|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 14 post(s) |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
6
|
Posted - 2013.10.02 21:27:00 -
[1] - Quote
Gabriel Darkefyre wrote:So, About that Lock Range, really needs to be Higher, especially for the Fleet Interceptors.
The Bubble Immunity is out of place. That should really be on the Interdictor class instead. Give the Nullsec only bonus to a Class of ships specifically designed to work in Nullsec.
Instead, give it a focussed bonus based around it's role as a fast tackler that's useful no matter where you are. It's meant to lock targets fast and stop them getting away. How about a Web Strength Bonus to stop a Target just burning back to the gate? Or a 100% Bonus to Warp Scramble Strength (So Warp Disruptors would give 2 Points of Warp Disruption while Warp Scramblers would give 4 Points, but only when fitted to an Interceptor)
This^^^
Also I am reposting this from another thread.
"In my opinion, the thing that intys need the most, is to be immune to the mwd canceling affects of a warp scram.
The warp bubble immunity is the stupidest thing that could be done. The last thing we need flying around is more uncatchable interdiction nullified ships.
If intys were immune to having their mwd turned off, they would need nothing else. That would be their niche and it would not just be a lame copy of another broken game mechanic."
|
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
6
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 04:04:00 -
[2] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:Garviel Tarrant wrote:stuff It's basically a faster, smaller, closer range Slicer. You fly it a similar way, but it's much much better suited to fighting other fast ships than the Slicer is. I think the easiest way to understand it would be to think of it as the stopgap between the Retribution & Slicer. Combined with the fast warp and bubble immunity, this'll be a really really fun ship to fly Interceptors are meant to be the fastest means to gain tackle on a target. That includes moving through excessively bubbled systems.
With a interceptors speed they can already move VERY fast though bubbled systems. As it is now bubbles are basically the only way to catch a interceptor.
By making them nullified that takes out the one real way of possibly catching a interceptor. We already have nullified T3s, and MJD battleships. With the addition of nullified interceptors we might as well just remove bubbles from the game.
As a fast tackle, interceptors would benefit greatly from immunity to the MWD canceling effects of warp scramblers.
|
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
6
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 04:49:00 -
[3] - Quote
Gallastian Khanid wrote:Teth Razor wrote:With a interceptors speed they can already move VERY fast though bubbled systems. As it is now bubbles are basically the only way to catch a interceptor.
By making them nullified that takes out the one real way of possibly catching a interceptor. We already have nullified T3s, and MJD battleships. With the addition of nullified interceptors we might as well just remove bubbles from the game.
As a fast tackle, interceptors would benefit greatly from immunity to the MWD canceling effects of warp scramblers.
Wow friend. Think about that a second. 'Interceptors are too hard to tackle. With bubble immunity they will be uncatchable. We should make them immune to scrams instead so they can burn through our bubble at 5km/s.' Also bubbles aren't what catches interceptors. Fastlocking, gatecamping scrubs in Recons catch Interceptors. I don't think I've ever died without having my MWD shut down (neut or scram) and of those 95% has been scrams. You are also suggesting that combat Ceptors with scrams fit should be able to dictate range against everything in Nullsec that doesn't have a 90% web. Just wow.
On jump in its next to imposable to catch a inty if he just crashes the gate. usually intys get caught on drag bubbles, especaly if they are ahead of their fleet. So in a scenario like that webs and neuts are more then enough to kill a inty, even if he has immunity to mwd cancelling.
All im saying is if they become nullified nobody will EVER catch them if they choose not to fight.
More nullified is BAD, REALLY BAD for null sec. |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
6
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 15:45:00 -
[4] - Quote
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:As someone said earlier in this thread, 2 mid slots ceptors are no good for obvious reasons, split weapon system ceptors are no good again for obvious reasons.
These 2 points need changes, 3mids minimum, single weapon system.
Also on a side note about speed, these should have very similar agility/base speed with very little difference. The main point of my opinion on this matter being that someone specializing in one race will not be penalized for not being able to fly the fastest one. It's not about making everything equal but give to different race specialized pilots same fun factor to achieve their job but in a different manner thanks to racial traits that might be the weapon system or tackle bonus.
Many players seem to assume inties are uncatchable and will be even worst after this change, well guys think a bit about it: you're flying the most paper thin ships in the game requiring mechanics and flying knowledge to stay alive. The slightest mistake on your approach angle or orbit and you get a hole from those arties/rails/beams blasting you to pieces, under neuts meaning you're as dead as if you were shot, scram/web with drone puppies eating you alive, so it's not that simple.
