Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Lol what? No.

That is not even close to being true. Kiting ships have to give up a lot to be effective, you think people use nano's/overdrives and similar mods because they think it enhances their ship in brawl mode? Or how about all the ewar and tackle advantages of being a brick tank that kiting setups have a lot less opportunity to use.

Which means you can't just slop out a half assed bombing run and get good results simply because someone dropped a bubble on your targets.

Also, mind your manners.

Perhaps you could point out the inherent advantages you gain to tackling when flying a ship outfitted as a brick tank?

You might also have a conversation with other pilots that equip for kiting, so that they can share their opinion on the advantages of being able to engage/disengage from combat at will.

Both are complex options to balance properly.
I'm arguing at least that battleships being given this option was a really good idea and has worked somewhat to make them more popular. Extending this option to lower classes of ships will just move battleships back into obscurity.

Why would you want an MJD on an aligned, insta-locking ship? The MJD wouldn't buy you enough time to get another volley off, and your ship isn't designed for sustained damage. Also you'd want to use a Tempest over a Maelstrom, and utilize the extra slots you get from having to fit no fitting modules. Regardless, your argument is that people that sit aligned with insta-locking snipers on a gate would get a benefit is pretty ridiculous.





Because people are against it on the tier-3 BCs while being in favor of it on command ships/BCs for reasons that doesn't exist, in doing so securing that a potentially dynamic shipclass gets relegated to garbage dumpster tier. It just makes no sense.





Vultures can hit at 220km. Compared to traditional sniper-fit Tier-3s, Vultures out-tank (by a huge margin, ~1700%), out DPS (at range, at least), and even out-range (220km)


This is why fitting matters. To fit a sniping tempest with MJD requires no additional fitting mods, so you can put in two nanos. 6.8 s vs 7.8s


The argument I made was not that BS are superior sniper ships, I was refuting that the addition of the MMJD on the tier-3s would be game-breakingly OP as people seem to suggest. Surely if that were the case, people would be willing to sacrifice 10% align time (is actually 14%, soz) to have access to this whoopingly ~overpowered~ module. If you want to warp in from a perch, blap, and warp out Tier-3 BCs are the way to go, but the MMJD would have /no effect whatsoever/ here.


As far as #2 (won't let me quote RIP) your posit a scenario with a fleet of 50+ Tornados sniping my short-range high-sig fleet. I can't get a warp-in on the bad guys in your scenario because ??? (they're super good at kiting I guess), but I /do/ have a prober and a bombing wing and a dictor. Your assumption here is that my dictor is good enough to bubble them, the ~kiting~ target is too dumb to warp as the dictor lands, while being simultaneously too dumb to MWD out of said bubble, and my perfectly timed bomb-run lands. In spite of this great coordination and luck, my bomber squad is incapable of being setup in such a way as to catch them as they all blink to a predictable position. Also the snipers are hilariously gimped because they have to fit both an MJD and an MMJD.

Seems legit.

While this may seem ideal on paper, this situation is very rare to see in reality. In fact, it requires such ineptitude that I'd argue having an MMJD wouldn't save the fleet. What if I told you that there already exists a doctrine that can snipe the way you described while being both impractical to probe and bubble immune 100% of the time, instead of once every 3 minutes. Surely there would be a 30 page thread about how game-breakingly overpowered it was? Spoiler alert! There DOES exist such a ship, the Tengu, and there are no such threads because, well, it's not game-breakingly overpowered.


So the tl;dr of all this is that the ships only get more annoying /on paper/. In reality, though, nothing really changes. And if you can think of a way that makes it so broken, there exists a platform that you can use to exploit this inequality. Instead, a once-robust shipclass will keep drudging along as a predictable sniping platform.

No.

There is a really simple solution that was already touched on: reduce the distance of the MMJD to 50km. This should work on Command Ships, Combat Battlecruisers and Deep Space Transports only (as proposed). Drop the spool-up time by 25% to compensate, but do not even remotely consider scripting these. Battleships get 100km, Battlecruisers get 50km - and Tornados get nadda.

CBC and CS lack the speed, warp speed and damage projection to ever become any sort of hilarious bullshit meta. Right now they have no place, no use in combat because they're too slow in many ways, they're under performing. With MJD they'll STILL be too slow in many ways but they have a gimmick that says that if you try to kite them it won't work. How is that a problem, kiting is a counter to slow ships and there's nothing much those ships can do against that, now they can. And all you have to do in your kiting ship is go "well, perhaps I won't be able to kill this guy".

Also, given that CBC and CS are in a somewhat bad spot atm, they will be buffed somehow. So you can choose, do you want to increase speed/agility on CBC/CS making them hilarious OP completely raping cruisers? I bet you don't, at least not if you're capable of being unbiased, so somehow they need a buff. This is a good one because it won't turn into a new meta and at the same time it plays into their current strengths.

Why is this so difficult to comprehend?

Nope, I thought it was dumb as well.

lol wut?

If you want to be totally honest it should be like this:


The MMJD module idea is really really bad. BSs needed it because of their horrible speed and agility. BCs and command ships do not have horrible speed or agility so they don't need this. DSTs probably won't use it due to the nature of gate camps. Please do not add this module.