These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 
Author
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
#61 - 2012-07-21 20:55:17 UTC
Tarryn Nightstorm wrote:
Andrea Roche wrote:
Black ops are OP as hell.
Look at Burn Eden stats using them and how efficient they are and how very rarelly they lose a back ops ship!
Sorry but their stats speaks miles on how good they are already, nevermind buffing them further!

Enough said!


Obvious troll is far too obvious.

1/10.

Keep practising!


lol
its not so obvious if you keep getting it wrong! Roll
Tarryn Nightstorm
Hellstar Towing and Recovery
#62 - 2012-07-22 06:31:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Tarryn Nightstorm
I get it wrong that you're a useless troll/mindless fanboi/girl, O great NPC-corp generic forum-alt?

No, I think not.

Next!

Star Wars: the Old Republic may not be EVE. But I'll take the sound of dual blaster-pistols over "NURVV CLAOKING NAOW!!!11oneone!!" any day of the week.

Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
#63 - 2012-07-22 08:26:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Andrea Roche
Tarryn Nightstorm wrote:
I get it wrong that you're a useless troll/mindless fanboi/girl, O great NPC-corp generic forum-alt?

No, I think not.

Next!


do you even know what a "fanboi" is?
yeah and your 3 corp alt is not generic! ohh boy...
you are not too clever are you
Lol
Lady Spank
Get Out Nasty Face
#64 - 2012-07-22 09:14:39 UTC
Counterpoints to a discussion will always be read as trolling in the minds of imbeciles.

(ಠ_ృ) ~ It Takes a Million Years to Become Diamonds So Lets Just Burn Like Coal Until the Sky's Black ~ (ಠ_ృ)

Hemmo Paskiainen
#65 - 2012-07-22 09:32:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Hemmo Paskiainen
Lady Spank wrote:
Counterpoints to a discussion will always be read as trolling in the minds of imbeciles.
Exept when his counterpoints were stupid, one sided and an obvius brainfart...

Anyhow, reported it anyway so this litter wont derail this topic... Damn trolls, ccp need to make a cave section here and implement prinesses ingame so they can kidnap them and hide in the caves!!

If relativity equals time plus momentum, what equals relativity, if the momentum is minus to the time?

Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
#66 - 2012-07-22 10:19:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Andrea Roche
Hemmo Paskiainen wrote:
Lady Spank wrote:
Counterpoints to a discussion will always be read as trolling in the minds of imbeciles.
Exept when his counterpoints were stupid, one sided and an obvius brainfart...

Anyhow, reported it anyway so this litter wont derail this topic... Damn trolls, ccp need to make a cave section here and implement prinesses ingame so they can kidnap them and hide in the caves!!


my point still the same my friend.
granted i have used BE as an example but as you well know there are many entites that use them differently and some more like the standard way of using them. At the end, most of them are successful at it and not all ships within the same class must be as good as the others. Eve just does not work like that and never has. Not even now with all the new buffs there are still many ships that are ignored simply cos they are not suited for a particular strategy or are not as good as the others.

In the end you got to ask a few questions and you got to be frank about it to yourself and recognize these:

Are there ships in every class that are used more than others cos they simply do not suit a particular strategy? Yes, stats prove it
Are black ops effective? Yes, stats prove it
Are there multiple AND effective types of strategies while using black ops? Yes, stats prove it
Are they effective as herassment tool? Yes, stats prove it
Do we have sufficient long term infomation to show these stats are acurate? They have been effective for more than 4 years. So yes

What are the down side?
Ship range
Not all the ships in the races are as good in particular stratgies as others
Cost of fuel and everyone must carry fuel along with a transport ship with fuel
Must be organized and work as a team

Does the disadvanteges keep them in check how effective they are? Yes
Do these disadvanteages does not make them effective? No

You cant just scream/demand buff this or buff that when you see how good they are.
Granted they are not the easiest thing to deal with BUT i believe thats the price you got to pay for been able to hot drop on cyno jammed system, snipe and kill an oponents in seconds.

Its not a troll but fact!
Master Tron
Axis.
#67 - 2012-07-22 13:42:02 UTC
Razor Rocker wrote:
Master Tron wrote:
As a everyday black ops pilot this ship needs more love.
You have my support on this matter.

Black Ops should have:

- Larger Fuel Bay
- Bridge recons and t3 amount should be lower
- Increased ly

Does Black Ops needs Covert cloak ?

My answer is NO, as they are atm is perfect. Having covert cloak makes them too powerful.



agree completely with this. Covert Ops cloaks are not needed, although it be nice not to erase the scan res penalty from cloaking devices.