Imho this nulli idea is an awesome addition promoting inty pilots and rewarding piloting effort, those are harassers, paper thin harassers that can be countered with some thinking and piloting skills. However those shouldn't be able to dish much dps, their hole strength should be around harassing abilities to pin down stuff and hoar on km's but not be able to pin stuff, move at will and kill easily larger ships (old Dramiel everyone?)
OMG THINK! How the hell does the Nullification idea "reward piloting effort"? I doesn't! There is no piloting effort in flying a nullified ship.
And with the new warp acceleration hitting a celestial or ping on a gate will not slow scouts down a much.
I can not stress enough how BAD NULLIFACTION ON FRIGATES IS for null sec! |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
6
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 16:47:00 -
[5] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:Niko Lorenzio wrote:You dont think bubble immunity will make ceptors extremely OP? I mean they got the speed to get out of the bubbles anyway so it's not like they slow them down much. No more OP than covops ships.
That statement is completely wrong.
What makes covops not op is the fact that you can still bubble them and try for the decloak, or if a covops is not smart he will warp strait gate to gate and hit drag bubbles.
When I bubble camp I catch more covops and bombers then any other ship.
Nullified intys on the other hand can jump in to a system and instantly warp out of a bubble on the gate. On top of that the pilot will not even have to think about the out gate being safe. Nullified intys create and reward dumber pilots. We already have nullified T3s, we DO NOT NEED NULLIFED INTYS. |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
6
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 19:18:00 -
[6] - Quote
Drake Doe wrote:Teth Razor wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Niko Lorenzio wrote:You dont think bubble immunity will make ceptors extremely OP? I mean they got the speed to get out of the bubbles anyway so it's not like they slow them down much. No more OP than covops ships. That statement is completely wrong. What makes covops not op is the fact that you can still bubble them and try for the decloak, or if a covops is not smart he will warp strait gate to gate and hit drag bubbles. When I bubble camp I catch more covops and bombers then any other ship. Nullified intys on the other hand can jump in to a system and instantly warp out of a bubble on the gate. On top of that the pilot will not even have to think about the out gate being safe. Nullified intys create and reward dumber pilots. We already have nullified T3s, we DO NOT NEED NULLIFED INTYS. So you're upset that you have to actually try and plan for nullified ships when you camp?
No I am not. But I am upset that bubble camps that you see now will turn in to remote seboing instalocking legion / loki / huggin / lachesis gangs. That will be a down grade in play style and a lot less noob friendly.
Camping with a drag bubble is one of the first things a new player can effectively do on his own. By adding nullified intys (null sec shuttles) you take away lots of the action these new players can enjoy. |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
6
|
Posted - 2013.10.07 19:25:00 -
[7] - Quote
DNSBLACK wrote:"A RAZOR Ragnarok accidentally pressed the GÇ£JumpGÇ¥ instead of GÇ£BridgeGÇ¥ button. Very unlucky in this case as it resulted in the titan being tackled. After a short rage form of a Naga fleet for Russian speakers (from which the footage was taken) and a Rokh fleet for English speakers, the titan was swiftly killed despite RAZORGÇÖs futile attempt to save it with their tier 3 bc gang. Furthermore, just as the titan went down, RAZOR jumped in 3 carriers and a single dreadnaught (?) to try to save it.
Titan Killmail
Shortly after, an NC. Maelstrom fleet bridged on a grid ping spot. The Stainwagon fleet warped to the enemy cyno at 100km and attempted a brawl. However, with a relatively GÇ£kitchen sinkGÇ¥ fleet composition, we decided to bail and head back to reship.
Overall Battle Report
After re shipping to Rail Tengus, the Stainwagon fleet bridged next door to the enemy Maelstrom fleet who were attempting to return to their staging system. After waiting for the enemies to jump through the gate, it was clear they did not want to engage us without some help. So the NC. fleet waited in system for their PL help to arrive. Sure enough, as soon as they did, the NC. gang warped in on our Tengu fleet at optimal and a fight ensued. Despite fighting outnumbered 3 to 1, the Stainwagon Tengu fleet continued fighting, weaving its way under the Maelstrom guns and out of range of the PL Proteus/Loki/Legion gang. However, towards the end of the fight, somehow the PL fleet managed to catch up to the Stainwagon logistics, resulting in the majority of our logi being wiped out. After it was clear that our logi werenGÇÖt able to sustain the incoming damage, and our FC pointed and webbed, our Tengu fleet aligned and promptly warped out. Great fights!
