These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Proteus - January] Recon ships

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Iain Cariaba
#1281 - 2014-12-20 19:02:58 UTC
Do I think dscan immunity is a good idea? No, I do not. I think all the rest of the changes to the recons are wonderful. However, when you combine the combat recon buffs with the dscan immunity, I think you get something way over powered.

How will this effect my game? If I'm ratting, then no more waiting to see if the neut that just came in is an explorer, safe up immediately. If I'm out hunting other ratters, then flying anything other than a combat recon is stupid. Like all big changes CCP makes, I'll stick around and see what's up after the dust settles.

Just a reminder to CCP, though. You are no longer the only option in the internet spaceships niche anymore. You would do well to remember this, and maybe start listening to your players. The players you drive away can now get their internet spaceship game play without having to return here, as they have had to do in the past.

No, I have voiced my opinions. Since this thread has devolved into yet another circular argument, I shall not be looking at it again. I will bide my time, and see if the latest batch of changes is worth maintaining my subs, as always.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#1282 - 2014-12-20 19:05:11 UTC
so people are saying to 'just use probes'.

how do I fit an expanded probe launcher to my thorax?
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#1283 - 2014-12-20 19:05:14 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
curse and lachesis still 3/4 lowslots instead of 5/6, d-scan immunity still only justified on the basis that covops cloaks are balanced, even though they aren't, and game-breaking tackle range bonuses still in.

this is actually more disappointing than +0.1 inertia.


TrouserDeagle dear, I have made a suggestion for slot changes a few pages back. Feel free to comment and take a look.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1284 - 2014-12-20 19:06:26 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
so people are saying to 'just use probes'.

how do I fit an expanded probe launcher to my thorax?


I refuse to believe that Shadow Cartel of all people are unaware of what scouts are, and how to make good use of them.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Caval Marten
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1285 - 2014-12-20 19:06:54 UTC
Kmelx wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:

it's a discussion, not a vote. that said, rise is still terrible.


TBH were discussing it, CCP are not.

From one of my earlier posts:

Kmelx wrote:

If you look at the timings, Rise's initial post was made at 2014-12-18 14:57:04 UTC. His we've noticed you don't seem to like this change but zero f**ks given reply was made within less than a day at 2014-12-19 11:15:14 UTC and then CCP Seagull announced it as a the number one feature of Proteus at 2014-12-19 16:15. They "consulted" with the wider playerbase for less than 26 hours about this change before they made it the top features/balance announcement in Seagull's dev blog.

No clearer indication that they had no intention of taking the players viewpoints on board was needed, it was a fait accompli, we've decided to inform you were are doing this announcement, taking into account the Christmas and New Year holidays and the intransigence of Rise's reply to the concerns raised, this "balance" change is going out in Proteus.




Good point.

And to trouser, I wasn't implying it was a vote, I just wanted to see how clear it was that there were really never any strong counter-arguments. The overwhelming amount of feedback i've seen is negative, just trying to figure out if it is my own confirmation bias though.
Lug Muad'Dib
Funk'in Hole
#1286 - 2014-12-20 19:10:43 UTC
TrouserDeagle do some solo without OGB, scout, etc.. Be in Shadow Cartel or any other big alliance don't mean "hey don't learn pvp, just stay in fleet and press F1 when FC ask you"
Liet Ormand
Sons of Bacchus
#1287 - 2014-12-20 19:11:12 UTC
I have to say, after reading through this thread as it's grown: Most of the players here are passionate about Eve to the point of insanity.

If I was CCP, I'd ignore most of this thread completely simply because so few people are rational in it.

It's like watching the "Occupy" protests that happened in the US a couple years back. Everyone involved was angry about something and convinced that a movement was under way to make big changes.

Yet if you talked to any two people about what they were protesting you'd get two different and sometimes conflicting answers.

About all this thread is good for at the moment is seeing all the different ways outraged people can snipe at each other and at CCP-Rise.
Thenoran
Tranquility Industries
#1288 - 2014-12-20 19:14:00 UTC
Modifying the Pilgrim bonus from strength to range will generally just make it a worse Curse.
If the Curse is dscan immune, what is the difference between a Curse in a plex or a cloaked Pilgrim in a plex?
The curse will have the additional neut strength and no targeting delay.

Whilst it does improve the Pilgrim for a fleet, is that really what you want to use a Pilgrim for?
Out of the 4 Force Recons, is a neut range bonus really going to make the Pilgrim that more desirable in a fleet?
If you want to neut ships out why not just bring Curses instead and use a different Force Recon for the cyno?

Furthermore, most Pilgrim fits have only two high slots available for neuts, the other two going to a probe launcher and the other to the cloak. That doesn't leave much neuting power at all, just two regular neuts with more range.
Nothing is going get capped out by that anytime soon.

The range bonus is also not needed as a replacement (if that was the intention) for the strength bonus because the Pilgrim can already dictate range due to its cloak.

Yes it is forced into scram range but within that range and the neut strength bonus it will cap out just about anything within a few cycles. Naturally the target can have friends but that in itself has no relation to the Pilgrim.
By swapping out the neut strength bonus, it becomes entirely a fleet only ship because it won't be able to kill anything on its own.
And within fleets, those two (*maybe* three) medium neuts with NO neut strength bonus are just going get laughed at.

Furthermore, the range works on the Curse because the Curse can kite with a shield tank.
The Pilgrim is not only to slow itself to kite, but it is armor tanked, meaning it becomes a brick.

If you want to give a buff, give it an addtional low slot for a stronger tank or a drone damage amp or an additional high slot for another neut or nos. The other alternative is to give a light range bonus IN ADDITION to the neut strength bonus so it can neut within warp disruptor range as well as warp scrambler range, say 20% like the strength bonus.
hellokittyonline
Hellokitty's Online Adventure
#1289 - 2014-12-20 19:16:14 UTC  |  Edited by: hellokittyonline
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
hellokittyonline wrote:

You're arguing for this so that you can overabuse the very imbalances that we're trying to discuss, discrediting our valid concerns, while offering absolutely no constructive counter-point by which we can take you seriously and actually have a debate.


No, I'm arguing for this because I actually want to fly these ships. They are cool as hell, and they've been pretty badly unviable for a long damned time now.

Changes that improve them to be useful and viable are a positive. Being off of d-scan is unique, useful, and opens up a whole new dimension of combat in the game.

And I truly don't care if said changes upset your little birdcage.


Quote:

please stfu


You first.

EDIT: slowclap for constructivity

Want to fly them? Come to lowsec, they have their place here and they're definitely not underpowered or underused. As a matter of fact I'd say they're pretty close to where they need to be barring maybe a few stat changes.

Honestly, you're playing in a smaller birdcage than I am and acting like the entire game should revolve around you wanting to fly a different ship. You want to fly a new ship? Do something new. That's what I did.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#1290 - 2014-12-20 19:16:43 UTC  |  Edited by: FT Diomedes
Thenoran wrote:
Modifying the Pilgrim bonus from strength to range will generally just make it a worse Curse.
If the Curse is dscan immune, what is the difference between a Curse in a plex or a cloaked Pilgrim in a plex?
The curse will have the additional neut strength and no targeting delay.

Whilst it does improve the Pilgrim for a fleet, is that really what you want to use a Pilgrim for?
Out of the 4 Force Recons, is a neut range bonus really going to make the Pilgrim that more desirable in a fleet?
If you want to neut ships out why not just bring Curses instead and use a different Force Recon for the cyno?

Furthermore, most Pilgrim fits have only two high slots available for neuts, the other two going to a probe launcher and the other to the cloak. That doesn't leave much neuting power at all, just two regular neuts with more range.
Nothing is going get capped out by that anytime soon.

The range bonus is also not needed as a replacement (if that was the intention) for the strength bonus because the Pilgrim can already dictate range due to its cloak.

Yes it is forced into scram range but within that range and the neut strength bonus it will cap out just about anything within a few cycles. Naturally the target can have friends but that in itself has no relation to the Pilgrim.
By swapping out the neut strength bonus, it becomes entirely a fleet only ship because it won't be able to kill anything on its own.
And within fleets, those two (*maybe* three) medium neuts with NO neut strength bonus are just going get laughed at.

