for the real bombs to hide amongst is a reasonable strategy. If the defenders chase a dud then that is handy stuff.
sure if you can only launch one at a time and they still cost 75% of a standard bomb
BLOPS Hauler
|
Gizzie Haslack
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2016.12.11 12:40:12 -
[182] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Gizzie Haslack wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Chenguang Hucel-Ge wrote:I'm not into PvP that much, but hey, defenders sound way too OP. Still, If you insist on adding one, please do it, but not without a tool to counter this one.
Behold, duds.
We have Bomb Launcher and then we add another launcher, let's call it "Bar I". Same fitting requirements of Bomb Launcher, roughly on par everything else. The difference is charge used. It's a dud, let's call it "Misericorde I". Cheaper than carbon, does no damage at all. The trick though, these are launched 3 per cycle, allowing for mild space saturation, thus providing some damage loss mitigation at cost of extra man on the field. nope the counter is bluff runs/more bombs per run 7 is no longer the holy number Launching duds for the real bombs to hide amongst is a reasonable strategy. If the defenders chase a dud then that is handy stuff. sure if you can only launch one at a time and they still cost 75% of a standard bomb
75% would be a touch excessive for a dud, but the size of the actual 'unit' dropped has to be the same as a bomb or people ( computers ) will spot it and ignore it.
|
Ares Splinter
Bank Of Zion The Volition Cult
5
|
Posted - 2016.12.11 14:02:31 -
[183] - Quote
balancing:
Reduced the mining yield of 'Excavator' Mining Drones by 32%.
Why r++vfucker CCP always Players who buy ships which costs 8 9 car just fitte and afterwards nefer in us while we can not even defend ourselves order processing, if the need to **** us so hard in the ass so may well put the indrusti core down to 2 minutes so we do not get ****** so hard up and have the opportunity get away .. 1 Excavator 'Mining Drones $ 700 mil plus piece and so **** is us in the ass with trifle with us in the sense that a carrier can both ratte and collect money home to 25% of the price is not it time CCP head u d of the ass and think a little over gain vs. cost? We really are many here who feel we are taken by the ass and deceived by the CCP way in carrying this out in life ..
From a very mad corp an our freinds... think CCP.. |
Ares Splinter
Bank Of Zion The Volition Cult
5
|
Posted - 2016.12.11 14:03:33 -
[184] - Quote
balancing:
Reduced the mining yield of 'Excavator' Mining Drones by 32%.
Why r++vfucker CCP always Players who buy ships which costs 8 9 car just fitte and afterwards nefer in us while we can not even defend ourselves order processing, if the need to **** us so hard in the ass so may well put the indrusti core down to 2 minutes so we do not get ****** so hard up and have the opportunity get away .. 1 Excavator 'Mining Drones $ 700 mil plus piece and so **** is us in the ass with trifle with us in the sense that a carrier can both ratte and collect money home to 25% of the price is not it time CCP head u d of the ass and think a little over gain vs. cost? We really are many here who feel we are taken by the ass and deceived by the CCP way in carrying this out in life ..
From a very mad corp an our freinds... think CCP.. |
ISD Max Trix
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
625
|
Posted - 2016.12.12 13:22:13 -
[185] - Quote
Removed some Off Topic post.
ISD Max Trix
Lieutenant
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Soldarius
O C C U P Y Test Alliance Please Ignore
1547
|
Posted - 2016.12.12 15:35:29 -
[186] - Quote
Samsara Toldya wrote:So... the "random" part.
Let's say there is a bombing wing with 11 bombers while there are 10 destroyers with d.i.c.k.s. cycling on grid.
Bomber 1 decloakes and launch a bomb.
10 d.i.c.k.s. get triggert by nearby bomb and shoot down the single bomb, causing 120 seconds cooldown on every d.i.c.k.
Remaining 10 bombers decloak and launch bombs.
Very random.
Or do all d.i.c.k.s. on grid communicate with each other and only a single defender missile is fired when there is only one bomb nearby?
The obvious counter to your suggested tactic is to not have every swinging D.I.C.K. blow their load at once. (See what I did there?)
In a large fleet fight where you are most likely to see a bombing run, no one really worries about a lone bomber. One will just get ignored because it will be totally ineffective. Its only when we start seeing full waves that people start speaking up about it on comms.
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
Lugburz
mind games. Suddenly Spaceships.
24
|
Posted - 2016.12.12 16:39:47 -
[187] - Quote
James Zimmer wrote:A few thoughts:
1. Bombs are generally launched in waves, and defenders will now randomly go after bombs. One bomb wave, and you may destroy every bomb, the next wave, only a single bomb (at least that's how I understand the mechanics as you describe them). That lack of consistency would be frustrating, especially in a game that is significantly less random than other MMOs.
2. Bombers are in a pretty good place right now. IMO they don't need this nerf.
3. Destroyers are the meta right now, they don't need the help.
4. Command destroyers are already unique and strong. Adding a third fleet assistance role to command destroyers on top of jumping and command bursts would make them too good IMO, though I do appreciate the effort to reward people who bring combined fleets.
Absolutely, this would make bomb runs just pointless, its already hard to hit a gang thats moving, in general the only successful bomb runs are operated by pilots who have some sort of clue as to what theyre doing - and believe me its not as simple as it looks.
Still if you were to perhaps and a destroyer bomber that could fit two launchers :3 |
Cholly Chi
Acme Entropy
9
|
Posted - 2016.12.12 19:58:19 -
[188] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Hi Space Friends, Coming with the December release, we're going to be releasing a feature we talked about at EVE Vegas 2016. Defender Missile SkillThe skill, Defender Missiles, will no longer require Missile Launcher Operation. All alpha characters will be able to train this to Level 1. The skill will provide a 10% per level bonus to Defender Missile velocity. No other skills will effect Defender Missiles. Defender MissilesDefender Missiles will no longer shoot down missiles aimed at you. Instead they will launch at a random bomb (non-structure) within its flight range. A single defender missile will kill any bomb. These defender missiles can only be loaded into a new defender launcher (described below) The Defender Missile I has a base range of 30km (45km at max skills), and a flight time of 3 seconds. During the December patch downtime, all existing defender missiles (and their blueprints) will become the new Defender Missile IDefender LaunchersThe Defender Launcher I can only load Defender Missiles. It may only be fit to Destroyer class vessels (Destroyers, Interdictors, Command Destroyers and Tactical Destroyers). Once activated, it will scan local space for any bombs,and if it finds one within range, launch a defender missile to intercept it. If it doesn't find any bombs within range, it will still cycle. The Defender Launcher I has a 120 second reactivation timer. It doesn't require a launcher hardpoint, and has low fitting requirements (10 cpu, 2 powergrid), but uses some capacitor (50gj) to activate. You can only fit one defender launcher. Command DestroyersCommand Destroyers receive at 50% role bonus to decreasing the reactivation timer on Defender Launchers. Bomb ChangesBombs now have a Minimum Velocity of 1m/s that you must be traveling at before you can launch. This is to fix some issues that can happen when your velocity is 0, causing the bomb not to move and just explode on you. You can checkout these changes (and more) on Sisi soon. We appreciate any feedback you have! Cheers, CCP Larrikin and Team Phenomenon
|
Gizzie Haslack
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2016.12.13 08:00:28 -
[189] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Hi Space Friends, Bomb ChangesBombs now have a Minimum Velocity of 1m/s that you must be traveling at before you can launch. This is to fix some issues that can happen when your velocity is 0, causing the bomb not to move and just explode on you. Cheers, CCP Larrikin and Team Phenomenon Cholly Chi wrote:I know that because of Eve physics, space is like pudding, but bombing and defense against such could be a lot more fun if the bomb's rate of travel was informed by the velocity the bomber was moving at when they were launched. You'd have to add some kind of velocity-informed range marker on the tactical to let the bomber know roughly when to drop them, but imagine the potential havoc and tactical implications:)
PS. if this idea is lunatic, please be kind - it was posted in the spirit of good fun.
