| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
DeCostaPacket
   |
Posted - 2008.03.09 16:49:00 -
[1]
Black op's require a re-think.
The major problems revovle around the fuel and cargo space for the required to hold it.
With an increase in the cargo hold capacity the ship would be more viable to the pod pilots of eve.
There jump range is short but as a suprise attack vesel in conjunction with bombers and force recon ships the range is not really a problem.
The talks for the use of the covert ops cloaking device carrys alot of weight when you take the pure cost of the ship ,and the fact its a huge bulls eye for any attacking gang.
Also the covert cyno generator should be able be used in cyno jammed systems so as to really pos a threat to locked down systems.
Let not foget that it is T2 and elite pilots are the only one that could either afford or pilot this ships.
There never be fleets of them in space , at 10x the price of there T1 versions.There tanking is weak to a point of a fitted hac will rival them for durability.
In sumary
Skill linked bonus.
Cargo hold linked to Black op's level
Fuel costs linked to Black op's level
Ship change.
Covert cloak allowed to be used.
Covert cyno Change.
Allow the covert cyno to be used in jammed systems.
Possibly link it to hacking skill for instance.
Many hour testing went into this ship but I think it missed the mark in its first release.
All of these points have been raised before but as yet to my knowledge there has been no response to them.
If you reply to this post do not turn it into a debate.
There are threads allready in use for that.
Points here are taken from the best I have seen and from testing with my main both in pvp on tranquilty and sisi servers.
|
Zeph Solaris
Heretic Army
DeStInY.
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 19:41:00 -
[2]
What part of jammed do you not understand? The point of the Cyno Jammers are not to keep capitals out, but to force people to use the gates.
|
Waxau
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 21:14:00 -
[3]
Tbh, OP i dont think you understand the purpose of black ops, when it comes to your covert cyno points. Imagine how overpowered that would be. Cyno jammed system....safe from cynos. So the only other possible form of entry would be gates. But WAIT! Someone just covert cyno'd a fleet of force recons.
Let the mayhem begin?
The majority of problems with black ops are nothing to do with the cargo hold. Its just one spoke of the wheel. There are many other spokes :P
|
Terazuk
Amarr
Rogen's Heroes
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 21:48:00 -
[4]
First I would have to agree with both Zeph and Waxau in that being able to use a covert ops cyno in jammed systems completely defeats the object of having cyno jammers.
 Quote:
The point of the Cyno Jammers are not to keep capitals out, but to force people to use the gates.
Capital ships cannot use gates ergo, the point of cyno jammers IS to keep capitals out. 
Quote:
So the only other possible form of entry would be gates. But WAIT! Someone just covert cyno'd a fleet of force recons.
Force Recons cannot use cynos to travel or 'jump' to systems.
As to the op.. Covert ops cloaking device is certainly not the answer... granted it would be really nice but yeah, as much as it pains me to say as I love the cloaky cloaky stuff, it's overpowered.
So far when I've given it some thought I come to the same conclusions as others and quickly reject them just as fast. I'm at quite a loss as to how to go forwards on this one.
About the best idea I think is for these ships to have a dedicated 'fuel' bay a larger cargohold just adds the possibilty of ppl merely abusing the extra space to stack in more cap boosters.
But meh... it's all been said and argued about, over and over again on a ton of other threads, so /thread
|
Wu Jiun
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 22:46:00 -
[5]
Whatever you do it will be either pretty useless or totally imba. I think the best option would be to delete them from database and forget about the idea. Then finally give us one kind of t2 bs that has its place in pvp.
Given that this won't happen i think the next best option is to make these things cheap. Granted its anything other than intuitive that such a ship only costs little more then a command ship but i really don't see many people using it under other circumstances. 200-250m per pop and i'd maybe assume to train for these ships just for the fun of it because well they would still suck pretty bad.
|
Alex Harumichi
Gallente
Gradient
Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 09:53:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Wu Jiun
Edit: all blackops i've seen yet were pve fitted. 
Yeah. Sadly, ninjaratting is about the only use I can think of for a BO, with current stats. The jump range + fuel costs make their "intended use" not useful in practice (being able to take one recon + self on a max 4ly one way trip does not qualify as "useful" in my book ).
|
AshtarDJ
Filthy Scum
Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 10:09:00 -
[7]
There's another thread about this same topic...
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=660537&page=3
|
Danny3388
North Siders
Morsus Empire
|
Posted - 2008.03.15 17:33:00 -
[8]
Ok i totaly agree that the BO should have the cov ops cloak, these are the reasons why:
You jump into a gatecamp with a blackops, even with a cov ops cloak you are dead beacuse the ceptor will fly straight towards you and decloak you before you can get out of the bubble. (And people say the ship will be overpowered)
Just take into account the allignment time and speed and agility of the ship, the cov ops won't be overpowered on a black ops.
The ship itself costs half a bill yet i see no advantage gained from the extra 400mill. It is worse then a t1 battleship in defence and offence and worse than a recon in any form of ew due to the severe locking time. So what are we spending the extra 400mill on, a jump drive that is useless or the jump bridge which is about the same.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |