These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Kronos] Blockade Runner Rebalance

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#241 - 2014-05-19 21:55:32 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Nobody is arguing that they should. We're arguing that player safety should be influenced by their decisions. If you want to autopilot in an empty BR then objectively speaking your risk goes down if you can be cargo scanned.

If you want to autopilot in a loot pinata BR then your risk will go up as it should be.
Your risk of being ganked autopiloting shouldn't be independent of your decision to carry juicy trinkets.


Quoting this, because it's the core of the issue.
Myrthiis
Boon Odd Ducks Bath Toys
#242 - 2014-05-19 23:10:46 UTC
"James Amril-Kesh" wrote:
We're arguing that player safety should be influenced by their decisions

This is the case with unscannability ,the player who choose to actively pilot his ships is safer than the one who choose autopilot.
Quote:
Your risk of being ganked autopiloting shouldn't be independent of your decision to carry juicy trinkets.

The risk of being ganked should'nt be lower for a lazy pilot ,no matter the value of cargo .CCP should keep promoting active piloting over automation even when this is a game feature and unscannability do that perfectly .
Galphii
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#243 - 2014-05-19 23:15:13 UTC
While these are practical changes it does reduce all four ships to being extremely similar. All of the industrial ships are suffering from this problem. I don't see the point of having racial variety if there's no variety.a problem to be addressed down the road a bit

"Wow, that internet argument completely changed my fundamental belief system," said no one, ever.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#244 - 2014-05-19 23:51:07 UTC
Sheeana Harb wrote:
Rowells wrote:

I think it ends up netting almost 0 change. Taking away from the agility multiplier makes it more agile, while adding mass counteracts that. however adding mass does help its agility when using speed modules.


I don't undestand why an additional mass would be useful with speed modules, the current Prowler only needs one cycle of MWD to get out of a bubble (which I believe is the only reason you would use a speed module). I also don't agree that modules are required to get the benefit of a racial theme. E.g. many Caldari ships have superior weapon range and strong shields by default (ship bonuses).

The change would then only benefit people who use prop mods, like me. Sometimes a gate is too camped to just burn out so you try to crash the gate. It also helps if you burn out and then have to align to warp point when the MWD is still on. As far as I can see this change would only be helpful and doesn't harm any specific play style.

Having higher base mass makes you more agile when using prop mods.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#245 - 2014-05-20 00:05:06 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Its rather amusing watching spineless bears trying to defend a safety net for bad pilots while calling gankers risk adverse because we want to at least have a small chance of being able to look at their cargo.
Myrthiis
Boon Odd Ducks Bath Toys
#246 - 2014-05-20 00:24:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Myrthiis
Finally showing your true face ,short on arguments going for insults ...Eve is a sandbox meaning all kind of players are mixing together deal with it.
Concerning the alleged safety net for bad pilots your talking about ,you are the one asking for it .Your are the one who wants autopiloting safer than active piloting .So who is the bad pilot ?And if you want so badly to look inside a BR catch it ,destroy it then you will know what is was carrying.
Oh and by the way as you are a goon representative ,i found it funny that you are asking for this change just after "Burn jita" Understand those who can ...
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#247 - 2014-05-20 00:41:56 UTC
Myrthiis wrote:
Finally showing your true face ,short on arguments going for insults ...Eve is a sandbox meaning all kind of players are mixing together deal with it.
Concerning the alleged safety net for bad pilots your talking about ,you are the one asking for it .Your are the one who wants autopiloting safer than active piloting .So who is the bad pilot ?And if you want so badly to look inside a BR catch it ,destroy it then you will know what is was carrying.
Oh and by the way as you are a representative of goons if found it funny that you are asking for this change just after "Burn jita" Understand those who can ...


I dont want autopiloting to be safer than activly flying a ship. At the same time I also dont want an empty ship being put at greater risk simply because some people dont want people looking at their cargo on a ship that when flown right is unlockable anyway.

Now if you were arguing to have immunity from npc navy scanning I could get behind that for the DST. But I do not support people who want a safety net for their own stupidity and lazyness.
Davion Falcon
Those Once Loyal
#248 - 2014-05-20 00:56:57 UTC
Meh. Remove cargo scanners.

Make gankers put some real effort into determining what to gank.

