EVE Search - CSM - CCP Meeting 001 - 0004 Black Ops Improvements

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Assembly Hall

CSM - CCP Meeting 001 - 0004 Black Ops Improvements

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)

CCP Wrangler	Posted - 2008.07.10 13:50:00 - [1] Noah (CCP) indicated that CCP was aware that battleships with jumpdrives would become the ultimate ship, and to this end Black Ops ships were pre-nerfed. Andrew (CSM Jade Constantine) noted that the range of the drive and the presence of cynojammers made the jumpdrive capability virtually useless. Another problem is the limited amount of fuel that can be carried. Bane (CSM Bane Glorioius) added to this that due to the fuel taking up large amounts of cargo space, loot from successful operations often cannot be hauled back to friendly territory. Noah (CCP) commented that a Fuel Bay can be added, so that fuel no longer takes up cargo space, or that specialized haulers could perhaps be used to haul the loot back or bring in supplies. CCP will also look at the issue with cynojammers. Jump range might be looked into but is of a lower concern, otherwise Black Ops ships might become too competitive with capital ships. Wrangler Community Manager CCP Hf, EVE Online Email "It's not worth doing something unless you are doing something that someone, somewhere, would much rather you weren't doing."

Lieutenant Isis Gristle Industries	Posted - 2008.07.10 16:03:00 - [2] If covert ops cynos could be lit in cyno jammed systems then the black ops could have a role. They are supposed to be the ships that can jump in behind enemy lines but cannot right now.
Nicho Void Hyper-Nova Tenth Legion	Posted - 2008.07.10 16:40:00 - [3] Originally by: Lieutenant Isis If covert ops cynos could be lit in cyno jammed systems then the black ops could have a role. They are supposed to be the ships that can jump in behind enemy lines but cannot right now. I concur, as long as the new fuel bay idea doesn't allow too many ships to bridge in. One black ops should not be able to bring in enough ships to drop the system. It should require a group.
Pwett Minmatar QUANT Corp. QUANT Hegemony	Posted - 2008.07.10 16:44:00 - [4] Shouldn't we be looking at using LESS capitals? I'm all for people using 800 million isk ships with less tank and firepower than a real battleship. What exactly is the problem? _______________ Pwett CEO, Founder, & Executor <Q> QUANT Hegemony
Lieutenant Isis Gristle Industries	Posted - 2008.07.10 16:48:00 - [5] Originally by: Nicho Void Originally by: Lieutenant Isis If covert ops cynos could be lit in cyno jammed systems then the black ops could have a role. They are supposed to be the ships that can jump in behind enemy lines but cannot right now. I concur, as long as the new fuel bay idea doesn't allow too many ships to bridge in. One black ops should not be able to bring in enough ships to drop the system. It should require a group. And the cyno jammer would still not allow normal jump ships to enter thus protecting from total invasion. And yes limit the number of covert ships that can bridge in either via fuel or just a set number.
Omber Zombie Gallente Frontier Technologies	Posted - 2008.07.10 16:49:00 - [6] just a thought, but if you include a fuel bay, why not have one type of fuel personal jumping and another type for bridging, it would mean having to manage your fuel rather than just filling it. ---------------------- CSM 08 Blog \| 1st Campaign Vid
Bane Glorious	Posted - 2008.07.10 16:56:00 - [7] Originally by: CCP Wrangler Bane (CSM Bane Glorioius) added to this that due to the fuel taking up large amounts of cargo space, loot from successful operations often cannot be hauled back to friendly territory. Noah (CCP) commented that a Fuel Bay can be added, so that fuel no longer takes up cargo space, or that specialized haulers could perhaps be used to haul the loot back or bring in supplies. CCP will also look at the issue with cynojammers. Jump range might be looked into but is of a lower concern, otherwise Black Ops ships might become too competitive with capital ships. To expand on this part: with the loot recollection issue, I recommended that Deep Space Transports (e.g. Impel, Mastodon, etc.) be able to use the covert jump bridge specifically, and not Blockade Runners. Deep Space Transports are generally underused and Blockade Runners don't really need any more help when it comes to evading people. Wasn't originally my idea, though.
