These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Rubicon 1.1] Mobile Micro Jump Unit and Mobile Scan Inhibitor

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sheeana Harb
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#721 - 2014-01-09 16:51:30 UTC
1 hour duration might seem a bit too short.

How about allowing players to 'fuel' mobile deployables (currently the two in question) with nanite paste, fuel blocks, strontium ect. to extend the lifespan(with e.g. 10hours hard-limit) ? Small cargohold so they have to be 'manned' frequently though.
Cameron Freerunner
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#722 - 2014-01-09 16:52:19 UTC
Ships inside the area of a MSI's effect will have their own directional scanner and probe results disabled.


And just like that, you made the unit utterly pointless. Why on earth would I sit inside a field that left my location visible and probable but blinded me to any attempts to probe me down? You'd be a fool to put one of these up and sit in its field. This unit had the potential to break the power of the AFK cloaker, but not anymore. Would a dev please explain what the intended purpose of this module is?

As a follow up question, if you can apply limitless ECCM to it, does the baseline limit still apply like it does for ships? In other words, can you make it unprobable?
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#723 - 2014-01-09 16:52:22 UTC
Theon Severasse wrote:
Petrus the 1 minute activation time is how long it takes for it to anchor, not how long it takes to jump. The spoolup time is still 12 seconds.

Ohhhhh! Okay then. That's a lot more reasonable. It could still stand to be a little lower, but it's not that big of a problem anymore.

Also, it really emphasizes the need for more EHP. A Mobile Small Warp Disruptor has 13.5k raw (pre-resists) hp. A MMJD is just as in the middle of things, and more likely to draw fire in the middle of a fight. It should be equally tanky.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
Theon Severasse
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#724 - 2014-01-09 16:52:34 UTC
Erasmus Phoenix wrote:
Do we have confirmation of whether scraming the ship trying to use the MMJD stops it or not?

If it doesn't, it really should.


They do according to the first post.
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#725 - 2014-01-09 16:54:02 UTC
Cameron Freerunner wrote:
This unit had the potential to break the power of the AFK cloaker, but not anymore.

From the perspective of the "AFK" cloaker, how does this make any difference to him? And from the perspective of the one using the MSI, how does it make any difference if the cloaker is cloaked?

Neither one sees the other in either case. I don't get it.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
Callic Veratar
#726 - 2014-01-09 16:55:25 UTC
I don't think that the MSI is OP for FW or wormholes any more. With the restriction that you can't see outside the area of effect, so, you have to keep a scout nearby, giving away where you're operating. Otherwise, you could get a large hostile fleet dropping on you completely unannounced.

Sure you, might be aligned to something, but you've changed your reaction time from d-scan range to the time it takes for tackle to decelerate from warp and lock.

I don't know the value of a FW plex, but 15M per site seems like a pretty steep tax to me.
Erasmus Phoenix
Avalanche.
#727 - 2014-01-09 16:57:19 UTC
Theon Severasse wrote:
Erasmus Phoenix wrote:
Do we have confirmation of whether scraming the ship trying to use the MMJD stops it or not?

If it doesn't, it really should.


They do according to the first post.


yeap, there it is.

so these won't be broken for OGBs. If you could web them to stop them making it into the shields, you can damn well scram them to stop them using an MMJD
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#728 - 2014-01-09 16:59:15 UTC
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Theon Severasse wrote:
Petrus the 1 minute activation time is how long it takes for it to anchor, not how long it takes to jump. The spoolup time is still 12 seconds.

Ohhhhh! Okay then. That's a lot more reasonable. It could still stand to be a little lower, but it's not that big of a problem anymore.

Also, it really emphasizes the need for more EHP. A Mobile Small Warp Disruptor has 13.5k raw (pre-resists) hp. A MMJD is just as in the middle of things, and more likely to draw fire in the middle of a fight. It should be equally tanky.



Problem is, if its tanky, then you can NEVER kill anyoen solo anymore unless you use a scrambler.. and that nowadays basically means balsters.

For example. a curse would never again be able to kill ANYONE.

No , the thing cannot be tanky. It needs to be killable by a cruiser or AF before it onlines.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Erasmus Phoenix
Avalanche.
#729 - 2014-01-09 17:01:48 UTC
Cameron Freerunner wrote:
Ships inside the area of a MSI's effect will have their own directional scanner and probe results disabled.