Yes, momentum should be included. When 29km becomes 35km, because you have added a bit of extra speed, then that really does take 'Bombing' to a fun level. You'll need talent to do it then, not just a Cloak. |
Nalia White
Tencus
243
|
Posted - 2016.12.13 12:23:56 -
[190] - Quote
you guys all sound like every ship will have at least one defender missile launcher...
bombing fleets are rare as it is, so this module will never be used anyway, so why freak out? |
|
Gizzie Haslack
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2016.12.13 12:38:04 -
[191] - Quote
Nalia White wrote:you guys all sound like every ship will have at least one defender missile launcher...
bombing fleets are rare as it is, so this module will never be used anyway, so why freak out?
Every saturday night Bomber's Bar flies out. Sometimes it's Torps, sometimes it's Bombs. And now they use Wormholes as well as BLOPS, so you won't see them coming unless you've got a couple of Suicide Bombers inside the BB Fleet itself.
That alone is why many head down the Pub on a saturday night. You stand a better chance of moving 'yo PLEX' ( I think I pronounced that correctly ) during the week :D
Cloakies are fun. I'd hate to see it lost because of NERF'ing and people not having pockets deep enough to fly them.
The Romulans had the right idea *nods*. |
SoulMIner
The Ancients of Eternity The Pestilent Legion
0
|
Posted - 2016.12.13 12:47:10 -
[192] - Quote
2004 Player here.
I have to agree this Nerf was not warranted.
Give the Destroyer the bonus, do not take anything away from the bomber.... 0m/s
My old 2 cents.
Edit: 10 pages of negative reply's day one of post, is a move in the wrong direction. |
Talmssar
Hiidenkilta
0
|
Posted - 2016.12.13 13:03:48 -
[193] - Quote
SoulMIner wrote:2004 Player here.
I have to agree this Nerf was not warranted.
Give the Destroyer the bonus, do not take anything away from the bomber.... 0m/s
My old 2 cents.
Edit: 10 pages of negative reply's day one of post, is a move in the wrong direction.
Player before release so since 2003 and I did quit in 2008. Checked out 2012 and now again due "free play" campaing. It is hilariuos that I end up reading this that it has been under construction like forever :D - I mean defender missile overhaul. Just hapened to be so that I ended up reading stuff which Caldaris fear most - anti missile stuff :/ Maybe I just wait few years and next news is I see CCP is shutting down servers.
TBH compared to other games is timesink vs fun. You should do 1 thing and gain 10 things not so that you have to do 10 things to gain 1 amount of fun... Change this and you may rise in numbers once again.
|
Zockhandra
Generals Of Destruction Syndicate The Bastion
33
|
Posted - 2016.12.13 13:08:37 -
[194] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Hi Space Friends, Coming with the December release, we're going to be releasing a feature we talked about at EVE Vegas 2016. Defender Missile SkillThe skill, Defender Missiles, will no longer require Missile Launcher Operation. All alpha characters will be able to train this to Level 1. The skill will provide a 10% per level bonus to Defender Missile velocity. No other skills will effect Defender Missiles. Defender MissilesDefender Missiles will no longer shoot down missiles aimed at you. Instead they will launch at a random bomb (non-structure) within its flight range. A single defender missile will kill any bomb. These defender missiles can only be loaded into a new defender launcher (described below) The Defender Missile I has a base range of 30km (45km at max skills), and a flight time of 3 seconds. During the December patch downtime, all existing defender missiles (and their blueprints) will become the new Defender Missile IDefender LaunchersThe Defender Launcher I can only load Defender Missiles. It may only be fit to Destroyer class vessels (Destroyers, Interdictors, Command Destroyers and Tactical Destroyers). Once activated, it will scan local space for any bombs,and if it finds one within range, launch a defender missile to intercept it. If it doesn't find any bombs within range, it will still cycle. The Defender Launcher I has a 120 second reactivation timer. It doesn't require a launcher hardpoint, and has low fitting requirements (10 cpu, 2 powergrid), but uses some capacitor (50gj) to activate. You can only fit one defender launcher. Command DestroyersCommand Destroyers receive at 50% role bonus to decreasing the reactivation timer on Defender Launchers. Bomb ChangesBombs now have a Minimum Velocity of 1m/s that you must be traveling at before you can launch. This is to fix some issues that can happen when your velocity is 0, causing the bomb not to move and just explode on you. You can checkout these changes (and more) on Sisi soon. We appreciate any feedback you have! Cheers, CCP Larrikin and Team Phenomenon
Sounds like we need a bomb that splits into more bombs but does less damage. If you ever want to see another bombing fleet....like ever again.
Once again you've added a new mechanic to counter/help counter an allready tough to pull off (and lets be honest an ineffective way of dealing with most contemporary fleets). I bet if you compare how many actual bombing doctrines get used each year to how many are successful BEFORE this patch comes in, you'll see that almost noone uses them anyway?
So, your providing a counter-play, for a mechanics which is currently in a super-bad place because its SO specific, and its hard to pull off..... So ultimately your addition means nothing because....Who uses bombs anyway?
Shield are red, Armor is too, i slapped my heavy neut, all over you.
Fingers crossed, broken shattered and burned,
across from the bubble and into your hull.
|
Jakara Dakara
Coreli Corporation Mercenary Coalition
3
|
Posted - 2016.12.13 13:26:16 -
[195] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Hi Space Friends, Command Destroyers Command Destroyers receive at 50% role bonus to decreasing the reactivation timer on Defender Launchers.
Any thoughts on perhaps making the bonus for Assault Frigates? As stated earlier in this thread command dessies have a niche roll atm where as Assault Frigates at the moment are completely outclassed by T3D's and it will give them more of a roll & usage. |
Davina Sienar
The Misinterpretation of Silence
117
|
Posted - 2016.12.13 13:51:39 -
[196] - Quote
I just want my CruiseMissiles back on my Manticore.......