Battle Report"
I guess this is what I mean when you have to define the battle field. There is no need for a ceptor in todays eve fleet battles. The interceptor should be good at tackling and surviving period. The speed tank of old should be brought back. I love everyone in this thread talking about dps, tank blah blah blah. The ceptor should not be a solo super frig it should focus on tackling in every battle field eve presents. After a fight the ceptor should be one of the only ships flying off. The only ship they should fear is another ceptor. Give me back my 2 bil ceptor doing 22000 meters per sec that could tackle dive in and out yet kill no one by itself. Define the battle field then the ship ccp
You Sir are completely correct. That is what intys were originally intended for. Why do we ,all of a sudden, need solo, interdiction nullifed, dps, tanking intys? There are so many other ships that fill those roles already! WTF is wrong with people? This change will be a big hit to null sec combat.
Like you said we need intys that can tackle and use SPEED to survive the fight. Not tank, not dps, But SPEED.
Before the nanonerf intys were a very usable ship for lots of things. The nano nerf is the reason intys are so bad now. |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
8
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 18:53:00 -
[8] - Quote
I really feel that those of you against nullified intys are not being vocal enough. This will change the game we love, this will give more power to the major blocs (the ability to project fleets and super caps across the map in mere minutes).
This in general is not a good change for null sec.
If you are against nullified intys, SPEAK UP! Get your friends and corp mates to speak up. Fozzie will be reading this thread regularly so if we voice our concerns about this maybe CCP will at least re-think the idea! |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
9
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 19:32:00 -
[9] - Quote
Onictus wrote:Teth Razor wrote:I really feel that those of you against nullified intys are not being vocal enough. This will change the game we love, this will give more power to the major blocs (the ability to project fleets and super caps across the map in mere minutes).
This in general is not a good change for null sec.
If you are against nullified intys, SPEAK UP! Get your friends and corp mates to speak up. Fozzie will be reading this thread regularly so if we voice our concerns about this maybe CCP will at least re-think the idea! The hell are you talking about I live in null and I can't wait.
Says a member of the CFC.. biggest bloc in the game... Of course you want it. |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
9
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 20:36:00 -
[10] - Quote
Come on CCP. Give us something intys can use to survive IN COMBAT. NOT A MECHANIC TO AVOID IT! |
|
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
13
|
Posted - 2013.10.10 17:54:00 -
[11] - Quote
Suitonia wrote:Capqu wrote:Barrogh Habalu wrote:Wild suggestion appears: what if most of any inty's cargohold is to be replaced with ammo bay like the one on Hoarder (you can store ammo, cap boosters, scripts and nano paste there AFAIK, so no loss for interceptor's direct usage).
Should solve any kind of inty cyno or inty hauling issues unless CCP specifically wants inties to be cyno/small hauling capable.
Also, make sure that the ship can automatically take charges from ammo bay to feed its mods unless current code already allows this (I'm not aware if it's only possible with regular cargohold or not). only problem i'd have with this is a 65m^3 mobile small warp disruptor is pretty standard cargo for inties, wouldn't want that going away Yeah losing out on the ability to fit a small warp disruptor would suck. Another thing to consider would be maybe giving Interceptors a small fleet hanger. (100m3 or so) AFAIK you can store anything there but you cannot light a cyno by having LO in the fleet hanger. So could give them a basic cargo-hold for most ammo/charge purposes. Say 40m3 or so, then 100m3 Fleet Hanger (Or just a secondary multi-purpose storage hanger), and you'd have to commit much more to get the cargo-hold up to scratch enough to be able to fit enough LO to be able to light a cynosural field without disrupting an Interceptor for other general purposes.