And just like that, you made the unit utterly pointless. Why on earth would I sit inside a field that left my location visible and probable but blinded me to any attempts to probe me down? You'd be a fool to put one of these up and sit in its field. This unit had the potential to break the power of the AFK cloaker, but not anymore. Would a dev please explain what the intended purpose of this module is?

As a follow up question, if you can apply limitless ECCM to it, does the baseline limit still apply like it does for ships? In other words, can you make it unprobable?


It seems to me like it's to hide the composition of a forming fleet, not to hide an ongoing activity like PvE.

It would never have done anything against an AFK cloaker. If he could have got to you without dropping probes, he can get to the MSI still cloaked. If he would have had to drop probes, then he still does.

If you have multiple in a system, it will affect a new hunter jumping in, but an AFK cloaker deciding to act won't be affected because you have no warning that he is moving now unless you have bubble/decloak traps that you are actually watching with ships inside them to see him get caught. It would in no way have ever affected AFK cloaking. I don't see how the hell you would think it would.


If you're forming a fleet up, you can sit in one of these, and your enemy won't get your exact fleet makeup without putting a scout in beside you. you can have your own scouts. If you want to cover a PvE activity, you need scouts outside the field, which seems fair to me.

Making it able to be made unprobable would be completely stupid. Fozzie's post seems to imply you can't do that, but that's just how I'm reading it.
Cameron Freerunner
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#730 - 2014-01-09 17:04:07 UTC
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Cameron Freerunner wrote:
This unit had the potential to break the power of the AFK cloaker, but not anymore.

From the perspective of the "AFK" cloaker, how does this make any difference to him? And from the perspective of the one using the MSI, how does it make any difference if the cloaker is cloaked?

Neither one sees the other in either case. I don't get it.


In my previous post in this thread, I point out that the MSI (as it was originally) meant that the prey could put up multiple MSIs to hide where exactly he was. The only way an in-system cloaked probing ship (I use that laborious term so that you won't get hung up on the terminology of "afk cloaker") presents a danger in that scenario is if he's actively probing. He can't just sit cloaked and wait for you to start running anomaly, dscan you, and warp to you. He would have to go investigate each MSI to present any actual danger and the only way he can do that is to put out his probes. In other words, you could run content in a system with an in-system cloaked probing ship and not have to dock up until there were actual probes on scan. Now, not only does in-system cloaked probing ship have the "power" it did before, but if you actually use an MSI, you're just blinding yourself. Even if you tried using a bubble or something, you'll also be inside the bubble, which is not where you want to be while running content blind.

Apparently the intended use of this module is hiding supercaps from scans.
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#731 - 2014-01-09 17:05:08 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Theon Severasse wrote:
Petrus the 1 minute activation time is how long it takes for it to anchor, not how long it takes to jump. The spoolup time is still 12 seconds.

Ohhhhh! Okay then. That's a lot more reasonable. It could still stand to be a little lower, but it's not that big of a problem anymore.

Also, it really emphasizes the need for more EHP. A Mobile Small Warp Disruptor has 13.5k raw (pre-resists) hp. A MMJD is just as in the middle of things, and more likely to draw fire in the middle of a fight. It should be equally tanky.



Problem is, if its tanky, then you can NEVER kill anyoen solo anymore unless you use a scrambler.. and that nowadays basically means balsters.

For example. a curse would never again be able to kill ANYONE.

No , the thing cannot be tanky. It needs to be killable by a cruiser or AF before it onlines.

Sounds like the job for 200-250 DPS (mediocre AF damage, poor cruiser damage). If it takes, say, 40 seconds to online, that's 8-10k EHP. If its online stays at 60 seconds, that's 15k EHP. It would have to be a bit less tanky than the upper bound, but whichever way I look at it, I still can't agree that 5k EHP is enough.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
Priestess Lin
Darkfall Corp
#732 - 2014-01-09 17:08:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Priestess Lin
CCP Fozzie wrote:

Ships inside the area of a MSI's effect will have their own directional scanner and probe results disabled.
We're adding a minimum distance of 75km from wormholes.
We're reducing the sensor strength of the structure to 5 and increasing the signature radius to 500. Go ahead and apply as many projected ECCM to that as you want.
We're increasing the build cost to ~15m isk.
We're decreasing the structure's lifetime in space to 1 hour.
Minimum distance to another MSI is now 100km.
We're increasing the volume of the structure to 100m3.