Jade Constantine	Posted - 2008.07.10 17:02:00 - [8] Originally by: Bane Glorious Originally by: CCP Wrangler Bane (CSM Bane Glorioius) added to this that due to the fuel taking up large amounts of cargo space, loot from successful operations often cannot be hauled back to friendly territory. Noah (CCP) commented that a Fuel Bay can be added, so that fuel no longer takes up cargo space, or that specialized haulers could perhaps be used to haul the loot back or bring in supplies. CCP will also look at the issue with cynojammers. Jump range might be looked into but is of a lower concern, otherwise Black Ops ships might become too competitive with capital ships. To expand on this part: with the loot recollection issue, I recommended that Deep Space Transports (e.g. Impel, Mastodon, etc.) be able to use the covert jump bridge specifically, and not Blockade Runners. Deep Space Transports are generally underused and Blockade Runners don't really need any more help when it comes to evading people. Wasn't originally my idea, though. I thought it was a great idea though - deep space transports being covert jump bridgeable via Black ops would absolutely rock. Star Fraction \| Dare to Dream!
Threv Echandari K Directorate	Posted - 2008.07.10 17:05:00 - [9] Edited by: Threv Echandari on 10/07/2008 17:06:01 Originally by: Bane Glorious To expand on this part: with the loot recollection issue, I recommended that Deep Space Transports (e.g. Impel, Mastodon, etc.) be able to use the covert jump bridge specifically, and not Blockade Runners. Deep Space Transports are generally underused and Blockade Runners don't really need any more help when it comes to evading people. Wasn't originally my idea, though. Agreed This would give those ships a role much like the KC-135 Tanker in use today by many militaries. ---------------------------------------- Happiness is a Wet Pod
Deep Slumber Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.07.10 17:20:00 - [10] Having recently spent some time on Singularity to get a feel for BlackOps, I strongly support taking a look at them. The cargo space is a problem if you are not using a Sin (or Redeemer) due to having to carry ammo/cap booster charges, isotopes, and loot. A slight increase in fuel bay size and/or making deep space transports indeed capable of using the portal should be looked at as well. Concerning allowing covert cynos in cynojammed systems - I cannot decide. On the one hand a cynojammed system should in my opinion favour the resident (defending) alliance, and bridging in 30 Falcons before the fleet jumps into the defender's camp could make it a bit too easy. Not an easy balancing task. I look forward to seeing Black Ops being more attractive for sure.

MarleWH	Posted - 2008.07.10 18:15:00 - [11]
Jenessa D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.07.10 18:22:00 - [12] Edited by: Jenessa on 10/07/2008 18:23:37 I'm absolutely in favour of both the seperate fuel bay and the covert cyno change. The fuel bay is self explanitory but as someone has already said the Black Ops is supposed to be a ship capable of jumping behind enemy lines but with the proliferation of cyno jammers it's nearly useless, plus people are unwilling to train the Cynosural Field training still to 5 atm because it offers no real tangable benefits that are worth the skill training time. If you simply make it so cyno jammers do not affect covert generators then you have given black ops a new lease of life. You then have the ability to move ships behind enemy lines but you are still unable to move ships capable of affecting sovereignty into the system.
Lord WarATron Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.07.10 18:32:00 - [13] Edited by: Lord WarATron on 10/07/2008 18:34:20 How exactly is someone meant to fly a black ops even if it has fuel bay? While it sounds good, and anything that improves the cargo capacity of my Hauler Redeemer is a positive, I still cannot conceive why I would want to fly a Black Ops in 1. Large Scale Warfare 2. Mid Sized romaing gangs 3. Small Scale hit and runs etc The Fundamental issues with black ops is that you got a Droneship, a EW boat, a Laserboat that lacks cap to MWD out of a large bubble etc. Its too spread a random mix that its best to redesign these ships with a pvp role in mind and not some theoretical stuff that sounds good on paper but in reality nobody will use. Give these ships a proper real world role that actually encorages people to use them in pvp. -- Billion Isk Mission
D0INK Vale Heavy Industries Molotov Coalition	Posted - 2008.07.10 19:47:00 - [14] Originally by: Jenessa Edited by: Jenessa on 10/07/2008 18:23:37 I'm absolutely in favour of both the seperate fuel bay and the covert cyno change. The fuel bay is self explanitory but as someone has already said the Black Ops is supposed to be a ship capable of jumping behind enemy lines but with the proliferation of cyno jammers it's nearly useless, plus people are unwilling to train the Cynosural Field training still to 5 atm because it offers no real tangable benefits that are worth the skill training time. If you simply make it so cyno jammers do not affect covert generators then you have given black ops a new lease of life. You then have the ability to move ships behind enemy lines but you are still unable to move ships capable of affecting sovereignty into the system. This. -------------------------------------------------- Run.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.07.10 22:43:00 - [15] I'm positive about these, as I think the Widow looks like sex on a stick. I fully agree that the all singing all dancing pwnmobile is not what anyone wants. I'd still like to see a ship that isn't just outclassed by a T1 equivalent though. That's a bit depressing. Not sure what the fix is - I'd settle for some scan res though. I like the idea of improved jumping/jumpbridging capability. As an aside, how about actually allowing covops cynos in highsec? -- Crane needs more grid 249km locking?