Make a HeavyBomber f.e..... use Tier 3 BC or so... make them use Torps and Bombs
All that shortrage stuff for a paper armor BomberFrig....
Cant realy use in lowsec anyways anymore and now nerf again
blah
|
Ms Michigan
Aviation Professionals for EVE The Ditanian Alliance
111
|
Posted - 2016.12.13 14:09:59 -
[197] - Quote
Ammzi wrote:From a game balancing perspective this makes absolutely no sense unless you plan to roll back the bomber nerfs from 2013. Bombers with bomb launchers are used rarely in any large engagement now-a-days due to the distributed multi-grid fights across several systems making the logistics and strategy of a bomber fleet quite complicated.
But now you wish to take the remaining and small usability of bombers and throw that completely out by giving an I-WIN button to counter bombs. Where is the logic in this? Usually these balance posts are preluded by motivation for a particular nerf or boost. I.e. "We will that bombers in general are too powerful in the current game play". But there's no such explanation given here - possibly hinting that you don't have a legitimate motivation.
This change will lead to simply extinguishing an interesting and dynamic combat mechanic in EVE.
Quoted for truth.
If you do this, roll back the changes from 2013. Then we can call this balanced. |
Kruselloyne
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2016.12.13 14:41:01 -
[198] - Quote
SoulMIner wrote:2004 Player here.
I have to agree this Nerf was not warranted.
Give the Destroyer the bonus, do not take anything away from the bomber.... 0m/s
My old 2 cents.
Edit: 10 pages of negative reply's day one of post, is a move in the wrong direction.
Like 10 people in those 10 pages, but who's counting?
People complain about every change CCP makes because it's not fixing THEIR pet issue. |
Lasisha Mishi
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
129
|
Posted - 2016.12.13 14:41:30 -
[199] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:
Bomb Changes Bombs now have a Minimum Velocity of 1m/s that you must be traveling at before you can launch. This is to fix some issues that can happen when your velocity is 0, causing the bomb not to move and just explode on you.
......that was a thing?
oh dear god |
Sunstar Jonni
Leviathan Rising
2
|
Posted - 2016.12.13 14:54:25 -
[200] - Quote
With bombing runs requiring extreme planning and luck and skill to execute now you're making it even harder to use against a class of ships which already have so many options to counter (warp off kill bombers) now bombing runs were useless against frigates from what I have seen. So this really only helps battlecruiser and battleship roams and who does those oh yea nobody so unless you know somebody is going after a tower, poco, citadel bombing runs are just not really used or fail out right the meta for blops is torps or more ships. just not seeing the utility or use here. Perhaps you're thinking of lifting the ban on bombs in hi sec so CODE can use them to hit retrievers? With no accompanying buff to boms just doesn't make sense to me. |
|
Olmeca Gold
Pleonexium Sustainable Whaling Inc.
60
|
Posted - 2016.12.13 15:05:10 -
[201] - Quote
Kruselloyne wrote:SoulMIner wrote:
Edit: 10 pages of negative reply's day one of post, is a move in the wrong direction.
Like 10 people in those 10 pages, but who's counting? People complain about every change CCP makes because it's not fixing THEIR pet issue.
Yeah people complain but its all about the negative/positive ratio and degree of the feedback. If you are gonna stop hearing negative feedback because "people always complain" then what is the purpose of a request of feedback in the first place right?
Personally I have never seen a change with this much overwhelmingly uniform negative feedback being rushed into the implementation without giving it a second thought. The uniformity of negative feedback for this one is on a par with the cancelled "cloakies decloak each other when cloaked" change.
Two reasons for this I think is that firstly CCP is rightly enthusiastic about giving alphas meaningful play (but they are doing it wrong), and secondly there is not really a lot of people in CSM who represents bombing fleets' interests, at least to the degree of being able to make their voice heard.
As Bombers Bar we will keep trying good bombing runs (but probably way less often), and we will succeed at times (but at a much lower level than a balanced meta deserves), and then some bombing illiterate CSM member will come and say "oh we told you defenders were a balanced change" and get his upvotes. Meanwhile you will see a good bombing run perhaps once in four months instead of one (which is already a low rate than a balanced meta deserves), and bombing will slowly and surely sink down to deep frozen depths of meta.
If nothing else changes. |
Gizzie Haslack
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2016.12.13 16:07:49 -
[202] - Quote
Sunstar Jonni wrote:With bombing runs requiring extreme planning and luck and skill to execute now you're making it even harder to use against a class of ships which already have so many options to counter (warp off kill bombers) now bombing runs were useless against frigates from what I have seen. So this really only helps battlecruiser and battleship roams and who does those oh yea nobody so unless you know somebody is going after a tower, poco, citadel bombing runs are just not really used or fail out right the meta for blops is torps or more ships. just not seeing the utility or use here. Perhaps you're thinking of lifting the ban on bombs in hi sec so CODE can use them to hit retrievers? With no accompanying buff to boms just doesn't make sense to me.
Dropping a bomb can pop flimsier frigates, and is great for clearing out drones. Drop 3 bombs in the same patch and you're gonna make a mess if you take people by surprise ( I'm ignoring focused bombs here ).
It's not easy, but it is do-able.
I don't expect easy when I can blap all of your drones in one move, but I do expect do-able.
I also expect you to have a fair chance to dodge my move, or I'm gonna get bored.
|
h4kun4
Gang Bang Pandas Snuffed Out
69
|
Posted - 2016.12.13 16:40:06 -
[203] - Quote
Honestly, for me its an alibi buff on destroyers, because lets face it. Bombruns are rare theese days, and people who can properly FC them are also not a mijority out there. People will bring a couple of those depending on numbers, usefulness, dcotrines and lowskill members or just fit a defender launcher "just in case" on the mandatory command dessies instead of a gun or a link. In the end, you might dodge a fake bombrun of 3 and the real run will still screw up ypur broadcasts or kill your fleet. |
Bowfingerz
Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers.
2
|
Posted - 2016.12.13 16:49:34 -
[204] - Quote
Sounds to me like Hardknocks eviction fleets will be totaly protected now well done ccp..(a subsidury of hardknock owneswormeholes plc)
|
Nicholas Sirens
Imperial Sirens
16
|
Posted - 2016.12.13 19:38:19 -
[205] - Quote
How do the defender missiles works in PvE now? I have not touch the PvE part in EVE for several Years but I do remember there are some mobs that launch defender missiles before. How they have been changed into?
töƒµ¡+sÄ+µ¥Ñ
µúÜsñ¦séÇsäí
S+Çt¦+µû¡µù¦
FÉ+FÉ+túètúè
|
Dornier Pfeil
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2016.12.13 20:16:11 -
[206] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Worst cases for this change are either they have to tone it down a little, or it doesn't have a significant impact on fleet comps and things stay more or less as they are.