I'll be updating the OP momentarily.


Way to go nerfing it into uselessness Fozzie. I thought I would be able to use these things to give myself an added layer of protection in wormholes and outside of high sec so maybe I could take a **** or answer the door without having to worry about hitting d-scan every single second, but I can see now that they are nerfed into uselessness due the outcry of the status quo and a small fraction of the playerbase. Sad to see CCP cave on the principles this thing was designed around. I guess ill be staying in high sec after all.

When discussing weaknesses of heavy drones vs fast frigates: baltec1- " A thanatos with a flight of geckos killed a bomber gang while AFK. So yea, they track frigates just fine." https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4678049#post4678049
Erasmus Phoenix
Avalanche.
#733 - 2014-01-09 17:11:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Erasmus Phoenix
Cameron Freerunner wrote:
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Cameron Freerunner wrote:
This unit had the potential to break the power of the AFK cloaker, but not anymore.

From the perspective of the "AFK" cloaker, how does this make any difference to him? And from the perspective of the one using the MSI, how does it make any difference if the cloaker is cloaked?

Neither one sees the other in either case. I don't get it.


In my previous post in this thread, I point out that the MSI (as it was originally) meant that the prey could put up multiple MSIs to hide where exactly he was. The only way an in-system cloaked probing ship (I use that laborious term so that you won't get hung up on the terminology of "afk cloaker") presents a danger in that scenario is if he's actively probing. He can't just sit cloaked and wait for you to start running anomaly, dscan you, and warp to you. He would have to go investigate each MSI to present any actual danger and the only way he can do that is to put out his probes. In other words, you could run content in a system with an in-system cloaked probing ship and not have to dock up until there were actual probes on scan. Now, not only does in-system cloaked probing ship have the "power" it did before, but if you actually use an MSI, you're just blinding yourself. Even if you tried using a bubble or something, you'll also be inside the bubble, which is not where you want to be while running content blind.

Apparently the intended use of this module is hiding supercaps from scans.


I... What...

Okay. If you are in a location where he has to probe it to find you, then he would have dropped probes without an MSI, and he will have to drop them with an MSI. Nothing will change there, except that if you use an MSI, you don't inconvenience him in any way, and you only inconvenience yourself by meaning that you can't d-scan the probes. The MSI would have offered little protection anyway, but you can still get that protection with a cloaky scout of your own.

If you are in an anom, or a belt, or whatever, he can use d-scan to work out which anoms or belts have MSIs in. He can then warp TO THE ANOM OR BELT, as he would always have been able to do, without using probes.

You can catch him using bubble + can traps, with someone sitting in the MSI to decloak him. If you do that, more power to you. If they take out the ability to have a bubble inside an MSI (Which I hope they do) then you can't do that, but you're no worse off than you already were. you can set a trap in another way, because he doesn't know what you've got in the anom if he wasn't paying attention as you warped.

You seem to be under the false assumption that the MSI would have stopped someone warping to an anom you were in. It would never have. They can just d-scan where the damn MSIs are and go to those anoms.
Erasmus Phoenix
Avalanche.
#734 - 2014-01-09 17:13:36 UTC
Priestess Lin wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:

Ships inside the area of a MSI's effect will have their own directional scanner and probe results disabled.
We're adding a minimum distance of 75km from wormholes.
We're reducing the sensor strength of the structure to 5 and increasing the signature radius to 500. Go ahead and apply as many projected ECCM to that as you want.
We're increasing the build cost to ~15m isk.
We're decreasing the structure's lifetime in space to 1 hour.
Minimum distance to another MSI is now 100km.
We're increasing the volume of the structure to 100m3.


I'll be updating the OP momentarily.


Way to go nerfing it into uselessness Fozzie. I thought I would be able to use these things to give myself an added layer of protection in wormholes and outside of high sec so maybe I could take a **** or answer the door without having to worry about hitting d-scan every single second, but I can see now that they are nerfed into uselessness due the outcry of the status quo and a small fraction of the playerbase. Sad to see CCP cave on the principles this thing was designed around. I guess ill be staying in high sec after all.


