These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

Stealth Change to the MJD.

Author
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
#21 - 2013-11-01 21:35:52 UTC
They fixed the MJD exploit? Cool.

The Tears Must Flow

Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#22 - 2013-11-02 01:29:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Herzog Wolfhammer
What's the big deal?

There's still going to be a Lachesis at 51KM from the gate.


My heart broke when I found out that it AND the Target Lock Breaker were only for BS.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!

James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#23 - 2013-11-02 02:08:45 UTC
I know for a fact that I tested the possibility of MJD + cloak when the module was first put on Sisi (or whatever server we were using at the time). It didn't work then, activating the module would deactivate your cloak.

As far as I was concerned this never worked, but apparently people have been doing it so I guess I was wrong.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Dr0000 Maulerant
Union Nanide and Tooling
#24 - 2013-11-02 04:24:29 UTC
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
What's the big deal?

There's still going to be a Lachesis at 51KM from the gate.


My heart broke when I found out that it AND the Target Lock Breaker were only for BS.



CCP1 "Hey, people are starting to notice that battleships suck."

CCP2 "What can we do to bring interest to an overnerfed class?"

CCP1 "just make a few BS exclusive toys and cite the law of diminishing returns"

CCP3 "Then why are caps so much bett.."

CCP 1&2 "SHHHH! NO ONE WAS SUPPOSED TO NOTICE"

Tell me again about how every playstyle you dont engage in "doesn't require any effort" and everyone who does it needs to die in a fire. Be sure to mention about how you tried it once but it was too easy/boring/ethnic-homophobic slur. 

Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
#25 - 2013-11-02 05:17:16 UTC
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:
By back-end fix, CCP apparently meant to say "All solo traveling BS pilots prepare to take it in the ***."








Solo traveling BS pilots should have been taking it in the ass like the fat guy in the mens bath house the whole time.

"Eve; risk averse is good for me, and I'll call you out if you try it and then cry carebear"

internet spaceships

are serious business sir.

and don't forget it

Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#26 - 2013-11-02 06:33:17 UTC
It may not have been intended but it was needed to make travelling non suicidal. If an inty cant travel 90 km before a battleship aligns and warps they suck.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)

PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
#27 - 2013-11-02 06:37:01 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
It may not have been intended but it was needed to make travelling non suicidal.

Scout, scouting is the answer.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#28 - 2013-11-02 06:56:13 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
It may not have been intended but it was needed to make travelling non suicidal.

Scout, scouting is the answer.

Not for a battleship unless you want to to go AFK everytime you find a system with peeps in local. A cloaked Cov Ops at gate and you're screwed with BS align time.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)

Black Dranzer
#29 - 2013-11-02 07:17:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Black Dranzer
Frankly, I don't think Battleships should be flying around unescorted anyway.

Also, the MWD/MJD cloaking trick is pretty obviously an unintended thing which CCP just never got around to fixing, probably because they assumed it was one of those low-end bugs that doesn't impact gameplay much.
Somebody, somewhere wrote:
But surely if they were ever planning to fix it, they would've done it sooner. Not only that, this has a huge impact on some people.
Yes, but this is CCP we're talking about.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#30 - 2013-11-02 07:43:18 UTC
Black Dranzer wrote:
Frankly, I don't think Battleships should be flying around unescorted anyway.

Also, the MWD/MJD cloaking trick is pretty obviously an unintended thing which CCP just never got around to fixing, probably because they assumed it was one of those low-end bugs that doesn't impact gameplay much.
Somebody, somewhere wrote:
But surely if they were ever planning to fix it, they would've done it sooner. Not only that, this has a huge impact on some people.
Yes, but this is CCP we're talking about.


So battleships are the new carrier, where they should not be unescorted at all times?
Wow, while many people suggest this of me, I really think you should step away from the keyboard before you do any more damage.

You, Kil2, and Ravi, should form your own knitting circle where you can create game mechanics that totally trash any enjoyability left in flying large ships in Eve.

I know, why not halve the lock times on BS'?. That will really show demonstrate their proper place in Eve.
Black Dranzer
#31 - 2013-11-02 08:17:26 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
I really think you should step away from the keyboard before you do any more damage*.

*Translator's note: "damage", in this context, means "posting an opinion I disagree with"
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#32 - 2013-11-02 08:24:38 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Black Dranzer wrote:
Frankly, I don't think Battleships should be flying around unescorted anyway.

Also, the MWD/MJD cloaking trick is pretty obviously an unintended thing which CCP just never got around to fixing, probably because they assumed it was one of those low-end bugs that doesn't impact gameplay much.
Somebody, somewhere wrote:
But surely if they were ever planning to fix it, they would've done it sooner. Not only that, this has a huge impact on some people.
Yes, but this is CCP we're talking about.


So battleships are the new carrier, where they should not be unescorted at all times?
Wow, while many people suggest this of me, I really think you should step away from the keyboard before you do any more damage.

You, Kil2, and Ravi, should form your own knitting circle where you can create game mechanics that totally trash any enjoyability left in flying large ships in Eve.

I know, why not halve the lock times on BS'?. That will really show demonstrate their proper place in Eve.

Yeah they're so OP instead of 2.5 times the lock time of a battleship they should have 5 times. And perhaps whenever they fire their weapons they're stuck in place for 5 mins.

I agree about the escorted thing lol. Can imagine all the pilots of HACs and cruisers putting their hands up for that job.

Here's something for CCP to consider, real life carriers and now ironically defunct battleships were as fast or faster than most escort vessels. Contemporary carriers are faster than most other ships. Where you got the idea that capital ships should be slow is anyone's guess.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)

Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#33 - 2013-11-02 09:29:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Tauranon
Infinity Ziona wrote:


Here's something for CCP to consider, real life carriers and now ironically defunct battleships were as fast or faster than most escort vessels. Contemporary carriers are faster than most other ships. Where you got the idea that capital ships should be slow is anyone's guess.


