|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort Test Alliance Please Ignore
136
|
Posted - 2016.07.01 22:52:41 -
[1] - Quote
Nadarob Skillane wrote:Skia Aumer wrote: Dude, can you even read? If citadel is agressed -> then it becomes vulnerable. That's what I have suggested.
So.... HOW exactly do you intend to agress an invulnerable citadel in order to make in vulnerable... ?
If nobody is there to man the guns the citadel poses no threat to you, it's just another drag bubble you should have avoided by burning yourself a ping or warping to a celestial in the first place while traveling through null.
But you tell me, why should you be able to make an unmanned, invulnerable citadel vulnerable? What would be the purpose of the invulnerability at all if you can force such a thing?
I see no problem with a citadel being used offensively outside of it's vulnerability timer becoming temporarily vulnerable. I'd honestly give it the same 1 minute weapons timer any player gets, the same one used to prevent tethering.
As far as the bubble changes go it's just simply a bad idea. And the idea of adding timers or allowing hostile entities to scoop someone else's bubbles are even worse. Literally ideas out of the mouths of those too lazy to realize they are in null and should know the proper ways to travel through hostile space does not include simply warping gate to gate.
And for you solo roamers. I have one thing to say to you. Get good. Travel the paths you wish to travel ahead of time in a ceptor if you must. It's always good to familiarize yourself with the lay of the land and set up pings where needed ahead of time. You'll find you'll catch more people off-guard if you appear in their system faster because you had previously set up a ping to bypass their drag bubbles. Or knew ahead of time to come in a nullified cyno ship to bypass their complete bubblefucking of a gate with friends on standby to jump in (that being outside of solo-roam category but you get what I'm saying I hope) .
Moral of that story is if you want your kills, do your due diligence and come prepared to hostile space! If you want to do off the cuff roams, don't complain when you get caught and killed by the locals and demand changes to support such a lazy playstyle.
EDIT- fixed the messed up quote I quoted. |
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort Test Alliance Please Ignore
136
|
Posted - 2016.07.01 23:19:07 -
[2] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote: I guarantee you the AU TZs would LOVE this, they can roam around until they find someone stupid enough to shoot bait and then reinforce their Citadel and maybe even kill it outright eventually, all because someone didn't restrict gunner roles enough, or someone was drunk.
I see no problem with this. These roles should be stricktly monitored anyway, not handed out to every pleb flying under your flag. If a corp/alliance wants to do that, then that's on them. And lets face it, it wouldn't be the first time something of value was lost due to a late night drunk roam *cough* |
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort Test Alliance Please Ignore
140
|
Posted - 2016.07.03 17:38:21 -
[3] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:Temijin wrote:Hate this! Nul is dangerous and eats the foolish. Scout...bounce off celestial so....travel in an Indy. Please stop reacting to whiners. They never stop as you should know very well by now CCP. Translation: We are incredible terrible at pvp, so we need an instant-repair station to help us win a fight again 5 cruiser or destroyers with 300 people. Our super-tatic is press approach and FONE. Works only with instant-repair station, so the rest of our incredible team cna farm more isk into the game with titans and soopers all day. You must play EVE as we say you must. If you are tied into a wheelchair, go to work like everyone else and buy 23+ƒ358+ƒ250167946 accounts like we say you must do. Stop being poor. Only rich people should live on Earth since we love to collect currency, currency is good, much more currency is much more gooderererer. We - our incredible gank team - are only able to press approach and FONE, stop helping good pilots to escape our inescapable risk-free gank tarps. Risk free tarps good, not as good as currency but good. End translation. How about no?
You seem lost and quite upset my friend. Might I help point you in the direction of low and high security space where you don't have to face such dangers?
Null defense is not about playing nice with small gang. We are here to crush you and keep you out of OUR space. If you wish to infiltrate and attack those within then you must work as a team. If that means bringing a ceptor/nullified t3 to burn pings then guess what that means you should do? I'll give you a hint, it's not cry to CCP to make that unnecessary. |
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort Test Alliance Please Ignore
141
|
Posted - 2016.07.03 19:54:38 -
[4] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:
you already had all this with just normal non-broken drag bubbles and no citadels. if this is what you need to defend your space, then I suggest actually you something something highsec
It's not needed, it's merely another tool at our disposal. One that is easily circumvented by anyone with a brain between their ears and a hair of patience.