Maybe it's for the best, you obviously aren't ready for a decent amount of risk.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#735 - 2014-01-09 17:13:50 UTC
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Theon Severasse wrote:
Petrus the 1 minute activation time is how long it takes for it to anchor, not how long it takes to jump. The spoolup time is still 12 seconds.

Ohhhhh! Okay then. That's a lot more reasonable. It could still stand to be a little lower, but it's not that big of a problem anymore.

Also, it really emphasizes the need for more EHP. A Mobile Small Warp Disruptor has 13.5k raw (pre-resists) hp. A MMJD is just as in the middle of things, and more likely to draw fire in the middle of a fight. It should be equally tanky.



Problem is, if its tanky, then you can NEVER kill anyoen solo anymore unless you use a scrambler.. and that nowadays basically means balsters.

For example. a curse would never again be able to kill ANYONE.

No , the thing cannot be tanky. It needs to be killable by a cruiser or AF before it onlines.

Sounds like the job for 200-250 DPS (mediocre AF damage, poor cruiser damage). If it takes, say, 40 seconds to online, that's 8-10k EHP. If its online stays at 60 seconds, that's 15k EHP. It would have to be a bit less tanky than the upper bound, but whichever way I look at it, I still can't agree that 5k EHP is enough.



Taht woudl be around 10k sicne nto all damage woudl hit and you would not start firing at second zero.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#736 - 2014-01-09 17:13:56 UTC
Theon Severasse wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
gascanu wrote:
Quote:
As for the bubbles, I would say make it so it can't be anchored within the radius of the bubble effect (of a T2 Large). Now obviously people who have a bit of common sense are thinking "But Theon, surely they can just anchor the bubble in front of/behind the MSI!", which is true, but at the very least you are going to know that you are warping into a bubble trap, in the same way that you do now. Again I reiterate, facechecking is not a good way of gathering intel, and requiring a player to have particular character skills and be in a particular ship is not a good idea.


how about dictor bubbles?


I think people putting up MSI's with bubbles in the center is a very good thing. I see no reason to prevent this, as it adds an extra layer of risk to anyone that wants to get intel on the MSI, and it goes very well with bubble camps and similar activities.


It's not risk though. You force people to use nullified ships to scout them. Hell you can't even safely scout them in CovOps ships, the ships that are meant to be designed for scouting..


Think about this:

I'm exactly the type of person that would setup an MSI, anchor a bubble, and light a cyno in the bubble with a small gang of fast-locking gank ships to kill scouts checking it out. I currently do this without the MSI, by deploying the trap in deepsafes so you can't actually scan me down anyway.

You learn how to scout it, or you lose a few ships in the scouting process. This isn't something game breaking or unfair. Now with nullified inties, it is even easier to check it out, and I have no sympathy for your inability to easily and safely get eyes.

I will say this though, I think it is a shame that inties are better scouts than covops.... and fully support nerfing the interdiction nullification mechanics to give covops their role back.
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#737 - 2014-01-09 17:14:01 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Ok everyone, here is our first round of changes since the beginning of public feedback. These are some quite large changes but we think the end result is a much stronger design.

Mobile Micro Jump Unit

We're cutting the EHP of the structure by 80%, to 5000hp.
We're increasing the time that the MJU takes to activate to 1 minute.
We're increasing the range at which the MJU can be used to 5000m.
We're increasing the minimum range from other MJU structures to 10km.
We're disabling the ability to jump while cloaked.

Mobile Scan Inhibitor

Ships inside the area of a MSI's effect will have their own directional scanner and probe results disabled.
We're adding a minimum distance of 75km from wormholes.
We're reducing the sensor strength of the structure to 5 and increasing the signature radius to 500. Go ahead and apply as many projected ECCM to that as you want.
We're increasing the build cost to ~15m isk.
We're decreasing the structure's lifetime in space to 1 hour.
Minimum distance to another MSI is now 100km.
We're increasing the volume of the structure to 100m3.


I'll be updating the OP momentarily.