No not really. American destroyers were specced for 35 knots until WW2 when 37 was a more usual speed, and only 1 class of battleship ever made 33, yet many, many cruisers were specced for 32-33 and many of those were built pre-ww2, and italian cruisers went up to and over 40.

That cruisers currently aren't faster than aircraft carriers is simply a function of them not having naval targets to intercept.

Its largely impossible to make a battleship faster without turning it into a battlecruiser (even the Iowas skirted that definition), because of the displacement required to float the armor. Note Nimitzes have a heavy armored deck and thus have a similar problem.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#34 - 2013-11-02 10:20:31 UTC
Tauranon wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:


Here's something for CCP to consider, real life carriers and now ironically defunct battleships were as fast or faster than most escort vessels. Contemporary carriers are faster than most other ships. Where you got the idea that capital ships should be slow is anyone's guess.


No not really. American destroyers were specced for 35 knots until WW2 when 37 was a more usual speed, and only 1 class of battleship ever made 33, yet many, many cruisers were specced for 32-33 and many of those were built pre-ww2, and italian cruisers went up to and over 40.

That cruisers currently aren't faster than aircraft carriers is simply a function of them not having naval targets to intercept.

Its largely impossible to make a battleship faster without turning it into a battlecruiser (even the Iowas skirted that definition), because of the displacement required to float the armor. Note Nimitzes have a heavy armored deck and thus have a similar problem.

Actually the majority of escort vessels in ww2 were slower than battleships. The reason some battleships were slow was because they were ww1 vessels.

Large vessels are fast because they can incorporate a boubous bow which causes the water flowing along the hull to reduce friction. Smaller vessels don't have that ability due to less mass.

Most destroyers even today are only capable of around 35 knots. Many battleships in WW2 could easily hit 31 and higher.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)

IceDe4d
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#35 - 2013-11-02 11:32:38 UTC
they never fixxed it and people that belive it got fixxed never tryed it out. you still can cloack and start the mwd after you are cloacked and the whole mechanic about this is stupid maybe one day it will be fixxed after the second decade ^^
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#36 - 2013-11-02 11:35:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
IceDe4d wrote:
they never fixxed it and people that belive it got fixxed never tryed it out. you still can cloack and start the mwd
You know the difference between MWD and MJD, right?
Caviar Liberta
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#37 - 2013-11-02 12:06:32 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Hmm, wow. I know some people who do this, I'll have to let them to know to look into it.

Thanks for the public service announcement. Back end fixes my ass.



You might need to see a proctologist then.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#38 - 2013-11-02 13:02:00 UTC
Caviar Liberta wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Hmm, wow. I know some people who do this, I'll have to let them to know to look into it.

Thanks for the public service announcement. Back end fixes my ass.



You might need to see a proctologist then.

No he doesn't. It's fixed, you see.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#39 - 2013-11-02 14:49:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Tauranon
Infinity Ziona wrote:

Actually the majority of escort vessels in ww2 were slower than battleships. The reason some battleships were slow was because they were ww1 vessels.

Large vessels are fast because they can incorporate a boubous bow which causes the water flowing along the hull to reduce friction. Smaller vessels don't have that ability due to less mass.



Destroyers were the escorts. Wikipedia even organizes them into nice lists where you can tick off all the WW2 destroyers that were slower than battleships. Its a short list!

Quote:


Most destroyers even today are only capable of around 35 knots. Many battleships in WW2 could easily hit 31 and higher.


Which is faster than any capital... ever. And only 1 class could do 31 with full magazines and stores. The bismark never got anywhere near 31 when chased.

Not only that, have you ever tried to turn a Nimitz.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#40 - 2013-11-02 18:56:39 UTC
Tauranon wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

Actually the majority of escort vessels in ww2 were slower than battleships. The reason some battleships were slow was because they were ww1 vessels.

Large vessels are fast because they can incorporate a boubous bow which causes the water flowing along the hull to reduce friction. Smaller vessels don't have that ability due to less mass.



Destroyers were the escorts. Wikipedia even organizes them into nice lists where you can tick off all the WW2 destroyers that were slower than battleships. Its a short list!

Quote:


Most destroyers even today are only capable of around 35 knots. Many battleships in WW2 could easily hit 31 and higher.


Which is faster than any capital... ever. And only 1 class could do 31 with full magazines and stores. The bismark never got anywhere near 31 when chased.

Not only that, have you ever tried to turn a Nimitz.



It's obvious that CCP is going with "bigger the slower" approach, maybe to the point that speed is calculated in the system and not arbitrarily assigned. (I don't know)


The departure from reality in this case is battleship and carrier speed, but an Eve version of a carrier if we went with RL factors would be a battleship that has only drones, whereas in the game a carrier is a large vessel in another class. There were smaller ships that carried aircraft and that's closer to an equivalent Gallente drone boat. This could be the RL equivalent to a Vexor. Yet now we have a Gallente destroyer that can field 5 drones.


But the speed of RL battleships during the second world war was mainly due to the fact that they actually got fired upon. Dig around a bit and you will find pictures of battleships in actual avoidance maneuvers as they got bombarded and torpedoed. This does not happen so much now, using very large aircraft carriers and keeping the enemy far away with aircraft, subs, and anti-ship missiles.

It's going to be interesting at least to see long range battleships fighting more along modern tactics while Gallente ships remain in the 15th century Spanish Armada (in your face ship melting short range brutality) strategy. We might end up back to days where Gallente ships get picked apart by missiles and long range turrets while slowboating to battle and drone DPS getting ignored.

(again)

Bring back DEEEEP Space!

Previous page12