Except for those very few people who used the defenders as they were. Their tools are now gone.
Can these missiles please have the intelligence to understand what kind of module they are in and behave as normal defenders when in a normal launcher and as bomb killers when in the new launcher? |
Dornier Pfeil
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2016.12.13 20:18:38 -
[207] - Quote
Gizzie Haslack wrote:50% accuracy or summat.
If you nerf the accuracy to something(50% sounds fine) then you should allow them to target the closest missile. |
Menis
Astrocomical Warped Intentions
0
|
Posted - 2016.12.13 21:54:54 -
[208] - Quote
There go's my defending gila fit. What do you do about missile fit ship's now. Can't hit missiles now and I don't fly in Null sec to fight Stealth Bombers. Bombs were heavily tanked as it was already. Now we have to have someone who don't need much skill to kill bombs? Great idea. Now I'll really put away any thought of ever flying a Stealth Bomber. I'll keep my PvP fit Gila for sites tho. Just have to give up the idea that another Missile fit ship can be avoided in a fight.
Another bad idea I think, But hey. We are all full of ideas these day's. |
Harenax
Podlins R Us Initiative Mercenaries
2
|
Posted - 2016.12.13 23:08:49 -
[209] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Altrue wrote:These missiles shouldn't do enough damage to oneshot a bomb. Why not have bombs take two hits to explode for instance? Given the random nature of the defender-to-bomb targeting, this would make defender missiles mostly useless, unless used en-mass.
So you are admitting that the update that you just did is completely friggin useless anyway because no one in there right mind is going to field a fleet with bomber counters because of how nerfed they already are? That bombers bar fleet that took out that fleet in M-0 was a freak accident you wont see for years again.
Thanks for wasting everyones time, yet again CCP.
edit:quoted poorly |
Dajat Lemmont
Aliastra Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2016.12.14 01:41:11 -
[210] - Quote
Starrakatt wrote:Dantelion Shinoni wrote:Create a new class of Destroyers, Utility Destroyers or whatever, if you really want a Defender Missile bonus for Destroyers, no need to muddle Command Destroyers to do so. We don't need more Destroyers, or in fact small ships love, we need CCP to fix T3c, BLOPS and Battleships. I think CCP is trying to get Alpha clones involved in fleet as Dessie's pilot with a use, thus the Defender Missiles change (fine enough) and the use of combined fleets (ok). However, as already stated, Dessies will just be alphaed off the field before Bombers commit. Looks to me like another indirect atempt to fix Battleship's vulnerabilities while trying to not actually touch Battleships. IMHO, Defenders would have seen such a better use as a battleship module.
DIDO, This should be a Battleship Module. And there should be a skill to shorten the cycle time.
|
|
Lonewolf174
Silver Guardians Fidelas Constans
0
|
Posted - 2016.12.14 07:20:07 -
[211] - Quote
Capqu wrote:
make them target drones or anyone using ecm on you instead
What he said.
better use for defenders, bombs are great, and need to see more use again. And thats from someone who is usually on the recieving end. |
Gizzie Haslack
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2016.12.14 11:01:36 -
[212] - Quote
Lonewolf174 wrote:Capqu wrote:
make them target drones or anyone using ecm on you instead
What he said. Better use for defenders, bombs are great, and need to see more use again. And thats from someone who is usually on the recieving end.
Just to play Devil's Advocate:
T1 bombs, 3 of, incoming. That's your drones & frigates going pop on wave 1. Pods go on wave 2 ( all those expensive implants ). Possibly dessies too.
T4 bombs kill battleships ( focused ), or can blap cruisers & dessies en-masse ( using non-focused bombs ) if done in waves.
Bombs are some scary shiznit.
I'd love to see more bombs going on. 3-4 Suicide Bombers could pop a fleet of 40-odd Frigates if well placed ( including those expensive pods that no-one insures ). And all it takes is a small wing of 3-4 Bombers getting the surprise factor with some general Voids ( not focused ).
So how do you guard against that?
You can make fun little Cloaky Destroyers, so Defender Missiles could be used by fleets ( including Bomber's Bar themselves ).
Indeed.
.
It's all fun & games until no-one can afford to fly in the fun stuff anymore. That's still my main fear. I don't mind paying a subscription, or buying the odd top-up PLEX once every couple of months; but if you need mega-deep pockets to even get into a T2 then something is wrong.
Business is business, so let the Rich kids pay for T3 ;) |
Lugh Crow-Slave
3405
|
Posted - 2016.12.14 11:07:07 -
[213] - Quote
Gizzie Haslack wrote: You'll need talent to do it then, not just a Cloak.
i take it you don't bomb much? or you only do it against fleets that have never dealt with bombing because it is no easy feat
BLOPS Hauler
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
3405
|
Posted - 2016.12.14 11:10:21 -
[214] - Quote
Jakara Dakara wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:Hi Space Friends, Command Destroyers Command Destroyers receive at 50% role bonus to decreasing the reactivation timer on Defender Launchers.
Any thoughts on perhaps making the bonus for Assault Frigates? As stated earlier in this thread command dessies have a niche roll atm where as Assault Frigates at the moment are completely outclassed by T3D's and it will give them more of a roll & usage.
i would much rather AFs be given a good place in eve not just some gimmick tacked onto them so they are a one trick pony
BLOPS Hauler
|
Gizzie Haslack
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2016.12.14 11:11:53 -
[215] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Gizzie Haslack wrote: You'll need talent to do it then, not just a Cloak. i take it you don't bomb much? or you only do it against fleets that have never dealt with bombing because it is no easy feat
That's the point. I want to feel talented. Study study study.
Plus it's accurate to the phsyics. Momentum is momentum. High Speed launching might even get you past Defenders?
Who wants some rich kid getting easy kills when you can instead have talented pilots kicking butt?
Or you can coast in at 10m/s cloaked to a range of 29 km, and then de-cloak & launch. Oh, and then leg-it ( obviously ) to a pre-set off-the-grid warp point ( using dual-bookmark triangulation ).
|
Sami Hakaari
Space Cavalry Regiment
0
|
Posted - 2016.12.14 13:27:44 -
[216] - Quote
Can anybody explain me why defence against missiles was removed completly? I was waiting for this patch to see them buffed and they removed it? |
Cade Windstalker
634
|
Posted - 2016.12.14 14:33:10 -
[217] - Quote
Sami Hakaari wrote:Can anybody explain me why defence against missiles was removed completly? I was waiting for this patch to see them buffed and they removed it?
You may want to try reading the thread, starting with the first post by CCP. The short answer is: They didn't. |
Gizzie Haslack
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2016.12.14 14:36:36 -
[218] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Jakara Dakara wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:Hi Space Friends, Command Destroyers Command Destroyers receive at 50% role bonus to decreasing the reactivation timer on Defender Launchers.