Over nerf much? With these stats they will be pointless to use.
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#738 - 2014-01-09 17:15:10 UTC
Cameron Freerunner wrote:
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Cameron Freerunner wrote:
This unit had the potential to break the power of the AFK cloaker, but not anymore.

From the perspective of the "AFK" cloaker, how does this make any difference to him? And from the perspective of the one using the MSI, how does it make any difference if the cloaker is cloaked?

Neither one sees the other in either case. I don't get it.


In my previous post in this thread, I point out that the MSI (as it was originally) meant that the prey could put up multiple MSIs to hide where exactly he was. The only way an in-system cloaked probing ship (I use that laborious term so that you won't get hung up on the terminology of "afk cloaker") presents a danger in that scenario is if he's actively probing. He can't just sit cloaked and wait for you to start running anomaly, dscan you, and warp to you. He would have to go investigate each MSI to present any actual danger and the only way he can do that is to put out his probes. In other words, you could run content in a system with an in-system cloaked probing ship and not have to dock up until there were actual probes on scan. Now, not only does in-system cloaked probing ship have the "power" it did before, but if you actually use an MSI, you're just blinding yourself. Even if you tried using a bubble or something, you'll also be inside the bubble, which is not where you want to be while running content blind.

Apparently the intended use of this module is hiding supercaps from scans.

Ah, it's because you blind yourself to spotting probes.

You can still reap all the former benefits with an alternate form of scouting (alt/friend). I wonder... can probes pick up other probes on scan? That might be a hilarious way to check if someone is probing you out, without using your d-scan. Even if not, it becomes a trade-off situation:

Without MSI
Pros: You can see probes/ships coming on d-scan.
Cons: An "in-system cloaked probing ship" has no guesswork involved in where you are. It also does not have to worry about a complex being a trap (as much).

With MSI
Pros: An "in-system cloaked probing ship" has to manually check complexes with unknown contents.
Cons: Neither you nor the attacker can see each other before you are both on the same grid.

The trade-offs don't seem quite fair, you're right, but they're better than the original proposal, where there was no reason to not use a MSI.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
Erasmus Phoenix
Avalanche.
#739 - 2014-01-09 17:17:51 UTC
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
I wonder... can probes pick up other probes on scan? That might be a hilarious way to check if someone is probing you out, without using your d-scan.


Fozzie's post implies that you can't get probe results for anything that would require a combat probe while you're in an MSI, but you can get stuff like wormholes. Basically you can't see anything that would require combats or d-scan.
Rekkr Nordgard
Steelforge Heavy Industries
#740 - 2014-01-09 17:18:38 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Ok everyone, here is our first round of changes since the beginning of public feedback. These are some quite large changes but we think the end result is a much stronger design.

Mobile Micro Jump Unit

We're cutting the EHP of the structure by 80%, to 5000hp.
We're increasing the time that the MJU takes to activate to 1 minute.
We're increasing the range at which the MJU can be used to 5000m.
We're increasing the minimum range from other MJU structures to 10km.
We're disabling the ability to jump while cloaked.

Mobile Scan Inhibitor

Ships inside the area of a MSI's effect will have their own directional scanner and probe results disabled.
We're adding a minimum distance of 75km from wormholes.
We're reducing the sensor strength of the structure to 5 and increasing the signature radius to 500. Go ahead and apply as many projected ECCM to that as you want.
We're increasing the build cost to ~15m isk.
We're decreasing the structure's lifetime in space to 1 hour.
Minimum distance to another MSI is now 100km.
We're increasing the volume of the structure to 100m3.


I'll be updating the OP momentarily.



Nerfed into the ground, excellent. The only thing remaining is to disallow the use of the MSIs inside FW plexes. At that point, the only outcome that could be better is these deployables never having been developed or introduced into the game at all.

Seriously, that's how silly this is. The only way this garbage isn't game-breaking is to nerf it to the point of uselessness outside of tiny niches. Don't get me wrong, I'm very happy that that has happened. I would be perfectly fine with never running into either of these two deployables in game ever. However when your shiny new flagship concept gets announced and you get 30 pages of negative and lackluster responses and then the only way to fix it is to make the deployables so weak as to discourage widespread use, then I think you need to seriously reexamine your design process and work priorities.