Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
GeneralMartok
the united Negative Ten.
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 08:47:00 -
[31]
good
Hab SoSlI' Quch! |
Poreuomai
Minmatar Mirkur Draug'Tyr Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 08:56:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Poreuomai on 08/05/2009 08:57:55
So ... CPP ... let's say I'm a scout in a cheetah and I jump into a gate camp with a large bubble up and am surrounded by interceptors ... what game mechanic do you expect me to use for escape if I cannot MWD+Cloak ?
Let My People Go |
Sapphrine
Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 08:58:00 -
[33]
This will be a massive nerf to alot of ships and will continue to favour blobs at gate. Small skirmish gangs are easily trapped as it is by well placed static camps. Literally the only way to get around these statics will be Black ops jumping fleets around, this isn't currently feasible due to the fuel reqs..
I strongly urge CCP to reconsider this change.
|
Poreuomai
Minmatar Mirkur Draug'Tyr Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 09:01:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Sapphrine Literally the only way to get around these statics will be Black ops jumping fleets around, this isn't currently feasible due to the fuel reqs.
... and due to the inability of covo-ops ships getting past the gate camps to set up the cyno.
Let My People Go |
Amy Wang
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 09:07:00 -
[35]
This is a really horrible "fix".
It completely screws over any people trying to do asymmetric warfare against bigger opponents in 0.0. Even Recons and coverts already die to competent gatecamps enough as it is, with these changes they will die even to incompetent camps all the time.
Why do you think it is necessary to add another advantage for the camping blobs when they already have so many? Why do you deem it necessary to nerf skirmish warfare a bit more in almost every patch? You hate diverse gameplay concepts that much?
Ok, fine you threw us a little bone there with the long overdue Black Ops changes but that alone does not just magically fix skirmish warfare, especially not if the specialized ships that are meant to infiltrate defended enemy space die all the time due to this badly thought out "fix".
Stop this now, there is nothing wrong with mwd + cloak in 0.0 space.
I can see a problem in low sec due to lack of bubbles where even BS with the mwd+cloak trick are uncatchable, fair enough.
But then please please please fix that problem ONLY in low sec and do not break 0.0 combat variety more as it already is.
|
Trimutius III
Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 09:15:00 -
[36]
First of all. It's testserver and i hope that issue would be looked into by CCP. This changes should not affect Cov Ops Cloaks. There is several possibilities how to do it:
1) The easy one. Only normal cloaks deactivate MWD and Cov Ops Cloak does not. (only situation with normal cloak + MWD needed nerf cov ops cloaking ships would be killed on root with such a change)
2) A little bit another. Give a boost to speed of Cov Ops Ships, for example role bonus to afterburners (that then should not turn off by cloak) AB will not give possibility of insta warp to other ships (i checked it for different ships AB doesn't work) but if Cov Ops Cloaking ships will get a significant role bonus to Afterburner, then u will pursue several goals: - More people will use 1 MN and 10 MN Afterburners. (U so long wanted it if i correctly remember what was said pre QR) - This will solve problem of Cov Ops Ships without MWD (if speed and acceleration would be enough) - Also it will give a COv Ops Ships new tackling role in Deadspace as they would be faster then interceprtors.
Of course i do understand that boost to afterburner is really great so then u can nerf something else for example such a ships also get Signature penalty when using afterburners. (This penalty doesn't matter when u are cloaked, but will matter if u are decloaked)
3) A litte bit more complicated. Give them boost of speed when cloaked that together with afterburner will give them speed and acceleration compared to MWD speed and acceleration.
But if this change will be there without reconsideration it looks like i will fly through camps only in interceptors. (I'm doing it quite well and they aren't dependent on cloak aneway) ------------------------------------------------- I am envoy from nowhere in nowhere. Nobody and nothing have sent me. And though it is impossible I exist ¬ Trimutius |
Xennith
Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 09:18:00 -
[37]
big kick in the face for small gang / solo pvp. we're always told that ccp want us to be able to do small gang stuff, so why are all the changes slowly pushing us towards a straight up "bring more ships" fight?
i can see the logic, battleships shouldnt be immune to lowsec camps, but this is a blanket nerf that probably causes far more harm than it solves. if you really want to adjust this, a lot more thought is required. |
Mohenna
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 09:33:00 -
[38]
BLOB online
|
ArmyOfMe
The Athiest Syndicate Advocated Destruction
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 09:38:00 -
[39]
great change, finally those freaking battleships in low sec wont get away every freaking time.
i am however worried about how this will affect recons in 0,0, so imo you should leave covert op cloaks alone for now
|
Darth Felin
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 09:52:00 -
[40]
Good change imho.