Explain the difference to me between this and a drag bubble without a citadel when unmanned.
Now what about when it's manned vs if throw a few of my alts cloaked in smartbombing BB.
Both situations avoidable, both one sided as I get to chose if I take the engagement or not. Or should we possibly get rid of cloaks and smartbombs as well because they are too good of a trap for those traveling through null sec as well? |
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort Test Alliance Please Ignore
141
|
Posted - 2016.07.03 20:33:42 -
[5] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote: I'm hearing 'nullsec is too hardcore for you, go back to highsec' from a load of camping bads who want to sit on a station in overpowered capitals and F1 on people
it was fine before - if you want to yolo and not pussyfoot around the place, you get dragged. the people punishing you for that would actually be in space and off gate and you could shoot them
You can't be that stupid. You didn't even read what I said. Who said **** about capitals in this thread? Not to mention the second they engage they are vulnerable so GTFO of here with that mindset. In fact if you read my reply a few pages back I'm actually in favor of citadels becoming vulnerable for a period if their weapons are used outside of the normal vulnerability timer to give it some amount of risk. Other than that I see no need for change to any mechanics.
As you said, drag bubbles were fine before so I ask why change them? Why not adjust the new mechanics around the old. |
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort Test Alliance Please Ignore
141
|
Posted - 2016.07.03 21:03:01 -
[6] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:
I read a bit of your reply but it seemed kind of dumb. I didn't say anything about a citadel using its weapons
So maybe you are.... that has been the entire point of this change and topic of discussion here. Citadel gate camps with their PDS inspiring the desire for this change by CCP. |
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort Test Alliance Please Ignore
141
|
Posted - 2016.07.04 02:16:58 -
[7] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:
Citadels on a gate is the same bad thing that we had with mines. Yes EVE had mines, don't create another thread asking for them again.
Come now I think mines returning to EVE would be hilariously good fun.. till my client crashes. |
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort Test Alliance Please Ignore
141
|
Posted - 2016.07.05 17:46:14 -
[8] - Quote
Khan, bubbles were always intended to work this way. Description or not.
I want you to test something, I already know how this works but it seems you don't. And this level of detail should be more than enough to convince you it's not some bug that they overlooked.
Set up a bubble anywhere. Try to warp to something inline with it in a frigate. Note where you land (near the edge). Now do the same thing in a cruiser/BC/BB and note where you land again. You'll notice as the mass of your ship increases you will land further and further inside the bubble.
This is not some bug, it is an intended mechanic, and not one that needs "fixing" as you put it. What we need is for players to learn how to avoid a decade old mechanic. Can they add it to the description? Sure, I see no problem there. But remove it? Hell no. |
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort Test Alliance Please Ignore
141
|
Posted - 2016.07.08 02:12:54 -
[9] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote: No risk, all reward.
~EVE 2016 |
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort Test Alliance Please Ignore
141
|
Posted - 2016.07.25 03:40:34 -
[10] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote: I think it would be a good idea for CCP to get away from the general perception / truth that playing EvE requires two accounts minimum. Essentially new people look at that and go "why would I want to pay $30.00 for a 15 year old game, double the usual sub of current MMO's, for the hassle of needing to multi-box two accounts simply so I can travel around without getting insta killed by the rich and powerful older players?".
The emphasis should be imo, on the attacker doing work to get kills, not on the defender paying double and doing double work while the attacker sits immobile and invulnerable doing nothing but a click and press.
You do not need more than one account to play this game. However, if you do not, you either need friends to make up for such things you cannot accomplish on your own (scouting and burning pings for the topic at hand). First and foremost being preplaning your route through hostile space, which includes not only looking at your route ahead of time, but also traveling that path in a ceptor and bookmarking your own pings. If that sounds like too much then maybe some people are expecting too much hand holding for their solo lifestyle in this harsh MMO. |
|
|
|
|