Ruthlessness is the kindness of the wise. Never forgotten, never forgiven.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#249 - 2014-05-20 01:00:49 UTC
Davion Falcon wrote:
Meh. Remove cargo scanners.

Make gankers put some real effort into determining what to gank.


And how do we determin what to gank with zero intel?

Removing the ability to scan dose not increase effort, it turns ganking into hoping you get lucky. You effectivly remove it as a profession.
Myrthiis
Boon Odd Ducks Bath Toys
#250 - 2014-05-20 01:17:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Myrthiis
You are contradicting yourself here,let me quote you .
"baltec1" wrote:
At the same time I also dont want an empty ship being put at greater risk simply because some people dont want people looking at their cargo on a ship that when flown right is unlockable anyway.

Don't you see the contradiction in what you are saying,if flown properly you are "unlockable" so empty or not your ship isn't put a greater risk as obviously you will not be on autopilot no matter what in low or null sec .For the simple reasons than scannable or not if you are autopiloting in these systems you will be ganked for the lolz.

But in the case of autopiloting in high sec ,unscannability force gankers to take a gamble (risk vs reward policy) .

So unscannability isn't a safety net for anyone .
- For gankers it force them to take a gamble.
"Should i loose a few catalyst to crack open this BR on autopilot even if it could be empty ?"

-For lazy pilot (autopilote) who wants to bring back a distant BR.
"Does a pirate will shoot my ship to look inside ,as they are greedy for juicy trinkets as a bear with honey ?"

-For proprer and dedicated pilote .
" i don't care anyway , i fly my ship as a boss "

This is the kind of questions a player should be happy to respond ,plus they are in phase with the Risk vs Reward policy.
So yes i think Unscannability is a good characteristic ,it brings interesting game choices and reward active piloting over lazyness .
Davion Falcon
Those Once Loyal
#251 - 2014-05-20 01:22:55 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Davion Falcon wrote:
Meh. Remove cargo scanners.

Make gankers put some real effort into determining what to gank.


And how do we determin what to gank with zero intel?

Removing the ability to scan dose not increase effort, it turns ganking into hoping you get lucky. You effectivly remove it as a profession.


Go get intel, wardec, or gamble on the gank.

Ruthlessness is the kindness of the wise. Never forgotten, never forgiven.
Utremi Fasolasi
La Dolce Vita
#252 - 2014-05-20 01:25:28 UTC
Judging by what just happened to all the Viators on the market in Metropolis in the last hour or so, it seems the speculation has begun.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#253 - 2014-05-20 01:37:50 UTC
Davion Falcon wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Davion Falcon wrote:
Meh. Remove cargo scanners.

Make gankers put some real effort into determining what to gank.


And how do we determin what to gank with zero intel?

Removing the ability to scan dose not increase effort, it turns ganking into hoping you get lucky. You effectivly remove it as a profession.


Go get intel, wardec, or gamble on the gank.


How do you get intel on the contents of somes cargohold without a scanner?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#254 - 2014-05-20 01:39:43 UTC
Myrthiis wrote:
You are contradicting yourself here,let me quote you .
"baltec1" wrote:
At the same time I also dont want an empty ship being put at greater risk simply because some people dont want people looking at their cargo on a ship that when flown right is unlockable anyway.

Don't you see the contradiction in what you are saying,if flown properly you are "unlockable" so empty or not your ship isn't put a greater risk as obviously you will not be on autopilot no matter what in low or null sec .For the simple reasons than scannable or not if you are autopiloting in these systems you will be ganked for the lolz.

But in the case of autopiloting in high sec ,unscannability force gankers to take a gamble (risk vs reward policy) .

So unscannability isn't a safety net for anyone .
- For gankers it force them to take a gamble.
"Should i loose a few catalyst to crack open this BR on autopilot even if it could be empty ?"

-For lazy pilot (autopilote) who wants to bring back a distant BR.
"Does a pirate will shoot my ship to look inside ,as they are greedy for juicy trinkets as a bear with honey ?"

-For proprer and dedicated pilote .
" i don't care anyway , i fly my ship as a boss "

This is the kind of questions a player should be happy to respond ,plus they are in phase with the Risk vs Reward policy.
So yes i think Unscannability is a good characteristic ,it brings interesting game choices and reward active piloting over lazyness .