It will be much harder for recons and cov.ops. to pass through the gatecamps but it is still a good change.
|
|
Algey
The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 09:53:00 -
[41]
A decent gatecamp in 0.0 can decloak and kill pretty much anything already. The only chance that you have against the camp is to mwd and cloak in a cov ops / recon (anything else will be too slow after the 10 seconds to get a decent distance away), and a good camp will often decloak you anyway.
So the game changes to fishing, where a blob sits around a gate killing everything that comes through unless another bigger blob arrives (which will be easily scouted). Oh what fun...
|
Karn Mithralia
Minmatar Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 10:05:00 -
[42]
Edited by: Karn Mithralia on 08/05/2009 10:06:29
Originally by: Ombey
Originally by: mynnna This severely harms mobile, guerilla and small group warfare and benefits stale camping and blobs. Don't do this.
Completely echo this. Currently our style of solo/ very small gang warfare involves running camps many times a day. We die a lot already, even with the MWD, Cloak, back to gate and out. You do this and this game will turn into lazygatecamp or bringmoarships. Or both.
QFT.
MWD while cloaked is not a get out of jail free card, but it helps balance things up. It takes skill and practice to pull off (player skill) and even then isn't gauranteed.
Think hard about this CCP, there is probably a better way to fix the bug where by you can mwd just after cloaking than to make it act like a scram (which is bad enough as is).
The question is: how dull do you want you 0.0 space?
PS: lol at number of U'K in this thread :P
|
Chi Quan
Perkone
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 10:25:00 -
[43]
Originally by: ArmyOfMe great change, finally those freaking battleships in low sec wont get away every freaking time. i am however worried about how this will affect recons in 0,0, so imo you should leave covert op cloaks alone for now
you did it wrong, you must use caps, not color. and don't come whining about high sec mission runners when you don't have targets to shoot in low sec. the recent activity increase there will now cease. covert cloaks were not changed, you can still warp cloaked.
and btt: bad move ccp, the agility decrease was most likely enough to prevent what you want to achieve with this. ---- Ceterum censeo blasters need some tracking love |
Trimutius III
Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 10:33:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Chi Quan
covert cloaks were not changed, you can still warp cloaked.
Oh rly? Without MWD my Viator could be blown to dust in a bubble 2 days before because there was 3 interceptors willing do decloak me... but i managed to run out of a bubble and warpout safely... Warping in cloak isn't the only thing that covert ops need. MWD+cloak running out of warp bubbles are critical for them in 0.0 secs... ------------------------------------------------- I am envoy from nowhere in nowhere. Nobody and nothing have sent me. And though it is impossible I exist ¬ Trimutius |
Max Hardcase
Art of War Cult of War
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 10:53:00 -
[45]
This "problem" that they're trying to "fix" isnt even listed in the 28 page thread up above as far as I can tell. ( certainly not in the top 20 of percieved issues/problems ).
You'd think CCP would have other priorities.
|
Lord Makk
Trust Doesn't Rust Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 11:37:00 -
[46]
This is absolutely ******ed and you know it.
Do not kill whats left of solo/small scale warfare in 0.0
But thats fine CCP isnt it? cause you know, you have all the bears paying subscription for 8 macrominers each in highsec, you got what you need there don't ya.
Keep ****ting on the rest of us, we players don't make up your base of income anymore.....
/me remember Curzon Dax's songs.. they are SPOT on.....
|
Trimutius III
Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 11:39:00 -
[47]
Edited by: Trimutius III on 08/05/2009 11:41:20
Originally by: Max Hardcase This "problem" that they're trying to "fix" isnt even listed in the 28 page thread up above as far as I can tell. ( certainly not in the top 20 of percieved issues/problems ).
You'd think CCP would have other priorities.
It was discussed here... pages 8-12... U can read our discussion if u want...
And i'm not against this idea because it's MY idea... I'm glad that CCP actually reading what we was discussing, but nerfing Cov Ops Cloak ships may have some problems, though nerfing of default cloaks is needed... ------------------------------------------------- I am envoy from nowhere in nowhere. Nobody and nothing have sent me. And though it is impossible I exist ¬ Trimutius |
Mira O'karr
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 11:43:00 -
[48]
Edited by: Mira O''karr on 08/05/2009 11:44:02 fact is that since cloaks where introduced CCP has done a lot of changes to the game. the nerf of warp core stabs, the introduction of HICs.
there is no reasonable travel fit that will get past a super sensor boosted HIC. the mwd+cloak could still it was vulnerable to decloaking and bumping.
so the game has changed and people figured out a way to balance what CCP was not able to balance. Hey they werent even able to remove the cloak mwd bug for how long? 3 years? 4?
so now we have this situation and they intend to kill the one tactic that was a counter. where are the scissors to the paper if this change goes to TQ. seriously, i dont see it.
|
Polinus
Caldari State War Academy
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 12:06:00 -
[49]
WTF? First CCP fail to properly boost black ops and now they NERF them even further? Their Single and only useful advantage.. is gone.....
aff lol
instead of trying to make every gate camp a death sentence why CCp does not spend more time traying to make more PVP happen out of gates?
|
Solbright
Advanced Security And Asset Protection
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 12:11:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Trimutius III
Originally by: Chi Quan
covert cloaks were not changed, you can still warp cloaked.