Ford Hakata Hakata Group Blade.	Posted - 2008.07.10 22:52:00 - [16] Originally by: Bane Glorious To expand on this part: with the loot recollection issue, I recommended that Deep Space Transports (e.g. Impel, Mastodon, etc.) be able to use the covert jump bridge specifically, and not Blockade Runners. Deep Space Transports are generally underused and Blockade Runners don't really need any more help when it comes to evading people. Wasn't originally my idea, though. This is a wonderful idea. Simple, opens the game to stealth missions deep into enemy territory and gives carebears another way to actively help with tactical issues. --
Letrange Chaosstorm Corporation Apoapsis Multiversal Consortium	Posted - 2008.07.10 23:09:00 - [17] Edited by: Letrange on 10/07/2008 23:10:16 I fully support the inclusion of one of the two types of transport being able to be cov-ops cyno'ed Logically it should be the blockade runner. One of the arguments against the normal DST being that the cargo bay you can get on one of those is extreme and may render a black ops squadron as a whole over powered. On the flip side a DST being zipped around by a black ops would really bring new meaning to "combat logistics".
Temugen Obsessive Compulsive Destruction The Last Stand	Posted - 2008.07.10 23:11:00 - [18] The Fuel bay and deep space transports using black ops jb's is an excellent idea and would solve 90% of this issue. We should change this discussion to verifing that exploits of this mechanic are not currently in someone's mind... /me points at Bane and his goon cohorts Check here for more Recruiting Info. JUMBO
Erotic Irony 0bsession	Posted - 2008.07.11 06:57:00 - [19] Originally by: Temugen The Fuel bay and deep space transports using black ops jb's is an excellent idea and would solve 90% of this issue. You must be profoundly stupid and inexperienced to think such a thing. I was expecting much more sensible changes like the ones suggested my assembly hall thread, instead we have several months later, absolutely no change on the CCP position. A dedicated fuel bay doesn't make them even remotely relevant--they are a gimmick right now rather than gameplay, to that end no one cares about jump bridges or covert cyno fields when the core stats of the ship favor virtually every other ship class in the game. At no point is the opportunity cost of fielding a single black ops worth the cost when you could have had an insurable carrier or a handful of hacs and battleships for the same amount. When every circumstance favors other ship types 100% of the time, its clear black ops need a more dramatic revision than some token, non-combat tweaks, particularly when you can't apply any realistic fits to any of them. That someone can suggest that the fix for a combat ship is some byzantine logic with a hauler boggles the mind. THE SOLUTION TO BLACK OPS IS BRIDGING HAULERS GUYS RELAX. As I've said before, bridging recons and or haulers is meaningless, costly and counterproductive--you can't siege pos, knock out station services or anything of value. It's especially wasteful when those same recons could have traveled to a system on their own without obstruction. We need parsimony of balance not some roulette style balancing where the tech two version is several magnitudes worse than its tech one hull much less a single recon ship. That someone like Jade with the pretense of being a guerrilla warfare expert could bring nothing more insightful or persuasive than this is truly telling and disappointing. This was an area where only a handful of people could provide meaningful contributions and one that was as a result, at risk of being marginalized because of its time and skill investment--lucky for us, both CSM and CCP completely failed to deliver. ___ Eve Players are not very smart. Support Killmail Overhaul
Vaal Erit Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2008.07.11 07:11:00 - [20] Originally by: Lord WarATron The Fundamental issues with black ops is that you got a Droneship, a EW boat, a Laserboat that lacks cap to MWD out of a large bubble etc. Its too spread a random mix that its best to redesign these ships with a pvp role in mind and not some theoretical stuff that sounds good on paper but in reality nobody will use. Give these ships a proper real world role that actually encorages people to use them in pvp. Wow, I'm totally agreeing with this. I'm going to fish out the old blackops boost threads, as there are many issues with blackops and I can't believe that only the jump capabilties are being discussed here. -- http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html

Lord WarATron Amarr Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.07.11 07:34:00 - [21] Originally by: Erotic Irony they are a gimmick right now rather than gameplay, to that end no one cares about jump bridges or covert cyno fields when the core stats of the ship favor virtually every other ship class in the game. At no point is the opportunity cost of fielding a single black ops worth the cost when you could have had an insurable carrier or a handful of hacs and battleships for the same amount. Exactly. Fuel bay, jumping into cynojammed systems etc etc does not solve the fundamental issue, which is that black ops, like assault frigs, have no real world role. Its the old "putting a band aid" on a broken leg story. You can already jump into cynojammed systems by using the gate. Before you say the system is camped, what exactly is a black ops meant to acheive in a cynojammed system that is camped? Attack someone in belts? Do people rat when they are camping a cynojammed system? Nanoships or Force recons are better for moving stuff in. Perhaps you catch a ratter or someone in station in a camped system,good luck trying to kill such a target before the people camping rush to gank the black ops. Back to point, there are several different real world idea's for blackops that actually give it a use in real world pvp. I have written down the best idea's I have seen in the forums. I have written the best idea for each category of pvp. They can be inclusive or exclusive of each other 1. Large fleet pvp - Black Ops become doomsday resistant/immune long range jumpdrive snipers. A bunch of these ships jump in or uncloak. 