Any thoughts on perhaps making the bonus for Assault Frigates? As stated earlier in this thread command dessies have a niche roll atm where as Assault Frigates at the moment are completely outclassed by T3D's and it will give them more of a roll & usage. i would much rather AFs be given a good place in eve not just some gimmick tacked onto them so they are a one trick pony
Agreed. AF's are currently expensive & pointless. In a Frigate you're gonna get blapped, so why spend nearly 45m etc on something so limited?
Giving AF's a 'launcher upgrade' might actually bring them back into play. They could be the Y-Wing of EVE. An old & chunky doo-dah etc. I get the need for a Heavy Strike Frigate with a hugely-adaptable chassis, but Bombers are so good you just don't need AF's at this stage.
I've had 'em queued for ages, and something better always comes along. That's not a good sign really. |
Spirit Bishop
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2016.12.15 12:51:59 -
[219] - Quote
Capqu wrote:waste of goddamn time
fozzie sov was enough of a nerf to bombing already, this is totally unnecessary
noone is bombing currently in eve because you reliably cannot predict where the fight will be and bombing requires some setup time
these changes would have been good 2 years ago
now adays test and friends are literally flying around in the most bombable doctrines in history but noone can be bothered bombing them because its impossible to predict where engagements will happen and super dds are just better bombs anyway, not to mention the general power creep of ehp/speed making bombs harder than ever to land
in adition 0 velocity bombs was some of the hardest **** to pull off and almost never saw any use so removing it for no reason i dont even understand, you just dont want people to be able to innovate?
thanks for the final nail o7 bongers
here is a suggestion because i guess i should be constructive
make them target drones or anyone using ecm on you instead
Honestly the biggest waste of time I have ran into in EvE Online was the link on the bottom of your rant. |
Felix Shoen
Appetite 4 Destruction Appetite 4 Destruction.
4
|
Posted - 2016.12.15 15:06:06 -
[220] - Quote
Bombing runs take planning, coordination, and skill. When they work out they are some of the most spectacular events in eve and make for great video. You at CCP even used bombers bar video in your "This is EVE" promo two years back. but now...well. Think about it this way.
You now have a mechanism where a paying player of skill and experience has his entire ship's attack completely negated by a Free to Play player WITHOUT ANY PLAYER INPUT WHATSOEVER USING A SINGLE MODULE.
what's next? how about a doomsday eliminator module mounted on an imicus. or a decloaking sphere only usable on noob-ships.
if you want to get rid of stealth bombers, get rid of them. You can do that. Don't, however leave them in game to be nullified by Alpha clones. because that makes us PAYING customers just a little pissed off.
|
|
Gizzie Haslack
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2016.12.15 16:05:56 -
[221] - Quote
Felix Shoen wrote:Bombing runs take planning, coordination, and skill. When they work out they are some of the most spectacular events in eve and make for great video. You at CCP even used bombers bar video in your "This is EVE" promo two years back. but now...well. Think about it this way.
You now have a mechanism where a paying player of skill and experience has his entire ship's attack completely negated by a Free to Play player WITHOUT ANY PLAYER INPUT WHATSOEVER USING A SINGLE MODULE.
what's next? how about a doomsday eliminator module mounted on an imicus. or a decloaking sphere only usable on noob-ships.
if you want to get rid of stealth bombers, get rid of them. You can do that. Don't, however leave them in game to be nullified by Alpha clones. because that makes us PAYING customers just a little pissed off.
Fleets 'n' squadrons. It's the only way to be sure* ;)
.
* Unless the FC is a knob making money off of your back, but that's bye-the-bye. |
May Arethusa
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
227
|
Posted - 2016.12.15 18:26:40 -
[222] - Quote
Quote:Adding Cov Ops AND Defender Missile capabilities might just fix teh AF.
Yeah... No.
Assault Frigates are just as capable as they used to be. The issue lies in the recent additions around them, T3Ds and Command Destroyers. I fail to see your logic in retasking an Assault Frigate to a defensive role.
Quote:fozzie sov was enough of a nerf to bombing already, this is totally unnecessary
noone is bombing currently in eve because you reliably cannot predict where the fight will be and bombing requires some setup time
Your inability to co-ordinate with FCs to ensure a fight takes place on a pre-prepared battlefield isn't a nerf to bombing. That said, there are numerous static locations where fights will take place at predictable times, and that number is growing each day. Try adapating instead of bemoaning changes to the game, because we all know how much sympathy that gets you. You're living in a target rich environment, do something with it.
Quote:You now have a mechanism where a paying player of skill and experience has his entire ship's attack completely negated by a Free to Play player WITHOUT ANY PLAYER INPUT WHATSOEVER USING A SINGLE MODULE.
Not really. For a start, pressing a button is what is known as player input. Then there's the random nature of their targeting, meaning that at least some bombs will get through. That's without accounting for the two minute reactivation delay, a poorly co-ordinated anti-bombing squad can easily be negated with feints. Finally, how is this any less of an annoyance when activated by a paying customer? Grow up. |
Gizzie Haslack
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2016.12.16 01:36:46 -
[223] - Quote
May Arethusa wrote:Quote:Adding Cov Ops AND Defender Missile capabilities might just fix teh AF. Yeah... No. Assault Frigates are just as capable as they used to be. The issue lies in the recent additions around them, T3Ds and Command Destroyers. I fail to see your logic in retasking an Assault Frigate to a defensive role.
I just don't see the point with them when you can run a Dessie in pretty much every role an Assault Frigate does. Adding some zing could be fun. Having a 'summat' that can fly Cov-Ops and mount a Defender AND do a little Blapping too could compliment a Bomber-wing nicely.
Oh, and as for solo-bombing I found this:
https://puu.sh/rlngQ.mp4
I think it works nicely :)
|
Frostys Virpio
Yet another corpdot.
3015
|
Posted - 2016.12.16 14:38:28 -
[224] - Quote
Gizzie Haslack wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Chenguang Hucel-Ge wrote:I'm not into PvP that much, but hey, defenders sound way too OP. Still, If you insist on adding one, please do it, but not without a tool to counter this one.
Behold, duds.
We have Bomb Launcher and then we add another launcher, let's call it "Bar I". Same fitting requirements of Bomb Launcher, roughly on par everything else. The difference is charge used. It's a dud, let's call it "Misericorde I". Cheaper than carbon, does no damage at all. The trick though, these are launched 3 per cycle, allowing for mild space saturation, thus providing some damage loss mitigation at cost of extra man on the field. nope the counter is bluff runs/more bombs per run 7 is no longer the holy number Launching duds for the real bombs to hide amongst is a reasonable strategy. If the defenders chase a dud then that is handy stuff.