The easiest way to fix this cyno problem. DONT GIVE THEM NULLIFACTION! Without nullification there is no real issue. |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
14
|
Posted - 2013.10.10 21:36:00 -
[12] - Quote
Barrogh Habalu wrote:Randy Wray wrote:Having a ship that's completely incapable of looting modules is unacceptable IMO, a better solution to this would be to not allow them to carry liquid ozone. Problem with this is that we get the nullified shuttle again as you mentioned. I'm not really sure if it's possible to forbid them from carrying specific item without too much additional coding. Making it impossible to specifically fit cyno would be easier, but that smells like another arbitray decision, something I don't see CCP doing without at least camo'ing it a bit By the way, I didn't suggest to remove regular cargohold completely, and that being said, if CCP didn't want Inties to be nullified shuttles, they wouldn't come up with original idea at all - too obvious to be overlooked by anyone really. While we are at it, I'm a bit surprized that I haven't seen any "safe flying through null, gg hello kitty online, I unsub" comments. Something tells me that I wasn't looking hard enough
I don't think anyone is arguing the fact that CCP knows that these will turn in to Null Sec shuttles. But rather everyone against nullified intys is asking WHY THE HELL does CCP think we need null sec shuttles?
Most people would rather see intys get some sort of unique ability that gives them a viable role in combat, aside from swarming though null sec trying to catch miners and ratters. One that sets them apart from the T1 Tackle frigs.
If you think these ships will help you catch more ratters and miners, you are very mistaken. Most carebears will be in a dead end system with a cloaked scout at the pipe entrance. Most will be safed up by time you get with in 2 jumps.
Pve'ers are not dumb like they were 5 years ago. They will adapt to not being able to bubble spam the ingate, and will start using a scout. |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
14
|
Posted - 2013.10.12 20:33:00 -
[13] - Quote
Susitna wrote:Just going to throw out this idea. If it already been discussed sorry. I did not have time to read the whole thing?
Do all warp bubbles need to be equal? Could it be that a bubble dropped by an interdictor or Hic are superior to an anchored bubble? Interdiction bubbles might be able to warp disrupt everything to include T-3s because the crew has tuned it to the current local conditions. However anchoraged bubbles only have factory pre sets and can not catch the specialized ships?
I think this could work. Clocky nullified T-3s are too powerful now? Intercepts are getting a big buff with the warp speed and making them able to ignore interdictors might be too much?
This is one of the best ideas I have seen long a long, long time. It still makes nullification useful but adds a way to counter it . |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
15
|
Posted - 2013.10.12 21:18:00 -
[14] - Quote
Mr Doctor wrote:Teth Razor wrote:Susitna wrote:Just going to throw out this idea. If it already been discussed sorry. I did not have time to read the whole thing?
Do all warp bubbles need to be equal? Could it be that a bubble dropped by an interdictor or Hic are superior to an anchored bubble? Interdiction bubbles might be able to warp disrupt everything to include T-3s because the crew has tuned it to the current local conditions. However anchoraged bubbles only have factory pre sets and can not catch the specialized ships?
I think this could work. Clocky nullified T-3s are too powerful now? Intercepts are getting a big buff with the warp speed and making them able to ignore interdictors might be too much? This is one of the best ideas I have seen long a long, long time. It still makes nullification useful but adds a way to counter it . Honestly I think if it were to be like that it should be hics only and be a new WDF module that only catches nulified ships and cant be active when standard bubble is active (possibly even need to have the other one offline to make it more of a commitment). Still dont think its a great idea though tbh.
Its a better idea then having fleets of ships roaming null sec with NOTHING that's able to stop them. |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
15
|
Posted - 2013.10.12 22:13:00 -
[15] - Quote
Randy Wray wrote:a bubble that catches nullified ships sounds kinda like a cyno jammer jammer to me. In other words its a ridiculous idea.
Ok smart ass! Give us a good idea for a counter to nullified intys! I dare you to come up with one. And no, due to module delay remote seboing a interceptor is not a counter! |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
15
|
Posted - 2013.10.13 17:52:00 -
[16] - Quote
Randy Wray wrote:BORG HELLinHEAVEN wrote:-Interdiction nullified.
-Insane drope in the time to reach the target and to be able to lock when in grid with the target.
And i still see people asking for more lock range.
Ceptors will be so incredible after rubicon...
What if you warp to a gate with your target and the gate is bubbled? That happens pretty often in null. If that happens you'll end up on the gate while the target lands in a bubble up to 100km off the gate. Hooray for bubble immunity. What I think would make more sense like alot of people have mentioned is to give light interdictors bubble immunity at least agains their own bubbles. To balance this it would gain an agression timer from bubbling again. Right now we have cloaky dictors that just bubble the gate and jump, which is pretty stupid since it's obviously an act of agression. It would make alot more sense if they had a built in mechanic so that they don't get trapped in their own trap. This makes more sense and improves the role of light interdictors.