Having to have 1-2 cloaky haulers and BO with cargo expanders for a deep insertion (lol) seems rather silly to me.

the dps and tank of the BO is fine. But I'd love to see people using BO more.

Another neat perk, which I think will probably make them OP, is having each have an ewar bonus. So a redeemer with a neuting bonus, panther with a web bonus and sin with a pointing range bonus. This would eliminate the need for recons on the fleet.

in the end, improve the BO in nearly any way and ill be happy.


This is amazing idea (I agree), they still are T2 ships, meaning they should have bonus. At the moment they seems to be just T1 battleships what can just use jump drive nothing else.
Bootleg Jack
ACME Mineral and Gas
#68 - 2012-07-22 15:55:58 UTC
Andrea Roche wrote:
Bootleg Jack wrote:
Ironic the "Black Ops" ship, which Black Ops implies bad assed is in actuality nothing more than a kind of jump gate industrial.

Tank sucks...
Cloak sucks...
DPS sucks...

See, it is a jump gate industrial with a bad assed name.


you defenetly dont know what you are talking about regarding black ops.


lol, enlighten us, are you saying the cloak is ok?

Or maybe you think it has great DPS?

Or the tank, *snicker*, is that good?

Shields base:
Widow = 5312
Scorp = 6641
Scorp Navy = 9961
Rattlesnake 12750

The tank is less than the base T1 ship by nearly 20%.

It is outclassed as a fighting ship in all cases with ships of similar size.

I'm an American, English is my second language...

Soi Mala
Whacky Waving Inflatable Flailing Arm Tubemen
#69 - 2012-07-22 16:04:06 UTC
Bootleg Jack wrote:
Andrea Roche wrote:
Bootleg Jack wrote:
Ironic the "Black Ops" ship, which Black Ops implies bad assed is in actuality nothing more than a kind of jump gate industrial.

Tank sucks...
Cloak sucks...
DPS sucks...

See, it is a jump gate industrial with a bad assed name.


you defenetly dont know what you are talking about regarding black ops.


lol, enlighten us, are you saying the cloak is ok?

Or maybe you think it has great DPS?

Or the tank, *snicker*, is that good?

Shields base:
Widow = 5312
Scorp = 6641
Scorp Navy = 9961
Rattlesnake 12750

The tank is less than the base T1 ship by nearly 20%.

It is outclassed as a fighting ship in all cases with ships of similar size.


Which is why they travel in gangs. Also, they have backup from the recon that's cynoing. Add the element of surprise and you have surprise buttsechs.

Maybe you'd rather have a brawling dps tankmachine that can warp cloaked?
l0rd carlos
the king asked me to guard the mountain
#70 - 2012-07-22 16:14:36 UTC
Hi Guys.
I am part of a small lowsec corp and we sometimes use blackops to break gatecamp that would not be possible to attack in other ways (because of scouting and ~100AU warp)
And they work great for that!
Yes, the fuelbay is not that big, but we drop a container with more fuel before bridging, so that solves that problem.
Tank is a little bit meh .. but if we can we also bridge logistics.

I totaly agree on the DPS part, it is low. But would it be good for the game if they would make more damage?

Maybe we should have 2 different kind of Blackops, one with large fuel bay and cover cloak and one with DPS/Tank Bonus?

Youtube Channel about Micro and Small scale PvP with commentary: Fleet Commentary by l0rd carlos

Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
#71 - 2012-07-22 20:27:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Andrea Roche
Bootleg Jack wrote:
Andrea Roche wrote:
Bootleg Jack wrote:
Ironic the "Black Ops" ship, which Black Ops implies bad assed is in actuality nothing more than a kind of jump gate industrial.

Tank sucks...
Cloak sucks...
DPS sucks...

See, it is a jump gate industrial with a bad assed name.


you defenetly dont know what you are talking about regarding black ops.


lol, enlighten us, are you saying the cloak is ok?

Or maybe you think it has great DPS?

Or the tank, *snicker*, is that good?

Shields base:
Widow = 5312
Scorp = 6641
Scorp Navy = 9961
Rattlesnake 12750

The tank is less than the base T1 ship by nearly 20%.

It is outclassed as a fighting ship in all cases with ships of similar size.


i will enlighten you. You dont need to cloak in order to warp around. Many people has lived without them for ages and the killboard is full of such examples. You dont need that much dps believe it or not. The reason is very simple. Black ops jump, kill and warp out in literally seconds! You dont need more DPS when you kill targets very fast.
You just never have experinced what is like been jumped by 6/7 or more black ops. Believe me son, its totally one sided.
If 10 or more when there is 6 of you or so, you will all die!