Or just launch more bombs and be sure all that went through exploded instead of the RNG of defenders sometimes wiping your real bombs and only duds getting through. |
Rei Y
Minmatar Citizen 90483936 Corporation
15
|
Posted - 2016.12.16 16:26:11 -
[225] - Quote
didnt see it on the first 2 pages - do these changes apply to NPC defender missiles? 75% chance of defender missiles on team burners pretty much canceled out 75% DPS on missile boats. |
Aischa Montagne
Blut-Klauen-Clan
18
|
Posted - 2016.12.17 08:37:58 -
[226] - Quote
I have a bit hard time understanding what Problems you guys have. Do you realy want to do less Bombing runs because they are one little, not very effective counter ability on the battle field?
Please, think again. Do you realy believe that we will see huge destroyer fleets against Bomber run that has no love with a majority of FCs currently flying?
I have strong doubts that defender missles will have a big impact. I see some exceptations of course. I think people might scramble into Destroyers when they learn a bomber fleet tries attack something stationary. This is not to bad.
However, I see a lot of Potential in the tech of Defender Missles. Maybe in future we see more effective Bombs, with more effective options to decoy, and with more effective way to shoot those Bombs down. Sounds good. And I like the Idea to get there in small steps much more appealing then in one huge Blob that is probably unbalanced and not working.
I realy like that defender Missles are now somewhat usefull. Until now skilled Capsuleer did not looked at defender missles twice. Now I think even the skilled pilots might want to fit one of those occationly. And that for me is a huge improvement before. Even if the impact in total is little at this point of time.
congrats CCP. I realy like this step by step approach of yours. And I would like to see more openness for smaller changes on the community side.
Aischa |
Kellasana
FireStar Inc Evictus.
2
|
Posted - 2016.12.18 02:23:41 -
[227] - Quote
Thing you bombing whiners REALLY need to get through your heads too, is the fact that Defenders are, as has been said ad infinitum, RNG targetting. you guys seriously think every fleet you're going to bomb is going to be guarded by destroyers COVERED in defender launchers? Highly freaking doubt it. also, bear in mind, they'd have to be in range too, and activated on time.
All you really need to do is just figure out which area to approach the fleet from would be best, or, you know, wait until their fleet is distracted, or several other tactical advantages.
giving alphas the ability to have a dedicated and handy role in null fleets will make them want to be in them more, and will lead to more people eventually subbing so they can do more than just that.
Granted, I to would like to see new changes show up for bombers as well, but We all just need to adapt with the times, rather than whine on and on about how things used to be, or how unfair things are. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
3421
|
Posted - 2016.12.18 02:25:32 -
[228] - Quote
what are you talking about most destroyers have the one utility high needed to fit the max number of these and the amount of atention needed to use them is easily low enough to just have alts anchored to your fleets
BLOPS Hauler
|
Redwood Tyx
Rogue Clones Yulai Federation
0
|
Posted - 2016.12.21 20:37:28 -
[229] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:
...
Defender Launchers The Defender Launcher I can only load Defender Missiles. It may only be fit to Destroyer class vessels (Destroyers, Interdictors, Command Destroyers and Tactical Destroyers). Once activated, it will scan local space for any bombs,and if it finds one within range, launch a defender missile to intercept it. If it doesn't find any bombs within range, it will still cycle. The Defender Launcher I has a 120 second reactivation timer. It doesn't require a launcher hardpoint, and has low fitting requirements (10 cpu, 2 powergrid), but uses some capacitor (50gj) to activate. You can only fit one defender launcher.
...
Why couldn't you just made it so the player could choose if he want a defender launcher on his e.g Sabre, why make a launcher slot so that we loose one hi-slot if we do not want this defender missile thingy?
I been playing several years and id been attacked one time from a bomb! ONE time!!! But I have used the 8th slot every time I fly with my Sabre!!!
Do it again, do it right! |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
6323
|
Posted - 2016.12.21 21:08:50 -
[230] - Quote
Redwood Tyx wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:
...
Defender Launchers The Defender Launcher I can only load Defender Missiles. It may only be fit to Destroyer class vessels (Destroyers, Interdictors, Command Destroyers and Tactical Destroyers). Once activated, it will scan local space for any bombs,and if it finds one within range, launch a defender missile to intercept it. If it doesn't find any bombs within range, it will still cycle. The Defender Launcher I has a 120 second reactivation timer. It doesn't require a launcher hardpoint, and has low fitting requirements (10 cpu, 2 powergrid), but uses some capacitor (50gj) to activate. You can only fit one defender launcher.
...
Why couldn't you just made it so the player could choose if he want a defender launcher on his e.g Sabre, why make a launcher slot so that we loose one hi-slot if we do not want this defender missile thingy? I been playing several years and id been attacked one time from a bomb! ONE time!!! But I have used the 8th slot every time I fly with my Sabre!!! Do it again, do it right!
Uh... This hasn't changed the fitting for any ship.
Woo! CSM XI!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
|
Alyssa Severasse
Rolled Out Shadow Cartel
20
|
Posted - 2016.12.24 23:10:25 -
[231] - Quote
MJDFG Bombs.
That is what you need. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
3473
|
Posted - 2016.12.25 23:33:30 -
[232] - Quote
Alyssa Severasse wrote:MJDFG Bombs.
That is what you need.
Dear GOD!
BLOPS Hauler
|
Capqu
Half Empty
1254
|
Posted - 2017.01.01 17:27:40 -
[233] - Quote
So are you just gonna continue perpetuating that this forum isn't for addressing feedback but instead just for posting dumb things that go into the game whether or not you get the feedback you want or are you actually going to address any of the points people (not just me) brought up?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
Lelob
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
247
|
Posted - 2017.01.06 11:48:50 -
[234] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote: Defender Launchers The Defender Launcher I can only load Defender Missiles. It may only be fit to Destroyer class vessels (Destroyers, Interdictors, Command Destroyers and Tactical Destroyers).
Cheers, CCP Larrikin and Team Phenomenon
L O L
Let me just launch bombs against a bunch of thrashers,svipuls, and dictors. It's like a ships-you-should-never-ever-ever-even-try-to-bomb-like-ever. This is a 0/10 totally 100% worthless idea. Go back to the drawing board with this crap please lol |
Lelob
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
247
|
Posted - 2017.01.06 11:56:00 -
[235] - Quote
In case there is some confusion, the way you currently deal with bombers is with dictor bubbles/hic bubbles, ships with extremely high scan res, and ships that can kill frigs really quickly. That is literally the definition of a destroyer. A fast locking, frigate killing ship that can occasionally drop bubbles. If you saw a bunch of arty thrashers on grid now or dictors or confessors or p. much a bunch of destroyers, you wouldn't bomb it anyways unless you had balls of steel or were a total ******* ******. |
Lelob
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
247
|
Posted - 2017.01.06 12:03:11 -
[236] - Quote
May Arethusa wrote:Quote:fozzie sov was enough of a nerf to bombing already, this is totally unnecessary
noone is bombing currently in eve because you reliably cannot predict where the fight will be and bombing requires some setup time Your inability to co-ordinate with FCs to ensure a fight takes place on a pre-prepared battlefield isn't a nerf to bombing. That said, there are numerous static locations where fights will take place at predictable times, and that number is growing each day. Try adapating instead of bemoaning changes to the game, because we all know how much sympathy that gets you. You're living in a target rich environment, do something with it.