Now there is something the two of us agree on! |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
15
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 02:35:00 -
[17] - Quote
Devlin Shardo wrote:Immunity to non-targeted interdiction
this i don't like. Its Hurting a large player base, sure the Warp acceleration is fine, but to give interceptors that low warp time together with Immunity to non-targeted interdiction. Thats just wrong.
Sadly Foozie seems to be ignoring those of us who are against nullified interceptors. I thought we might get a response at least saying something like, they see some of us are upset about it and that they are looking in to it further. But I guess not.
Load of **** if you ask me! |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
17
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 18:06:00 -
[18] - Quote
XavierVE wrote:Wanted to point out yet again that small gang PvPer's are the people worst hurt by nullification. Most null-bears living in 0.0 have giant blocs protecting them, who often have giant home defense blobs up. Nullified interceptors are their best friend in terms of making sure their heavily overtanked ratting ships (carriers especially) are safe in 0.0, they just don't know it yet.
- Any proper home defense fleet is going to have at least 3-4 interceptors out of a 30 man gang. - Your seven man balanced gang used to be able to create separation from that by dropping bubbles behind. - Those interceptors now go right through those bubbles and will tackle you. - Sure, you can kill them, but you're getting aggression that holds you in system for at least sixty seconds, and probably more like a couple minutes. - 30 man blob covers your out-gates, you're screwed. Loggoffski time.
Now, due to this happening to you constantly, the natural reaction is simply to fly combat interceptor only gangs, to get around this massive buff to home defense blobs. You can't run from a larger gang anymore unless you're flying interceptors only, after all. No more defensive bubbles, flying in ships larger than an inty in a small 7 man gang means they will be quickly overtaken.
This means that you'll be able to roll through any region you wish without any chance of being tackled unless you make a mistake while ganking a ratter. Also known as: Not likely. Overpowered. Easymode.
So now instead of having fun brawls in null-sec, you'll either be chased down and blobbed or you'll sell out, run combat interceptor fleets to get delicious carebear ganks, and never die. Jump bridges made small gang FC'ing hard enough in null sec, this just murders it dead.
Worst change they've proposed to the game since I started playing. That includes every decision made in Incarna. Anytime you remove elements of battlefield positioning ('dictor bubbles are a small gang FC's best friend) you're hurting the game tremendously.
Once again, a better change is to restrict the anchoring of bubbles by gates to 40km, much like how GSC's are restricted from being anchored by gates. A anchored bubble restriction would go a long way to solving many issues, from null-sec renters death-bubbling their in-gates to blobs spamming large bubbles on regional gates in order to cut off traffic passively.
+1 for a intelligent well thought out post. I agree with everything said here! |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
17
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 19:01:00 -
[19] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote:XavierVE wrote:screams and indignation Haha ! Like if suddenly all nullsec was going to fly in interceptors... And you know, tackling don't prevent from going through a gate, and then, you still have to tackle this cruiser before he warp out ; well, exactly like before. Landing at a gate before someone never assured you to tackle him. I think some nullbear are really scared by these inties. There will be pve Battleship wrecks more than small gang ones IMO.
Its not nullbears that are getting hit the hardest by nullified intys. Its small gang pvp! Read the posts on this page! |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
17
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 20:34:00 -
[20] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote:Teth Razor wrote:Its not nullbears that are getting hit the hardest by nullified intys. Its small gang pvp! Read the posts on this page! I read and had a good laugh ! Thanks for it ! Come on, inties always were able to catch up on small gangs, and they never needed bubble immunity to do it.
EXACLTY. So why give them nullification and turn them in to nullbear shuttles? |
|
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
17
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 20:50:00 -
[21] - Quote
Portmanteau wrote:FT Diomedes wrote: Also, before you get all excited about this new feature, consider what 1000 Goons in interdiction nullified ceptors can do to your fun. Risk-free PVP is a bad thing.
Risk free ? WTF are you talking about ? You do realise that pvp happens all over losec and hisec where no bubbles exist at all ... it's not risk free. You are just too reliant on bubbles, too lazy to learn to deal with catching a ship without them. Go to losec where everybody whinges about instalocking gatecamps and you'll see you can catch anything if you put your mind to it. The way you put it makes it sound like as soon as ppl get past a bubble they've insta pwnt any target they choose. A well organised fleet is still going to beat the crap out of an inty blob whatever way you look at it, for goodness sake ... if you can't cope with this you should just quit.
