Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Op, you're doing it wrong.

Learn to cloak.

Problem solved.

Next.

I don't understand how this follows. Like I stated earlier, warp core scramblers are ridiculously ineffective in these scenarios where the ability to point within seconds of landing is everything, so the point about a triple warp core strength scram is irrelevant.

How about a history lesson?

In the beginning of EVE anyone and everyone used WCS for everything. They were everywhere in PVE, PVP, etc. and made it nearly impossible to kill anything without getting into close scram range (often with multiple scrams necessary). While this was not impossible, the devs realized it was excessive to ask so much of the agressing ship when the defending ship sacrificed so little. So they introduced the WCS bonuses we know today in order to combat that effect. We are simply asking for an extension of that nerf as new professions spring up.

How about an explanation of why WCS have such little negative effects in terms of fitting in these new professions?

In a PVE environment, low slots are generally used for two things. Those are tanking mods and damage mods. In mining they're also used for mining upgrades. Sacrificing low slots in those professions means sacrificing isk/hour in terms of mining upgrades or damage mods. Therefore fitting a WCS is a serious choice in terms of how much protection you want vs how much isk you will make. In the new professions described, FW plexers don't need lows because, due to the mechanics of FW complexes, they need to be present in order to "cap out" that plex. Which means rushing through the plex like in a mission won't substantially increase their isk/hour. In the new sites profession, the modules most used to increase isk/hour are scanners and scanning equipment, the most used of which are all medium slot modules. Therefore, in the new professions, you're not sacrificing isk/hour in order to gain protection. You're simply gaining protection with wise fitting knowledge.

I'm not "whining" on the forums because I'm a "big bad piwate that is pissy because he didn't get a kill". And I'm not proposing anything now that wasn't an issue inthe beginning of EVE. I'm seeing something from in-game experience, comparing it to other professions, and coming up short on explanations as to why they're not nerfing all the professions the same. Especially ones that are supposed to have some inherent "risk"

EDIT: The history lesson was in order to back my claim that WCS are only intended to have no negative effects on travel fits, in order to rebutt the earlier "Citation Needed" comments

And that assumption of you is wrong as i've pointed out earlier already. The stabs reduce targeting range greatly. That means flying from can to can in sites where containers are far apart instead of just warping in, quickly scanning all cans from a distance and cherry pick. Some nullsec sites the cans are 60-70 km apart.

So basically what you're saying to us is "I don't want to take advantage of the tools that are available to me, I demand that the game bend and be rebalanced to suit my needs instead."

Also, you're not willing to take a risk but you demand that your prey do so? Really? Are you on drugs, or are you just a complete buffoon? Moreover, please remind me what risk a virtually-weaponless CovOps presents to your combat-oriented machine.

This feels like I'm in some twisted parody of a "Nerf AFK Cloaking" thread.

One last question. Are you one of those people who has no friends and no alts, or do you just feel like you're completely entitled to solo kills of ships that are specifically designed to be slippery and escape from threats?

If you can put a point on them, you can put rounds on them. Why not alpha them? If they have stabs, they certainly aren't tanked. Suddenly those warp core stabs aren't helping them very much.

I have been killed by that fit, its pretty effective and costs very little (no covert opts has 4 lows so double scram works fine).

Also changing virus strength is not going to effect FW unless you need to hack them now which I doubt. So the point of FW is some what moot.

Our assertion is if you didn't bring enough points to hold, or enough DPS to kill a t1 frig, then they can call you dumb instead.

In all honesty while complaining about not being able to catch and trap or alpha a frigate that can't fight back is kind of dumb there is a valid point in this topic.

If warp core stabilizers function in a way so as to limit the effectiveness of ships in combat should they also function to limit the effectiveness of ships doing other things such as mining, probing, salvaging, hacking, and so on? Leaving aside the OP and his failings, both perceived and actual, it's an interesting question as developers sometimes have issues noticing emergent gameplay issues until they become gameplay problems.

They do already as has been explained elsewhere in this thread but I will reiterate:
They halve scan resolution meaning you need to be in the site longer due to longer locking times
&
More importantly, they halve your target range so with two fitted, which is often the case, you have 1/4 of your original locking range which on a frigate makes it a very short locking range. This means that you have to move from one can to another, making the time you're uncloaked and in the site much longer meaning you're more at risk from being caught by prepared predators.

There really doesn't need to be any more adverse affects to WCS.

Please note, I don't really do these sites and when I have done I've opted for not fitting WCS as I want the longer range and the shorter in site time so I've no vested interest in stopping this change other than for the fact it's unnecessary and generally unbalancing.

Very good point. It rather does, doesn't it.