Furthermore, the range works on the Curse because the Curse can kite with a shield tank.
The Pilgrim is not only to slow itself to kite, but it is armor tanked, meaning it becomes a brick.

If you want to give a buff, give it an addtional low slot for a stronger tank or a drone damage amp or an additional high slot for another neut or nos. The other alternative is to give a light range bonus IN ADDITION to the neut strength bonus so it can neut within warp disruptor range as well as warp scrambler range, say 20% like the strength bonus.


The Pilgrim really should get the neut range and amount bonus. It will still not be as good as the Curse, because it will fit fewer neutralizers, but that is a reasonable trade-off for being completely invisible whenever it wants to be.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1291 - 2014-12-20 19:22:38 UTC
hellokittyonline wrote:

Honestly, you're playing in a smaller birdcage than I am and acting like the entire game should revolve around you wanting to fly a different ship. You want to fly a new ship? Do something new. That's what I did.


Says the guy arguing that his desire to not have scouts in his fleet should dictate game balance?

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#1292 - 2014-12-20 19:24:15 UTC
The question is simply does the level of tedium surrounding pissing about scanning ALL the time....outweigh people's risk aversion. It probably does. Maybe not for a few weeks whilst novelty wears off, but it probably will.

PS: remember to check under your bed for rooks.
hellokittyonline
Hellokitty's Online Adventure
#1293 - 2014-12-20 19:40:46 UTC  |  Edited by: hellokittyonline
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
hellokittyonline wrote:

Honestly, you're playing in a smaller birdcage than I am and acting like the entire game should revolve around you wanting to fly a different ship. You want to fly a new ship? Do something new. That's what I did.


Says the guy arguing that his desire to not have scouts in his fleet should dictate game balance?


yet again, not constructive.

I never said we don't have scouts, I said that I don't know a single PvPer who wants to be a probing scout for a combat fleet. We use scouts all the time, but all but requiring a probe launcher definitely hurts the folks who like to (or have to because newbros) fly small frig/dessy gangs and do not have the resources to sub an alt for that sole purpose.

Furthermore what the hell does having scouts have to do with the size of my "birdcage". I've clearly broken you. I'm sorry.
Mei Khlolov
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#1294 - 2014-12-20 19:49:51 UTC
Just throwing out an idea for the pilgrim/curse.

Maybe a bandwidth of 60 or 70? This way, you can get a slight amount more dps by allowing a heavy drone or two to squeeze into a full flight, while still keeping it below the full 75 needed for 3 heavies/sentries. Would stick with the recent bandwidth experimentation with the guristas line.

Something like a Gecko + 2 infiltrators would be a typical flight with a 70 bandwidth, 447dps with 3 DDAs.

Or maybe just up them all the way to 75. Either way, for adding a bit of extra offense, this could work without crossing into gallente dedicated drone boat territory.
Rollo Brinalle
Imaginary Rats.
#1295 - 2014-12-20 19:55:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Rollo Brinalle
CCP Rise wrote:
Quote:

I can tell you what will happen most likely:
- Less fights because people are risk averse
- A 2nd account with a Prober at all times will be must, not an option.


I think this is a complex debate and I'm sure that none of us understand player behavior completely, but my experience is actually the opposite of what you're saying.

These mechanics that obscure information give people the excuses needed to take risks. Take the example given somewhere in this thread of a low sec camp with 2 Vexors and 2 Rooks. Before these changes, the gang considering fighting them never would because they know they can't deal with the Rooks. After, they won't see them and so they will probably engage. That's more fights because people are risk averse.


I would be more worried with this mechanic that people have to spend a lot of time running probe scans when they really don't want to be than that they are avoiding engagements because of the possibility of Recons. I don't think this will be a problem but we'll have to wait and see.


With regards to d-scan immunity:

Yes it is a complex debate and why it should be shelved until CCP has more information and can come back with a resounding message on why this is a positive change for the game because based on the feedback here there is enough pushback that I can conclude it's not a positive change for the game.