Yes it is risk free. The only thing that will catch intys after this goes live will be smart bombing battle ships.
And no! Remote sebo'd ships will not catch intys due to module delay. To catch a inty, even with a insta lock, you need 1 sec for the server tick to apply the warp disrupter. 99% of intys will be long gone by time the server applies the disrupter.
If you don't understand what I am talking about I suggest you go pvp for a while before trying to sound smart again! |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
17
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 21:02:00 -
[22] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote:Teth Razor wrote:EXACLTY. So why give them nullification and turn them in to nullbear shuttles? Because that's useful to *enter* a system and go tackle a target. No more bunker ratting system. Cyno behind the lines was already possible with covops (and an entity using titans should find covops expendable), so I don't think that is a real concern in fact. And inties already were very hard to catch, but are not that difficult to kill or tackle if they stay on the battlefield, so being able to survive between fights is something we can give them I think.
The point is that intys are hard to catch as it is. At least as it is now we can still catch them once in awhile with a drag bubble or a well timed dictor bubble 100km from a gate. After this patch there will be NOTHING that can catch them.
Things that do not have a viable counter to not belong in a sand box.
And I really do not want to see Smart Bombing battle ship camps everywhere. That will not be good for 0.0 game play. |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
19
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 01:40:00 -
[23] - Quote
Its really encouraging to see more and more people join the anti-nullification train! Just keep getting more people to complain about it and maybe we will force CCP to not implement it. |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
19
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 20:23:00 -
[24] - Quote
Onictus wrote:Bouh Revetoile wrote:XavierVE wrote:It doesn't matter if they place bubbles at the celestials. When you go to ratterville, you go to gank ratters. Which means you're going to anomalies. Sure, miners might throw bubbles up in mining anoms since they last a day or two, but ratters aren't throwing drags up in combat anomalies.
So your argument is misinformed. The real problem are bubble bunkers on gates, so nerfing those rather than empowering interceptors to screw over every small gang FC that roams null-sec in non-Combat Interceptor fleets would be the best solution.
But CCP won't do that, because it takes an act of god to get them to admit a planning mistake. I honestly believe they'd rather break the game for small gangs than to say "Yeah, that idea wasn't completely thought through." Guess where do anomalies spawn... Yeah, around planets. Within 4AU You don't warp a planet shotgunning a system, hell anymore you don't have to scan. ....and I will tell you now people are already planning their roaming fits.
I for one am VERY against nullified intys. But if CCP goes though with it, I plan on abusing the **** out of it.
My corp already has inty fits on sisi that are strong enough to kill most ratting ships with only a gang of 4-5 intys. |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
19
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 03:18:00 -
[25] - Quote
Veshta Yoshida wrote:Teth Razor wrote:I for one am VERY against nullified intys. But if CCP goes though with it, I plan on abusing the **** out of it.
My corp already has inty fits on sisi that are strong enough to kill most ratting ships with only a gang of 4-5 intys. I don't get it, what is the opposition about. We are going from single ratter tank killing nullified covert cloaking ships with above average tanks to 4-5 nullified ships with zero tank. Is the idea of old school roaming (ie. team work not involving superfluous Titan alts) that abhorrent? To me it sounds like it will be an absolute blast, at least from the Interceptor pilots PoV and it will more than likely create a huge market for lowly ships such as Dessies as even ****-fit/-piloted destroyers will eat Interceptors as light snacks at a fraction of the cost. Or what about the tiericided T2 frigates, most of them have roughly same damage as Inties but with tons more tank .. where is the nullifier crap when the primal part of the Inty pilots brain screams "Trololol, T1 frig snack time" before being shown the door? Make no mistake, I dislike the idea of nullifier anything, not because it is extremely potent but because there is no real way to counter it .. even the Harry Potter wannabes with their cloaks can be disrobed but there is squat to be done against AoE tackle immune ships that will go to warp as fast as shuttles and cross the biggest systems in less 30s. PS: I fully expect T3's to get hit with a lot of conflicts between the prime-grade-beef subsystems when tiericede reaches them so doubt they'll retain the cloak+nullifier, thus used as example only, status quo will change.
And that is exactly why I am against nullified intys. I am all for new ways to catch ratters and miners, and im all for new ways to kill each other.