PS: let me point something out to you. You obviously dont know this since you are looking at all the ships shields. You dont shield tank with a blackops fleet! You armor tank, cos you need all the mid slots for utilities! Another reason is cos your higher dps are your armor ships so you spider tank with drones and some internal rep or external(unusually thought)
Also check the resistance of the widow for armor. You maybe shocked!
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
#72 - 2012-07-22 20:28:20 UTC
l0rd carlos wrote:
Hi Guys.
I am part of a small lowsec corp and we sometimes use blackops to break gatecamp that would not be possible to attack in other ways (because of scouting and ~100AU warp)
And they work great for that!
Yes, the fuelbay is not that big, but we drop a container with more fuel before bridging, so that solves that problem.
Tank is a little bit meh .. but if we can we also bridge logistics.

I totaly agree on the DPS part, it is low. But would it be good for the game if they would make more damage?

Maybe we should have 2 different kind of Blackops, one with large fuel bay and cover cloak and one with DPS/Tank Bonus?


Can you provide us with killboard examples of such battles to se you composition plz.
thx
l0rd carlos
the king asked me to guard the mountain
#73 - 2012-07-22 22:13:22 UTC
Andrea Roche wrote:

Can you provide us with killboard examples of such battles to se you composition plz.
thx

Yes, sure.

http://spam.eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=13283419
That was a gatecamp with multiple Battlecuisers, a T3 warped right before we bridged in. At leat one of them jumped with GCC into highsec. The neares gate is 100 AU away. The Battlereport/Related kills is messed up, because we reshiped and made a camp on the same gate.
Even with this big blob it took some time to kill the BCs. T3 with clovert subsystem dont do much damage.

http://spam.eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13282454

Personaly i think it's fun to bridge with the Blackops, but because of the low dps we often blob the enemies and i start to feel sorry for them. In the time we kill a couple of BCs, their friends can undock in Battleships and start killing us.
So it's kinda risky. Maybe we just need more proteus :D

BOs are a specialized Ship for a tiny part of PvP, that does not mean that they are underpowered.

Youtube Channel about Micro and Small scale PvP with commentary: Fleet Commentary by l0rd carlos

xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
#74 - 2012-07-23 08:34:19 UTC
Bootleg Jack wrote:
Andrea Roche wrote:
Bootleg Jack wrote:
Ironic the "Black Ops" ship, which Black Ops implies bad assed is in actuality nothing more than a kind of jump gate industrial.

Tank sucks...
Cloak sucks...
DPS sucks...

See, it is a jump gate industrial with a bad assed name.


you defenetly dont know what you are talking about regarding black ops.


lol, enlighten us, are you saying the cloak is ok?

Or maybe you think it has great DPS?

Or the tank, *snicker*, is that good?

Shields base:
Widow = 5312
Scorp = 6641
Scorp Navy = 9961
Rattlesnake 12750

The tank is less than the base T1 ship by nearly 20%.

It is outclassed as a fighting ship in all cases with ships of similar size.



there is a reason for the lower tank, that i get.
but no covert cloaking device for a covert ship <<<< Fix Please
CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
#75 - 2012-07-23 11:31:05 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Ytterbium
Back from vacation and thought this thread could use some dev love.


Yes, Black Ops definitely need some attention; the main problem with them is the lack of role focus. Some (like the Redeemer or Window) are trying to achieve a purpose directly on the battlefield, similar with recons by having an electronic warfare or damage related bonus. On top of that, they also are trying to fulfill a fleet support role with their cyno capability, which is quite in contradiction with the previous one.

And they aren't great at both: their raw HP is quite lower than tech 1 battleships (and tech 2 resistance boosts aren't stellar either), have less turret and missile hardpoints than tech 1 counterparts and remain more expensive to run, which doesn't make them appealing for direct engagement purposes. They also lack autonomy in their support role, as they are quite short ranged, fuel hungry and this issue is amplified by their small fuel bay forcing them to rely on other ships to resupply frequently during an operation.

The current plan is to take one these two listed roles out of the Black Ops ship class and reshape them to do the remaining one well. If they are disruption ships using EW, they should have more presence on the battlefield for their pricetag. If they are support tools for surprise attacks and small gang movement into enemy space, then they should have the proper bay, range and tools to do so accordingly.

The role dropped out of the Black Ops would then be moved to a new class in the tech 2 battleship range to replace for the loss.

We acknowledge some entities out there are using Black Ops with great effect when backed up with the proper organization, structure and out-of-the-box thinking to make use of them in unorthodox situations. While we don't want to take that away, Black Ops should be more effective without such heavy commitment into them (a statistic query we ran at the beginning of this year shown there are more Titan than Block Ops pilot on TQ). They should be great force multiplier tools for small groups to take on larger ones by surprise, and should be able to do so relatively well without relying on a dedicated support structure.