Oh rly? Without MWD my Viator could be blown to dust in a bubble ...
Chi was only talking about lowsec. This is fix for helping those lazy lowsec pirates after all.
----- The Eve Client - A Love Story - The single biggest fix CCP ever did to Eve. Keep it up! |
|
Marquis Zenas
m3 Corp
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 12:11:00 -
[51]
Cautiously welcomed.
Although it does look like there will be bigger demand for covert cyno jumps to break past the blockades. (Stealth black-ops boost detected!) -------------------------- Sigless |
Rawr Cristina
Caldari Naqam Exalted.
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 12:14:00 -
[52]
imo this change should only apply to prototype / improved cloaks and NOT covert ops.
- Contagious - |
Poreuomai
Minmatar Mirkur Draug'Tyr Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 12:17:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Marquis Zenas Cautiously welcomed.
Although it does look like there will be bigger demand for covert cyno jumps to break past the blockades. (Stealth black-ops boost detected!)
Who is going to make those cynos ? The cheetah which died at the first gate camp?
Let My People Go |
Juliette DuBois
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 12:22:00 -
[54]
Edited by: Juliette DuBois on 08/05/2009 12:26:37 Edited by: Juliette DuBois on 08/05/2009 12:25:16 Remove gates and then make escaping from fight you are in harder and you¦d have bit more exciting eve all around.
And there are only very few good gate camping groups in EVE... Ones I¦ve seen I can count with maybe fingers of two hands and I¦ve ran around alot just for fun. Vast majority of camps are complete fails that lack one or more components you want <2-4 bubblers, webbers, long range scrams, healty dose of decloakers, lots and lots of instant locking instant hitting high dps and faultless intel network>.
|
Conlin
Gallente Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 12:31:00 -
[55]
So hittin the cloak button automatically kills inertia ?. Where do you get these ideas ccp ?. Life is hard enough dodging gatecamps who can jb all over the place blocking your path , now you want to make it easier for them even further ?. This will certainly kill guerilla warfare , and kill a huge part of pvp off . If this is set in motion we can all sit in our cabins , smoke a pipe with our warm slippers on , swing the lantern and tell the grand kids of the old days when we solo roamed the corners of hostile space alone .
|
Sidus Isaacs
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 12:37:00 -
[56]
Originally by: GeneralMartok good
Good for your little Rancer camp, but not much else.
This is not a good idea imo.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html |
Hertford
Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 12:42:00 -
[57]
As long as cloaking T2 transports are renamed to Blockade Walkers, I don't see any problems.
|
Dirac Spinor
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 12:43:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Ombey
Originally by: mynnna This severely harms mobile, guerilla and small group warfare and benefits stale camping and blobs. Don't do this.
Completely echo this. Currently our style of solo/ very small gang warfare involves running camps many times a day. We die a lot already, even with the MWD, Cloak, back to gate and out. You do this and this game will turn into lazygatecamp or bringmoarships. Or both.
Came here to post this and found someone had already done the job for me. To add, this is a terrible change that only benefits lazy gatecamping and decreases the emphasis placed on player skill.
|
Fossil Wolf
omen. Gay4Life
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 12:44:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Rawr Cristina imo this change should only apply to prototype / improved cloaks and NOT covert ops.
this
Furthermore by continuing this discussion we detract from the real issue many of us are having with eve online, the lack of break between signature and post content. |
Space Wanderer
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 12:51:00 -
[60]
Edited by: Space Wanderer on 08/05/2009 12:53:08
Well, I can't say I think it is a great idea, both for 0.0 and lowsec.
For 0.0 it is pretty obvious, most people outlined it.
For lowsec the reason is slightly less obvious, but equally relevant. No solo player will travel with anything larger than a destroyer in lowsec, a t1 cruiser at worst. The exception would be if he fully scouted around. In both cases the result is the same: LESS pvp in lowsec.
I just remember some pirates fragging my BC NOT at a gatecamp some time ago. Without a decent way to travel in lowsec that BC would not have been there for pvpers to get it.
Besides, from a trader POV this just makes the impro cloak totally useless. Guess I had better dump my stock.
I have no gripes at CCP for fixing what it certainly appears to be a bug (I'll manage to make a profit out of it anyway, and no, not telling you how :-)), but boosting gatecamping doesn't seem very conducive to increased pvp.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |