Player Features and Ideas Discussion

The more I think about it, the more I am opposed to the D-Scan immunity for Combat Recons. Not because I think it's a bad idea, overpowered, "gimmicky", etc., but because it does nothing to meet CCP's stated goals of improving their viability in fleets. It's a pure scouting/solo/recon gang bonus, it doesn't add anything to Combat Recons in terms of fleet viability when T3s are available that will do the job better, in a far more survivable platform.

CCP, drop the D-Scan immunity bonus for Combat Recons and give them full T2 HAC resists instead. That will better meet your stated goals without overpowering Combat Recons in small gang situations. EDIT: To be perfectly clear, I'd be fine with Combat Recons keeping the D-Scan Immunity bonus and getting the full T2 HAC resist profile. It just seems that CCP isn't okay with them keeping both, so if CCP has to choose, I'd rather have the one that will better meet their stated goals.


If you're looking for an appropriate platform to grant D-Scan immunity, consider Electronic Attack Frigates. They are sufficiently high-tech to warrant the bonus, it would give them additional an additional role as non-cloaky gang scout, and it would put your shiny new bonus into play.


CCP, please consider this. (In addition to compensating for the Lachesis having only 4 hardpoints and no damage bonus.)

Actually the saddest thing about a D-scan immune ship is that the best defense against it will turn out to be the reliable, free, and instant intel of Local.

Meaning that Local will never go away or stop being the instant free intel tool that it already is.

I don't think the current ship balance team knows how to deviate from having a fixed set of bonuses span a manufacturer's entire range of ships. It's the same stuff I complained about when they first started their rebalancing spree... they're turning EVE into a game where each race has like four basic ships, each duplicated in various sizes. So boring and so ineffective.

Individual hulls need to be designed and balanced on an individual basis so they can shine. That said, I also think ECM needs a complete re-work anyway, so there's also that...

FC you want a EWAR recon or a webby loki? Bring the loki the recon will just die to fast. That was the old answer. The short term answer was "cool bring your EWAR we can actually field them without them going insta pop" The new answer? "Bring the loki the recon will just die to fast"

Nice job you morons, you fixed a ship and then you killed it.

Range, HACs have double a recons range in most instances.

will these changes be put onto the test server? I'd like to test a few fits out and see if they're viable.

Nor should it be the sole point of balancing, either. Fun and innovative mechanics should not be held back merely because some people object to non-solo activities.




Why? Last time I checked, this was a multiplayer game. Choosing to handicap yourself should not merit additional consideration when it comes to game balance.




Absolutely none of which aren't 100% mitigated by correct use of d-scan.

That's the point of this. To make it so there are more dimensions to this besides "Are they using d-scan or not?" Right now it's really binary, and that is a bad thing.




Yeah, somehow I have my doubts as to your impartiality here. Just sayin'.

Where is this choice coming from? it isn't for you to say who can and can't afford to pay for multiple accounts Its also not for you to debate the validity of others choices about how they spend their real life money.

Yes this is a multi player game, that means at least one attacker and one defender, or two parties. You and me. you don't have to roam in big fleets just to participate in the multiplayer facets of Eve.

Your argument here is about balance? Dscan immunity does not bring balance.






I am finding it hard to understand your sentence structure, are you saying it is 100% mitigated by Dscan?
If so then shouldn't Dscan itself be looked at? Shouldn't we be looking at different ways for everybody to survive or get killed?

The game is quite old, it is bound to seem binary as we repeat the process so many times. I don't think anybody is suggesting EVE should not evolve but we are suggesting that this change will bring a huge gain by one group of players which have no need for the gain.

You screwed up those quotes right royal.

No you are not. You have explicitly said that you are against d-scan immunity because it impacts positively on something you don't like.

That's about as far from impartial as it's possible to be.




Every little bit helps, since they're damned determined to not give them workable hitpoint levels. You seem to be under the assumption that the hitpoint boost would have happened without the d-scan immunity, and you're mistaken.





Quit bolding for emphasis on entire paragraphs, it's obnoxious.

And no, I'll take the d-scan immunity with a viable dps platform, thanks. Nevermind that I don't run five alts, it's two at most.