2. Small/Mid sized pvp - Having the portal ability to portal any ship sub capital. This way, a black ops can portal his gang to destination and jump though himself afterwards. Just now, whats the point of portal when you cannot portal hic's etc through? 3. Solo pvper - Well, best I read was turning these into cov ops cloaking battlecruisers, since thats pretty much what they are. -- Billion Isk Mission
Vaal Erit Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2008.07.11 07:36:00 - [22] Black ops issues: -Resists: It's a T2 ship, where are my T2 resists? -Cloak: BO gets a bonus no targetting delay due to cloaking, but the Improved Cloak give me a delay in scan res. So wtf is that? -Cloak2: Can we haz COCD? BO has the stats of a Force recon yet not the cloak -Fitting: More grid/cpu please -2ly Jump range? Come on... -Give me tank or ewar or something, it has no role... -Can I portal in a useful ship, a hictor/interceptor anything. -- http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html
Mecinia Lua Galactic Express Burning Horizons	Posted - 2008.07.11 08:05:00 - [23] Without greater range and a fuel bay they cannot reach their intended function as they cannot reach enemy territory. For supply purposes we need a covert ops transport. This could just be a higher level transport, say level 3. Covert Ops Transport, it can jump with the Black Ops Battleship. It should just be a higher level transport and not a separate skill. However add the ability to fly a covert ops frigate to the prerequisite to fly the actual ship. The Covert Ops Transport should have 3 Hi Slots (no turret or launcher hardpoints)...primarily to allow a salvager, tractor beam and cover ops cloak. Mid and Low slots should be probably 2 or 3. 2 rig slots. Cargo capacity about 1/2 of the current blockade runner. handling on par with a blockade runner. Thoughts expressed are mine and mine alone. They do not necessarily reflect my alliances thoughts.
Lord WarATron Amarr Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.07.11 08:39:00 - [24] Originally by: Mecinia Lua Without greater range and a fuel bay they cannot reach their intended function as they cannot reach enemy territory. What is their intended function? I have yet to see a single pvper actually define how to use a black ops even if it could jump further (which is no bad thing). My Cargo Expander Redeemer can benifit from such, since if thats all that is changeing, then all black ops will become are Jumpdrive haulers. With most alliances bridge networks the way that they are, you can jump all the way from deep 0.0 via pos cyno's or bridges to 1j from hihgsec and if the gate does not have a bubble up, just though to highsec. On the return journy, skip all camps by jumping straight to a pos cyno from high sec and bridge/pos cyno yourself back solo. Is that their intended function? Because thats all they are going to be used for if changing jump ranges is the only function. -- Billion Isk Mission
Erotic Irony 0bsession	Posted - 2008.07.11 09:08:00 - [25] Originally by: Mecinia Lua For supply purposes we need a covert ops transport. This could just be a higher level transport, say level 3. Covert Ops Transport, it can jump with the Black Ops Battleship. It should just be a higher level transport and not a separate skill. However add the ability to fly a covert ops frigate to the prerequisite to fly the actual ship. You're talking about transport ships as the antidote to black ops battleships. No one cares that you think there should covert transports given the ubiquity of carriers, rorquals and bridge networks. I'll paste this a few more times until you understand how spurious and irrational this is: You're talking about transport ships as the antidote to black ops battleships. You're talking about transport ships as the antidote to black ops battleships. You're talking about transport ships as the antidote to black ops battleships. You're talking about transport ships as the antidote to black ops battleships. In any event, covert haulers already exist; its called a pilgrim. ___ Eve Players are not very smart. Support Killmail Overhaul
Mecinia Lua Galactic Express Burning Horizons	Posted - 2008.07.11 09:32:00 - [26] One complaint is that you can't haul the loot due to fuel requirements. The Black Ops Battleship still has to jump, I'm suggesting that perhaps we need another ship to fulfill the role to collect the loot and such from such ops thus alleviating the problem. The Transport in itself can't jump on its own, it would only be able to jump just like the covert ops frigates with the Black Ops battleship. It could be used to carry additional fuel as well or additional ammunition or a combination of the two thus extending the black ops operational ability. The largest problem with the Black Ops Battleship itself is it lacks the range to reach many systems. It also has a small cargo capacity relative to the fuel needed. The small cargo capacity affects more than just its jumping though it limits ammunition for the operation making it hard to operate for extended periods of time even if it can make it to enemy space. A covert ops transport would help alleviate that problem. Thoughts expressed are mine and mine alone. They do not necessarily reflect my alliances thoughts.