So, when would this be coming out? Unfortunately, not for a while. As explained in the various blogs before, our current priority is to fix tech 1 ships as a whole before moving to more advanced hulls. That is because we need a solid frame of reference to rely on and compare hulls to before we can move to more delicate and complex ships, like Black Ops or tech 3 hulls.


Also don't forget this is just our long term plan for now, and things may change in the future. In all cases they are not forgotten, but will take time to get to.

Hope that helps!
Alpheias
Tactical Farmers.
Pandemic Horde
#76 - 2012-07-23 11:33:25 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:


Black Op Window


Sound pretty kick ass.

Agent of Chaos, Sower of Discord.

Don't talk to me unless you are IQ verified and certified with three references from non-family members. Please have your certificate of authenticity on hand.

Darek Castigatus
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#77 - 2012-07-23 11:41:15 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Back from vacation and thought this thread could use some dev love.


Yes, Black Ops definitely need some attention; the main problem with them is the lack of role focus. Some (like the Redeemer or Window) are trying to achieve a purpose directly on the battlefield, similar with recons by having an electronic warfare or damage related bonus. On top of that, they also are trying to fulfill a fleet support role with their cyno capability, which is quite in contradiction with the previous one.

And they aren't great at both: their raw HP is quite lower than tech 1 battleships (and tech 2 resistance boosts aren't stellar either), have less turret and missile hardpoints than tech 1 counterparts and remain more expensive to run, which doesn't make them appealing for direct engagement purposes. They also lack autonomy in their support role, as they are quite short ranged, fuel hungry and this issue is amplified by their small fuel bay forcing them to rely on other ships to resupply frequently during an operation.

The current plan is to take one these two listed roles out of the Black Ops ship class and reshape them to do the remaining one well. If they are disruption ships using EW, they should have more presence on the battlefield for their pricetag. If they are support tools for surprise attacks and small gang movement into enemy space, then they should have the proper bay, range and tools to do so accordingly.

The role dropped out of the Black Ops would then be moved to a new class in the tech 2 battleship range to replace for the loss.

We acknowledge some entities out there are using Black Ops with great effect when backed up with the proper organization, structure and out-of-the-box thinking to make use of them in unorthodox situations. While we don't want to take that away, Black Ops should be more effective without such heavy commitment into them (a statistic query we ran at the beginning of this year shown there are more Titan than Block Ops pilot on TQ). They should be great force multiplier tools for small groups to take on larger ones by surprise, and should be able to do so relatively well without relying on a dedicated support structure.

So, when would this be coming out? Unfortunately, not for a while. As explained in the various blogs before, our current priority is to fix tech 1 ships as a whole before moving to more advanced hulls. That is because we need a solid frame of reference to rely on and compare hulls to before we can move to more delicate and complex ships, like Black Ops or tech 3 hulls.


Also don't forget this is just our long term plan for now, and things may change in the future. In all cases they are not forgotten, but will take time to get to.

Hope that helps!


Hope this isnt considered crossposting but i just wanted to point this thread at you, contains some suggestions regarding black ops I think you should see

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=135180&find=unread

Pirates - The Invisible Fist of Darwin

you're welcome

Sentient Blade
Crisis Atmosphere
Coalition of the Unfortunate
#78 - 2012-07-23 11:47:21 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
So, when would this be coming out? Unfortunately, not for a while.


I appreciate the feedback you gave us, and I understand the long term goals.

But in the mean time those of us that have trained in black ops find them a complete pain in the ass for the most part - can you placate us in the short time and fiddle with some database numbers and adjust the fuel bay / costs?
Peter Powers
Terrorists of Dimensions
#79 - 2012-07-23 12:00:54 UTC
leave black ops alone.

3rdPartyEve.net - your catalogue for 3rd party applications

ovenproofjet
Gallifrey Industries
#80 - 2012-07-23 12:29:16 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:

So, when would this be coming out? Unfortunately, not for a while. As explained in the various blogs before, our current priority is to fix tech 1 ships as a whole before moving to more advanced hulls. That is because we need a solid frame of reference to rely on and compare hulls to before we can move to more delicate and complex ships, like Black Ops or tech 3 hulls.


Also don't forget this is just our long term plan for now, and things may change in the future. In all cases they are not forgotten, but will take time to get to.

Hope that helps!


Thank you for this response, as a member of one of the groups you mention that uses Black Ops all the time this is very encouraging.

Once T1 is sorted (and hopefully the drake nerfed!) could you please prioritise Black Ops in the T2 rebalancing. There isn't really any T2 class that is as broken as the Black Ops!!!