These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Cloaky Smartbombing?

First post
Author
Machimpy
Doomheim
#1 - 2017-06-09 07:45:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Machimpy
As the title,

We already have delay for targeting ships after decloak, that was introduced long ago after many tears from nullsecs due to solo bombers typically wrecking their day.

So then Im saying, it also should fall to logic to have an as significant a delay when using smartbombs after decloak ?
Tuttomenui II
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2 - 2017-06-09 08:13:04 UTC
No. Bombs don't require target lock. Should we apply your insane Idea to smart bombs as well. Roll
Machimpy
Doomheim
#3 - 2017-06-09 08:17:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Machimpy
Tuttomenui II wrote:
No. Bombs don't require target lock. Should we apply your insane Idea to smart bombs as well. Roll


Cloaky smartbomber detected.

I never talked about bombs.

Smartbombing yea, namely the cloaky and utterly risk-adverse type that gets away of blowing up 3bil pods for literally no effort.
Tuttomenui II
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2017-06-09 08:37:35 UTC
Yeah misread, but my comment is sarcasm so it still works to make my point. Still Roll
Black Pedro
Mine.
#5 - 2017-06-09 09:31:19 UTC
Machimpy wrote:
Smartbombing yea, namely the cloaky and utterly risk-adverse type that gets away of blowing up 3bil pods for literally no effort.
Point of Order: Why should the value of the pod reflect upon the effort or risk of the opponent to blow it up? How would it be a better game if pods (or ships for that matter) were safer if they were worth more or were carrying more valuable things?

Someone needs to provide some risk for pods, which let's be frank, are near impervious in Empire space where there are no bubbles. I for one am glad there are apparently some players stalking these veteran players and apply some risk to them flaunting their wealth to improve their PvP chances over the poor new players who cannot afford such bling implants.

So, no OP, it is not time to make pods even safer and give more advantage to complacent veteran players with heads full of expensive implants. Let's keep those players at least at theoretical risk to being out-played and losing those implants. Not only does this risk mean players have to make a real choice, implant loss is a great stimulator of the economy and keeps the markets humming along.
April rabbit
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#6 - 2017-06-09 09:39:23 UTC
Machimpy wrote:
Tuttomenui II wrote:
No. Bombs don't require target lock. Should we apply your insane Idea to smart bombs as well. Roll


Cloaky smartbomber detected.

I never talked about bombs.

Smartbombing yea, namely the cloaky and utterly risk-adverse type that gets away of blowing up 3bil pods for literally no effort.

Warping in 3-billion POD gates to gates in low-sec? Shocked

Here is the winner! Lol
Lan Wang
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2017-06-09 10:37:29 UTC
Machimpy wrote:
Tuttomenui II wrote:
No. Bombs don't require target lock. Should we apply your insane Idea to smart bombs as well. Roll


Cloaky smartbomber detected.

I never talked about bombs.

Smartbombing yea, namely the cloaky and utterly risk-adverse type that gets away of blowing up 3bil pods for literally no effort.


tell you what, stop flying 3bil pods in paper thin shuttles, i mean how ******** are you flying your 3bil pod in a ship that has 0 tank, risk-adverse, lol totally wrong on soo many levels give it a try sometime and see

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*

Max Deveron
Deveron Shipyards and Technology
#8 - 2017-06-09 10:57:39 UTC
First of all.........
This is General Discussion not Features and Ideas.

2nd.....
no for the reasons already posted by others.
Cartheron Crust
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#9 - 2017-06-09 11:23:22 UTC
Stop being bad instead.
Joey Bags
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#10 - 2017-06-09 17:49:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Joey Bags
April rabbit wrote:
Machimpy wrote:
Tuttomenui II wrote:
No. Bombs don't require target lock. Should we apply your insane Idea to smart bombs as well. Roll


Cloaky smartbomber detected.

I never talked about bombs.

Smartbombing yea, namely the cloaky and utterly risk-adverse type that gets away of blowing up 3bil pods for literally no effort.

Warping in 3-billion POD gates to gates in low-sec? Shocked

Here is the winner! Lol


Sadly, I have done exactly this. Amamake, full load of Mid-Grade Virtue implants and some blingy boosters as well. It was a huge loss for me at the time. Having said that I vote no to this proposal. There is risk to this game and this is a fair and viable one. If someone is that risk averse to ask CCP to change the mechanics of the game, don't fly with expensive implants. It's that simple. As for the argument that the vets have all the advantages, well, yes in fact they do. They are not insurmountable advantages and no matter how much ISK someone has someone has more or how many skill points someone has more or however much experience they have (that counts for the most) on occasion they lose too.

Play your game. Not someone else's. Enjoy.

You can pick your friends and you can pick your nose but you can't pick your friends nose. Unless you podded them...and collected their corpse.

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#11 - 2017-06-09 19:49:27 UTC
Machimpy wrote:
Tuttomenui II wrote:
No. Bombs don't require target lock. Should we apply your insane Idea to smart bombs as well. Roll


Cloaky smartbomber detected.

I never talked about bombs.

Smartbombing yea, namely the cloaky and utterly risk-adverse type that gets away of blowing up 3bil pods for literally no effort.


FYI it is risk averse.

Second, please don't misuse the concept of risk averse.

K, thanks bye.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Blade Darth
Room for Improvement
Good Sax
#12 - 2017-06-09 20:41:19 UTC
Why should an aoe untargeted weapon require lock-reactvation delay?

Beside stabbed cloaky relic hunter interceptors this would benefit or hinder no one. And since its the only way to kill them, it should remain in the game.
ISD Bubblemoon
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#13 - 2017-06-09 22:46:20 UTC
Moved to Player Features and Ideas Discussion

ISD Bubblemoon

Lieutenant

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

Lan Wang
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2017-06-09 22:55:52 UTC
ISD Bubblemoon wrote:
Moved to Player Features and Ideas Discussion


wouldnt it be easier if we just deleted it?

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*

Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#15 - 2017-06-09 23:37:49 UTC
I don't know. A weapon that needs no lock logically need no delay. But it rather adds to the flavor of the game that you can just decloak and go full disco right there. Much lols to be had.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!

Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#16 - 2017-06-09 23:54:49 UTC
Maybe you should try not warping gate to gate in lowsec in a pod?
Wanda Fayne
#17 - 2017-06-10 01:10:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Wanda Fayne
Podding my bling through space...

"your comments just confirms this whole idea is totally pathetic" -Lan Wang-

  • - "hub humping station gamey neutral logi warspam wankery" -Ralph King-Griffin-
Henry Plantgenet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#18 - 2017-06-10 01:17:05 UTC
Actually you can hit cloak -> Light all smartbombs for some reason Ugh
Machimpy
Doomheim
#19 - 2017-06-10 07:42:20 UTC
Henry Plantgenet wrote:
Actually you can hit cloak -> Light all smartbombs for some reason Ugh


yep
Marcus Binchiette
Federal Vanguard
#20 - 2017-06-10 17:47:20 UTC
Machimpy wrote:
Tuttomenui II wrote:
No. Bombs don't require target lock. Should we apply your insane Idea to smart bombs as well. Roll


Cloaky smartbomber detected.

I never talked about bombs.

Smartbombing yea, namely the cloaky and utterly risk-adverse type that gets away of blowing up 3bil pods for literally no effort.


Well the bomber needs to locate the pods first, and then manouver on grid into range without hitting a collidable object . I've got to say, that does require some skill.