Player Features and Ideas Discussion

+1

Agreed and supported

I support the change. MJD should not work if scrammed or during cooldown period after a sucessful jump. In order to pin down ships with MJDs people will have to commit properly into scram range (instead of a quick flyby in an intercepter moving 6000m/s) or simply avoid dying by having proper support/EHP/Self Reps/etc.

When it comes to facing ships with neuts, any tackler with a scrambler can also fit nosferatus, or even a cap booster.

This change would indeed help ships like combat BCs or the painful slow BS, usually considered "bad" to be used, and help create a different, more viable, niche for them.

Lots of good feedback!

It seems everyone is pretty much agreed that this change would be a buff to larger ships. The point of contention seems to be what level of position control a battleship "should" have. In my mind, any non-nano brawling BS is just a sitting duck, with very little hope of disengaging from a fight (with the exception of the Armageddon). Look at how much more popular the nano ships are - (Machariel, Bhaalgorn, Oracle, etc.) It's because with these ships you can choose fights where it is still possible to disengage against overwhelming numbers.

Of course, the proposed change would likely make these few ships even more powerful (finally catch that mach, only to get neuted and it MJDs). Maybe that would be a little OP. However, I feel like making the brawling BS more viable would shake up the meta enough to help balance that out. As it stands, most of the battleships are just not used. And when they are they typically end up getting blobbed (if not hotdropped) because of their lack of flexibility.

ECM burst isn't something I considered. It would be pretty strong in conjunction with a reliable MJD. However, I think the real problem there is the ECM, not the MJD. And there are counters to that too (the range is only 6 km. You can actually hold scram and not even be in range...plus most ships should be able to relock a battleship before the MJD spoolup finishes).

Definitely some good points mentioned though. I still believe this change would be a good way to increase BC/BS usage without making them totally overpowered. However, there are some good counterpoints mentioned here for CCP to think about if they were to take this idea into consideration.

@Suitonia - Congrats on your success so far in AT. I'm rooting for you guys.

I'm sorry, I don't follow. Can you elaborate?

Having no cooldown is a bit too powerful, but a shorter cooldown would be good. Maybe 1 minute instead of 3.

+1 No cool down after failure to jump due to scram

keep timers the same imo I think this change would help enough

+1
ideas to balance the meta better between brawlers and kitters are good.

I like how this would encourage more tacklers to engage targets and serve to slightly defeat the kite heavy meta as it stands. However, this wouldn't solve much. Tackling a battleship in that state already takes a lot of work, you need to be able to visually identify when it is that the battleship in question is actually spooling the MJD and then dive the target during that cycle, make it there prior to its completion, and then make it out alive. This is a challenge outright, even for an interceptor, although not as much as it would be any other frigate class.

The frigate class of ship is still as it stands the perfect ship class for accomplishing this objective, as larger ships, wouldn't be likely to escape "death range" upon landing the scram. If this were to be changed so that scram must be maintained throughout the ENTIRE engagement it would be unlikely many ships would be able to withstand that onslaught, under the obligatory, scrams, webs, and neuts that the tackler is likely to face. Especially if ships like the rattlesnake are in concern here, only T3 cruisers and other battleships are going to be able to land the scram for the length of time required to simply stop the target from MJD'ing. Battleships have some extreme longevity and asking any ship to get in commitment range of it and simply brawl with it is a pretty tall order. This proposal offers to change the meta so that either Garmurs and Kereses would be the only class of frigates that even stand a chance at holding scram on a MJDing battleship, or alternatively, having much larger vessel who's original intent isn't tackling, supplant frigates as the better tacklers in this situation.

Ultimately, while I like this idea, if it were to be implemented the meta would simply change to a more annoying method to counter this, not a more tactful one. I can support a shorter cooldown, but not a complete negation of the timer, or a cooldown that is otherwise akin to a negation of the timer.

-1

Incorrect, the Destroyer class is the top of the meta right now due to T3Ds, but the cruiser class has been on the top of the meta for a significantly long period of time. This would not encourage people to fly larger ships seeing as right now it is the larger ships that defeat the MJDing BC or BS, frigates are used as support in these situations because they do not have the DPS or the tank to survive engaging a properly fit MJDing BC or BS. The job of the vessel is to hinder it long enough that the fleet it is aiding can destroy the MJDer.

The current cancer of the eve meta is the kitey orthrus and the variety of T3Ds. Since brawling is in such a bad spot the ships that can actually land scram on an MJDer are scarce.

Perhaps the T2 MJD that isn't in yet could have this effect.