There is no contradiction. Read everything I say rather than little snippets.
Davion Falcon
Those Once Loyal
#255 - 2014-05-20 01:40:21 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Davion Falcon wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Davion Falcon wrote:
Meh. Remove cargo scanners.

Make gankers put some real effort into determining what to gank.


And how do we determin what to gank with zero intel?

Removing the ability to scan dose not increase effort, it turns ganking into hoping you get lucky. You effectivly remove it as a profession.


Go get intel, wardec, or gamble on the gank.


How do you get intel on the contents of somes cargohold without a scanner?


I'm sure you're familiar with the concept of espionage.

Ruthlessness is the kindness of the wise. Never forgotten, never forgiven.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#256 - 2014-05-20 01:43:35 UTC
Davion Falcon wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Davion Falcon wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Davion Falcon wrote:
Meh. Remove cargo scanners.

Make gankers put some real effort into determining what to gank.


And how do we determin what to gank with zero intel?

Removing the ability to scan dose not increase effort, it turns ganking into hoping you get lucky. You effectivly remove it as a profession.


Go get intel, wardec, or gamble on the gank.


How do you get intel on the contents of somes cargohold without a scanner?


I'm sure you're familiar with the concept of espionage.


And how do we spy on the hundreds of thousands of pilots in high sec and read their minds?
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#257 - 2014-05-20 01:44:56 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Its rather amusing watching spineless bears trying to defend a safety net for bad pilots while calling gankers risk adverse because we want to at least have a small chance of being able to look at their cargo.


*it's
*averse

To wit:

It's rather amusing watching spineless bears trying to defend a profit-maximising idea for bad gankers while calling people auto piloting their blockade runners risk averse because they don't want to gamble their suicide ganking fleet on what might be an empty hauler.

The point being that unscannable cargo means the blockade runner pilot is taking more risk when AP, because the ganker doesn't know whether the ship has a cargo or not. There's no need for name-calling, just state the facts and provide your story about how a particular feature will or will not work for you. The ganker can scan the fit, which should provide some clues as to whether this particular blockade runner is carrying shiny pretties or not.

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Myrthiis
Boon Odd Ducks Bath Toys
#258 - 2014-05-20 01:48:27 UTC
Utremi Fasolasi wrote:
Judging by what just happened to all the Viators on the market in Metropolis in the last hour or so, it seems the speculation has begun.

Actually both Viator and Prorator will be pretty good,if they stay like this.
They both have nasty hole in the shield Viator is a bit better on this part ,but anyway for a BR your cloack is your tank .
Honnestly between those two its a close choice. I do prefer Prorator as it have much low and can fit 2 Cargohold expander,a nano and a warp core stabilizer who could be a lifesaver if you are a bit late on cloacking against a warp disruptor .

Please Fozzie give just one more powergrid to Prowler :)
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#259 - 2014-05-20 01:50:07 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Its rather amusing watching spineless bears trying to defend a safety net for bad pilots while calling gankers risk adverse because we want to at least have a small chance of being able to look at their cargo.


*it's
*averse

To wit:

It's rather amusing watching spineless bears trying to defend a profit-maximising idea for bad gankers while calling people auto piloting their blockade runners risk averse because they don't want to gamble their suicide ganking fleet on what might be an empty hauler.

The point being that unscannable cargo means the blockade runner pilot is taking more risk when AP, because the ganker doesn't know whether the ship has a cargo or not. There's no need for name-calling, just state the facts and provide your story about how a particular feature will or will not work for you. The ganker can scan the fit, which should provide some clues as to whether this particular blockade runner is carrying shiny pretties or not.


There are no clues to what is inside the hold of any ship based on their fittings.

Randomly ganking blocade runners and hoping you get lucky will always end in the ganker losing all their isk.
Komi Toran
Perkone
Caldari State
#260 - 2014-05-20 01:55:52 UTC
Davion Falcon wrote:
I'm sure you're familiar with the concept of espionage.

What corps announce what they're moving in a BR to membership? It's not exactly a fleet operation.

Anyway, I do find this whole argument rather pointless. You're either flying a BR safely, and so are practically invulnerable, or you aren't, in which case, welcome to Eve. Just knowing that at any time, if you mess up on a gate, you have a higher chance of being ganked flying the thing regardless of what you're carrying makes flying it more exciting. This is probably the only ship where it's performing its role 100% of the time it's in space.