Mecinia Lua Galactic Express Burning Horizons	Posted - 2008.07.11 09:33:00 - [27] Originally by: Lord WarATron Originally by: Mecinia Lua Without greater range and a fuel bay they cannot reach their intended function as they cannot reach enemy territory. What is their intended function? I have yet to see a single pvper actually define how to use a black ops even if it could jump further (which is no bad thing). My Cargo Expander Redeemer can benifit from such, since if thats all that is changeing, then all black ops will become are Jumpdrive haulers. With most alliances bridge networks the way that they are, you can jump all the way from deep 0.0 via pos cyno's or bridges to 1j from hihgsec and if the gate does not have a bubble up, just though to highsec. On the return journy, skip all camps by jumping straight to a pos cyno from high sec and bridge/pos cyno yourself back solo. Is that their intended function? Because thats all they are going to be used for if changing jump ranges is the only function. There function was to strike into enemy space with small commando raids, something they can't do right now due to constraints of jump range, fuel and ammunition reserves. Thoughts expressed are mine and mine alone. They do not necessarily reflect my alliances thoughts.
Lord WarATron Amarr Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.07.11 09:52:00 - [28] Originally by: Mecinia Lua Originally by: Lord WarATron Originally by: Mecinia Lua Without greater range and a fuel bay they cannot reach their intended function as they cannot reach enemy territory. What is their intended function? I have yet to see a single pvper actually define how to use a black ops even if it could jump further (which is no bad thing). My Cargo Expander Redeemer can benifit from such, since if thats all that is changeing, then all black ops will become are Jumpdrive haulers. With most alliances bridge networks the way that they are, you can jump all the way from deep 0.0 via pos cyno's or bridges to 1j from hihgsec and if the gate does not have a bubble up, just though to highsec. On the return journy, skip all camps by jumping straight to a pos cyno from high sec and bridge/pos cyno yourself back solo. Is that their intended function? Because thats all they are going to be used for if changing jump ranges is the only function. There function was to strike into enemy space with small commando raids, something they can't do right now due to constraints of jump range, fuel and ammunition reserves. Small Commando raids? Define "Commando Raids" in eve. -- Billion Isk Mission
Mecinia Lua Galactic Express Burning Horizons	Posted - 2008.07.11 09:57:00 - [29] The ability to jump into a system and hit soft targets without necessarily having to contend with the gatecamps in between. (Cynojammers I still believe should block them :) ) Thoughts expressed are mine and mine alone. They do not necessarily reflect my alliances thoughts.
Waxau Unus - Vir Exercitus	Posted - 2008.07.11 10:40:00 - [30] To be frank - Whilst the proposed issues/changes to black ops are useful, they still leave the ship roleless and underhanded in combat. The jump range and fuel bay isnt the base concern, its more so the ships have no true role in pvp. A suggested fix has been that of creating them as 'bs force recons'. Has been discussed at great lengths in many topics, so wont spam anymore. But yes - Whilst its good to see them being looked into, scan res, whole 'unable to warp cloaked' and so on gives them a whole variety of issues (let alone holding no advantage in most scenarios vs their t1 variants.)



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.