You have literally 0 idea what you are talking about. I have tried this on numerous occasions and it is very, very hard. I tried it for about 2 weeks before I gave up. I've been on both ends of this (FCing vs bombers and FCing in bombers) and it's stupidly easy to avoid bombers and stupidly hard to set them up to counter people. I really cannot stress enough how much you do not understand how very wrong you actually are. |
Frostys Virpio
Yet another corpdot.
3045
|
Posted - 2017.01.06 18:44:17 -
[237] - Quote
Lelob wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote: Defender Launchers The Defender Launcher I can only load Defender Missiles. It may only be fit to Destroyer class vessels (Destroyers, Interdictors, Command Destroyers and Tactical Destroyers).
Cheers, CCP Larrikin and Team Phenomenon
L O L Let me just launch bombs against a bunch of thrashers,svipuls, and dictors. It's like a ships-you-should-never-ever-ever-even-try-to-bomb-like-ever. This is a 0/10 totally 100% worthless idea. Go back to the drawing board with this crap please lol
Their goal is to get group to bring destroyers along in their doctrine which would be worthwhile to try to bomb. If the enemy somehow decided to fly shield battleships, they could with this bring a few destroyers in hope of swatting bombs out of the sky. Those same destroyers can also attempt to shoot bombers to nullify their bombs if they are so inclined.
I'm not saying ti will work but the goal was not to make dessi gang less of a bomb target. It's intended to integrate dessi as support in fleet that might get bombed. It comes at a time where CCP expect many newbies (alpha) so they try to give them a role they can actually do.
As a sidenote, can all alpha clone train defenders or is it only missile factions that have access to it? |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
6357
|
Posted - 2017.01.06 23:31:48 -
[238] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Lelob wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote: Defender Launchers The Defender Launcher I can only load Defender Missiles. It may only be fit to Destroyer class vessels (Destroyers, Interdictors, Command Destroyers and Tactical Destroyers).
Cheers, CCP Larrikin and Team Phenomenon
L O L Let me just launch bombs against a bunch of thrashers,svipuls, and dictors. It's like a ships-you-should-never-ever-ever-even-try-to-bomb-like-ever. This is a 0/10 totally 100% worthless idea. Go back to the drawing board with this crap please lol Their goal is to get group to bring destroyers along in their doctrine which would be worthwhile to try to bomb. If the enemy somehow decided to fly shield battleships, they could with this bring a few destroyers in hope of swatting bombs out of the sky. Those same destroyers can also attempt to shoot bombers to nullify their bombs if they are so inclined. I'm not saying ti will work but the goal was not to make dessi gang less of a bomb target. It's intended to integrate dessi as support in fleet that might get bombed. It comes at a time where CCP expect many newbies (alpha) so they try to give them a role they can actually do. As a sidenote, can all alpha clone train defenders or is it only missile factions that have access to it?
Ding, this is the correct answer.
Single ship doctrines are boring.
Woo! CSM XI!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
181
|
Posted - 2017.01.07 05:23:35 -
[239] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:VCBee 2fast2furious wrote:Just to confirm, do Defender Missiles 2.0 distinguish between friendly and non-friendly bombs? They do not, they target a random bomb within intercept range. It does not consider friendly or non-friendly bombs. Rowells wrote:So, in regards to how it selects a bomb, is it truly random or does it pick the closest one? Its truly random.
While I get that game realism must often be sacrificed on the altar of game balance this is one of those design choices that makes me wonder just what the heck is going on.
We're playing in a universe with semi-autonomous drones, even fully autonomous "rogue" drones, FoF missiles, FTL communication, and other technological marvels, but we can't make bomb-buster missiles that are at least "smart" enough to aim for targets that are getting closer to them or their launch point much less home in on any bomb that isn't transmitting as "friendly?"
This may make sense from a balance perspective, I've never touched bombs, but from a character perspective any engineer submitting this idea should be tossed out an airlock as hopelessly incompetent. |
GREYBOBSASS
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
31
|
Posted - 2017.01.11 22:54:39 -
[240] - Quote
or make super slick looking minelaying destroyers with both bonuses to defenders and epic minelaying tech...
maybe kamikaze drones like that chase on proxy |
|
Frostys Virpio
Yet another corpdot.
3053
|
Posted - 2017.01.20 19:32:24 -
[241] - Quote
Shereza wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:VCBee 2fast2furious wrote:Just to confirm, do Defender Missiles 2.0 distinguish between friendly and non-friendly bombs? They do not, they target a random bomb within intercept range. It does not consider friendly or non-friendly bombs. Rowells wrote:So, in regards to how it selects a bomb, is it truly random or does it pick the closest one? Its truly random. While I get that game realism must often be sacrificed on the altar of game balance this is one of those design choices that makes me wonder just what the heck is going on. We're playing in a universe with semi-autonomous drones, even fully autonomous "rogue" drones, FoF missiles, FTL communication, and other technological marvels, but we can't make bomb-buster missiles that are at least "smart" enough to aim for targets that are getting closer to them or their launch point much less home in on any bomb that isn't transmitting as "friendly?" This may make sense from a balance perspective, I've never touched bombs, but from a character perspective any engineer submitting this idea should be tossed out an airlock as hopelessly incompetent.
Bomb don't transmit as friendly.
They are also not homing anywhere since they are straight fire unguided ordinance. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
3543
|
Posted - 2017.01.20 21:07:45 -
[242] - Quote
Shereza wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:VCBee 2fast2furious wrote:Just to confirm, do Defender Missiles 2.0 distinguish between friendly and non-friendly bombs? They do not, they target a random bomb within intercept range. It does not consider friendly or non-friendly bombs. Rowells wrote:So, in regards to how it selects a bomb, is it truly random or does it pick the closest one? Its truly random. While I get that game realism must often be sacrificed on the altar of game balance this is one of those design choices that makes me wonder just what the heck is going on. We're playing in a universe with semi-autonomous drones, even fully autonomous "rogue" drones, FoF missiles, FTL communication, and other technological marvels, but we can't make bomb-buster missiles that are at least "smart" enough to aim for targets that are getting closer to them or their launch point much less home in on any bomb that isn't transmitting as "friendly?" This may make sense from a balance perspective, I've never touched bombs, but from a character perspective any engineer submitting this idea should be tossed out an airlock as hopelessly incompetent.
if realism is so important to you just imagine they were designed by the lowest bidder that cut cost using as simplistic a guidance computer as possible
BLOPS Hauler
|
Scath Bererund
SergalJerk Test Alliance Please Ignore
32
|
Posted - 2017.01.22 15:40:54 -
[243] - Quote
Cloaky tears best tears |
GROUND XERO
Rennfeuer Project.Mayhem.
13
|
Posted - 2017.01.23 10:57:00 -
[244] - Quote
Why making a modul change and adding new roles etc.... when it is much easier??? Because CCP can?
Just make bombs lockable and shootable... so every newbie is able to shoot it in a T0 frig (corvette)!
SOLVED!
NCPL (Necromonger of new Eden) will make EVE great again!
|
Brigadine Ferathine
Aliastra Gallente Federation
131
|
Posted - 2017.02.01 18:40:38 -
[245] - Quote
Scath Bererund wrote:Cloaky tears best tears Some cloakies... bombing has been nerfed out of existence. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
3712
|
Posted - 2017.02.04 11:53:47 -
[246] - Quote
Brigadine Ferathine wrote:Scath Bererund wrote:Cloaky tears best tears Some cloakies... bombing has been nerfed out of existence.
I still manage to bomb regularly focused void bombing at least
However yes conventional bombing is just no longer viable
BLOPS Hauler
|
Brigadine Ferathine
The Valiant Vanguard The Volition Cult
136
|
Posted - 2017.02.04 19:08:09 -
[247] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Brigadine Ferathine wrote:Scath Bererund wrote:Cloaky tears best tears Some cloakies... bombing has been nerfed out of existence. I still manage to bomb regularly focused void bombing at least However yes conventional bombing is just no longer viable Yeah. Void bombing doesn't count lol. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
3796
|
Posted - 2017.02.19 09:15:29 -
[248] - Quote
Brigadine Ferathine wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Brigadine Ferathine wrote:Scath Bererund wrote:Cloaky tears best tears Some cloakies... bombing has been nerfed out of existence. I still manage to bomb regularly focused void bombing at least However yes conventional bombing is just no longer viable Yeah. Void bombing doesn't count lol.
its like bombing was a problem
so ccp kept adding nerfs and counters but never actually stopped to see if they worked before adding the next one
BLOPS Hauler
|
Aeon Veritas
Easily.Offended Fidelas Constans
28
|
Posted - 2017.04.16 18:47:17 -
[249] - Quote
I know it's a kinda old topic, but I got some questions...
Could you please do sometking with the Heavy Defender Missile I? They are currently compleatly useless, I mean you can't even reprocess them... So either remove them from all loot tables, because currently at least the Angel NPC drop them regulary.
Or you give them some use. I could imagine them as anti standup bomb missiles, introduce a new Heavy Defender Missile Launcher I. Make the launcher only fittable for combat battlecruisers and command ships and give it also the 120 second reactivation timer. Make it so that you need 10 missiles to destroy a standup bomb, that way would be very hard to perma counter the standup bombs, because of fleet coordination and concentartion of the fleet members.
Or at least give them some minerals to reprocess them, but make them please somehow usefull... |
Spugg Galdon
Aliastra Gallente Federation
764
|
Posted - 2017.04.20 08:39:38 -
[250] - Quote
I'm late to this because of a break from Eve but I talked about this below when missile disruptors where on their way in.
I would have far preferred this option:
Okay, from a previous few posts I have condensed my thoughts on a valid point defense system as an alternative to GÇ£Tracking DisruptorsGÇ¥ for missiles.
Why don't we have functioning, smart, point defense systems? A point defense system that can shoot down drones and missiles? It would actually make far more sense than a "Missile Tracking Disruptor"
The module would be a simple high slot module, not a launcher or turret. This allows it to be fitted in any high slot. The module could either be sized or could have a very unique fitting attribute in that it uses a percentage of the ships CPU and PG meaning it can be fitted to any sized ship. This style of fitting attribute would reflect in the number of point defense batteryGÇÖs fitted to a ship dependant on the overall size of the ship.
The racial Point Defense System (PDS) would then have three different ammo types: Anti Missile Anti Drone Anti Bomb
These ammo types would all deal a "special" type of damage. For arguments sake, we'll call it "Snowflake". Snowflake is a special damage type that is "invisible" to the player. You will never see snowflake damage or resists in any GÇ£Show InfoGÇ¥ window. All items other than missiles, drones and bombs have a 100% resistance to it.
This will prevent PDS being used as an offensive weapon.
Now, the PDS is activated on a target ship, just like defender missiles work now. If you are using anti missile ammo, that ship will require to be launching missiles for it to activate. Same goes for drones. The PDS will then shoot down missiles or drones that the targeted ship GÇ£ownsGÇ¥ effectively.
If Anti Bomb ammo is loaded, it will work exactly how FoF/Auto Targeting missiles work now with the caveat that their only valid target are bombs. This will allow the ship to effectively defend against bombers without having to target the bombs/bombers themselves.
Guess what else all of this would fix? !!Bombers!!
Ammo reload takes 30 seconds which can give windows of opportunity.
It could even be racial!
Amarr point defense lasers would be best vs missiles - instant damage, good range but poor tracking vs drones at short range.
Caldari point defense missiles would be the "all rounder". Okay vs drones and missiles due to not requiring tracking but travel time
Galente Point Defense Blasters would be best vs drones - poor range but excellent application and damage
Minmatar Point Defense Guns would be another all rounder but lower projection with higher RoF.
I can't tell you how much I would love a Destroyer hull fitted out with point defense flying amongst the fleet performing the "Screening" role. You could even have a T2 version!
Yes, a fleet of battleships protected by a squadron of point defense Destroyers would be immune to bombers.
Also, Destroyers are squishy so it wouldn't be difficult to clear the field of enemy Point Defense.
It would actually create a lot of new game play that is extremely newbro friendly as any fleet commander will want some screening destroyers in his/her fleet.
Que fleet commanders screaming "POINT DEFENSE! POINT DEFENSE!" when they see bombers decloaking and the newbros flying Defense Destroyers (GÇ£DDGÇ¥GÇÖs or GÇ£Dee DeeGÇÖsGÇ¥) screening the fleet hit their PDS modules that were pre loaded with anti bomb ammo.
If you're the newbro who saves the fleet of battleships from the bombing run you will be sat there with a massive erection smile. |
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
6652
|
Posted - 2017.04.20 12:28:57 -
[251] - Quote
Well, defender missiles now target bombs. automatically. So there is a PDS. just needs activated.
Woo! CSM XI!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
Spugg Galdon
Aliastra Gallente Federation
764
|
Posted - 2017.04.24 07:04:53 -
[252] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:Well, defender missiles now target bombs. automatically. So there is a PDS. just needs activated.
I've read about these. From what I understand 4 are necessary for them to be effective. Anymore is wastage.
Are they very effective? Why don't they expand the use of these things? We have point defense animations now. Why aren't these able to be used on ships to create a sphere of damage around ships that can only damage misslies or drones depending on ammo used.
It would look pretty cool and would be far better than "smart" (which are actually very dumb) bombs.
Why can't we swap smart bombs for something like this? It would look really cool too. And like I said, fitting requirements would just "eat" a percentage of the ships cpu and PG to simulate being fitted all around the ship. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: [one page] |