Even the logic is flawed because your saying "If the people don't know the ships are there then they will fly in to take a fight." Well of course they are because they don't know the extra ships are there that's not risk avoidance that plain entrapment. People don't avoid fights because they are risk adverse they avoid them because the setups are no where near even and who's going continually fly with an FC that suicides the fleet all the time? Who's going to go after targets blindly?

Here's an analogy for you if you go to your barber to get a hair cut and he starts off by slapping you in the face how long before you just stop going? If you keep landing in on a couple of ships and getting slapped in the face how long before you just don't go fighting. Or you find other ways by either combat scan everything or have a cloaky ship warp in to check the area. So now everyone runs the moment combat probes go out or the entrapment doesn't work because you're sending cloakies in on every small target. Or some other unspecified method to get intel on the targets. Regardless it's more work for the same amount of fights and not a positive change.

In short, you're telling us CCP is implementing a mechanic they have no clue how it will affect the game. I mean you said it yourself "I don't think this will be a problem but we'll have to wait and see." Well read the forum because there is a lot of people who say it WILL be a problem for them and you don't need to wait and see.

Again I say take it off the table go back to the brainstorming room and find another way to make recon ships more viable because hiding them is not a solution.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1296 - 2014-12-20 19:55:08 UTC
hellokittyonline wrote:

yet again, not constructive.


How is that? I'm just countering your assertions.

Claiming that the changes are bad because you can't be asked to bring probes is what's really not constructive here.



Quote:
We use scouts all the time, but all but requiring a probe launcher definitely hurts the folks who like to (or have to because newbros) fly small frig/dessy gangs and do not have the resources to sub an alt for that sole purpose.


Plenty of people make it work. Your failings don't reflect on ship balance.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#1297 - 2014-12-20 19:56:30 UTC
Mei Khlolov wrote:
Just throwing out an idea for the pilgrim/curse.

Maybe a bandwidth of 60 or 70? This way, you can get a slight amount more dps by allowing a heavy drone or two to squeeze into a full flight, while still keeping it below the full 75 needed for 3 heavies/sentries. Would stick with the recent bandwidth experimentation with the guristas line.

Something like a Gecko + 2 infiltrators would be a typical flight with a 70 bandwidth, 447dps with 3 DDAs.

Or maybe just up them all the way to 75. Either way, for adding a bit of extra offense, this could work without crossing into gallente dedicated drone boat territory.


mixed drone waves are cancer, you should be asking for just a bigger drone damage bonus instead.
Mei Khlolov
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#1298 - 2014-12-20 19:58:55 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:


mixed drone waves are cancer


How so
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#1299 - 2014-12-20 20:07:25 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:
so people are saying to 'just use probes'.

how do I fit an expanded probe launcher to my thorax?


I refuse to believe that Shadow Cartel of all people are unaware of what scouts are, and how to make good use of them.


ah. yet another case of 'give ccp more money or get ******'.
hellokittyonline
Hellokitty's Online Adventure
#1300 - 2014-12-20 20:08:18 UTC  |  Edited by: hellokittyonline
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
hellokittyonline wrote:

yet again, not constructive.


How is that? I'm just countering your assertions.

Claiming that the changes are bad because you can't be asked to bring probes is what's really not constructive here.



Quote:
We use scouts all the time, but all but requiring a probe launcher definitely hurts the folks who like to (or have to because newbros) fly small frig/dessy gangs and do not have the resources to sub an alt for that sole purpose.


Plenty of people make it work. Your failings don't reflect on ship balance.


Yet again not constructive and this is definitely my last response to you. I know what you do, I've seen you post before, you're profession really doesn't need to be taken into consideration when it comes to balancing the game because what you do inherently thrives on imbalance.

If they were changing something that ruined a character you had been training for years I would say otherwise, that would be where your opinion should come into consideration. This is not one of those scenarios.

Furthermore, you're taking what I said out of context (again, this seems to be the only thing you do on the forums) and putting words in my mouth to prove what? You think I'm wrong? Saying you're wrong is not constructive criticism unless you're explaining to me why you're right. I don't even know what you're argument is. You've offered no reasons why this change should go into effect except "dscan shouldn't be perfect" which is another opinion an not a fact to support an opinion.