But intys will actually cut down the amount of combat we see in null sec. They will be used primarily as null sec shuttles or fast roaming gangs out looking for easy kills. We will get less brawls, less kills on drag bubbles, and more people just blasting though as fast as they can with NO way to counter it.
That is what I am against!
Everything add to the game should be added to create content for everyone. This will remove more content then it adds. |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
20
|
Posted - 2013.10.26 00:06:00 -
[26] - Quote
Sean Parisi wrote:XavierVE wrote:Lloyd Roses wrote:For once, large T2 bubbles got 40km radius and 80km diameter. Finally got where your issues are. Other than my pathetic mixing up of radius and diameter, no, t2 large bubbles do not have a 80km warp scramble range. They have a 40km warp scramble range. Not from the center, but across. https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Mobile_Large_Warp_Disruptor_IIQuote:Please, how bad are you to die to a small group of interceptors with a 5-10man gang (dying as in you cannot make use of the now even longer gap between light tackle landing and fleet landing to dispose of those ceptors) Reading is fundamental. Nobody said anything about losing a gang to a gang of interceptors. The problem is when you're roaming, killing ratters, and the usual home defense blob of 30+ pops up on your radar. It's run time. You run. You drop bubbles behind you to create separation. You gank any of their light tackle that gets too far ahead when you've cleared 3-4 jumps, you drop aggression, you keep running. Nullification breaks this because now dropping 'DIC bubbles means nothing in terms of creating 3-4 jumps of separation before you can aggress, wait out aggression, and then continue to run. Instead of creating separation, you get no separation and you're stuck in a system with aggression as the 30+ duders behind the interceptor cover your in and out gates. Then it's bouncing safe times and loggoffski. Quote:If there is anything ruining your apparently daily hercules attempts of taking on 30man gangs with 5man fleet, then it is the general warpspeed dynamics that are changing, but not wether or not ceptors got to burn for 4 seconds. Reading, again, fundamental. The argument isn't that nullified interceptors break your ability to "take on 30 man gangs with 5 man fleet", but that it breaks your only tool to create separation from those gangs, the 'dictor bubble. The warp speed changes don't really hurt you that badly, since it means that the interceptors will simply get way ahead of their gang. The problem is keeping interceptors from jumping straight into you during your run which is where the 5-10 seconds you get from 'dictor bubbles saves your ass. Losing the one avenue we had to create separation from home defense blobs means the small gang meta in null-sec is dead. All hail easymode 5-10 combat interceptor gangs ganking ratters and being able to safely run from any gang composition that is thrown against them. Wait... Are you telling me that interceptors will "Intercept" - You don't say....
Interceptors intercepting is fine as long as there is a counter to them becoming risk free null sec shuttles! |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
21
|
Posted - 2013.10.28 19:47:00 -
[27] - Quote
Major Killz wrote:Did that dude who said he would change minds thru "reasoned arguments" get CCP to remove nullified Interceptors yet?
Nope. But I sure hope CCP at least takes a look at the massive screw-up that nullified intys will be. |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
21
|
Posted - 2013.10.29 02:54:00 -
[28] - Quote
Dream Kim wrote:Teth Razor wrote:Major Killz wrote:Did that dude who said he would change minds thru "reasoned arguments" get CCP to remove nullified Interceptors yet? Nope. But I sure hope CCP at least takes a look at the massive screw-up that nullified intys will be. And why is that?
Read my previous posts about it. I do not feel like explaining it all over again.
Also if you cant see what is wrong with nullified intys on your own, there is probably no point in anyone trying to explain it to you. |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
21
|
Posted - 2013.10.29 02:58:00 -
[29] - Quote
Dream Kim wrote:Naomi Anthar wrote:I cannot +1 that. I'm deeply disapointed.
Crusader NEEDS 3RD MID .
NEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS.
What kind of tackler it is that cannot fit sensor booster or web ? I dunno how you do this ...
I suggest either take turret and swap cap bonus for another damage, or take low and move to mid.
I Beg you for ALL THAT IS SACRED WE NEED ONE ADVANCED FRIGATE WITH LASERS WITH 3 MIDS.
Yes you got it no frigate above base t1 level got 3 mids.
Slicer - 2 mids, Retribution - 2 mids, Crusader - 2 mids.
I BEG YOU. Purifier has 3 mids.
He said WITH LASERS. Reading is hard |
|
|
|