These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Stealth Orca nerf round #2

Author
Ulstan
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#101 - 2011-12-07 21:06:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Ulstan
Quote:
TLDR; I can understand preventing players from removing ships from combat via Orca. I don't understand why it should be made stupidly difficult/risky to bring a NEW ship into combat. After all - the new ship is now ALSO committed to the battle.
Fix the 'BOARD SHIP' function as detailed above.


Look, obviously CCP doesn't want it to be easy to SWTICH SHIPS MID COMBAT. If you want to switch ships dock/POS up, change ships, come back. That's the way it works.

It's trivially easy to bring a new ship into combat - it's just not easy to do when you're trying to transfer a pilot from one ship in combat to another ship. Nor should it be.

I am broadly in favor of every nerf to 'neutral' vessels having any ability to impact a fight whatsoever, from orcas to RR to gang boosters.

Anyway, any mission runner smart enough to know to target the hurricane when it gets spit out is going to be smart enough not to engage you in the first place.

Quote:
Forcing players to disengage, dockup in order to switch ships - is kind of weaksauce when the whole point of the Orca having an SM bay in the first place is for in-space fitting and ship swapping.


Yes, it is for IN SPACE fitting and ship swapping. It is not for IN COMBAT fitting and ship swapping. The entire point of EVE revolves around you planning out a ship and fitting and then being restricted to that ship/fitting for the ensuing combat. Asking to be able to swap fits/ship on the fly because you made a dumb decision is game breakingly bad, IMO.

You want this capability because it helps you kill mission runners better, but take a step back and look at how terrible it is in terms of EVE's philosophy.

Why on earth should you be able to magically transform one ship into a completely different ship on the field of combat? I see no justification for this whatsoever as a game play element other than "well it helps kill mission runners" and there are plenty of ways to do that.

I'd say their new solution is perfect. There is a chance you will still get in your new ship and waste the MR, there is a chance the MR will target the new ship and keep you from boarding it. You could win, you could lose.

Also I would say that as a corporation that specializes in utilizing sneaky/underhanded methods of bringing grief to mission runners ( a cause I fully support) TEARS should be full of professional admiration at CCP's sneak/underhanded method of bringing grief to people who used ORCA's in this way.

Something you used to do doesn't work any longer. You'll have to adapt your tactics. Welcome to EVE.
Beliar Gray
I'm quitting Eve PV Rock I want to talk with you
#102 - 2011-12-08 00:27:49 UTC
Ulstan wrote:
Quote:
TLDR; I can understand preventing players from removing ships from combat via Orca. I don't understand why it should be made stupidly difficult/risky to bring a NEW ship into combat. After all - the new ship is now ALSO committed to the battle.
Fix the 'BOARD SHIP' function as detailed above.


Look, obviously CCP doesn't want it to be easy to SWTICH SHIPS MID COMBAT. If you want to switch ships dock/POS up, change ships, come back. That's the way it works.

It's trivially easy to bring a new ship into combat - it's just not easy to do when you're trying to transfer a pilot from one ship in combat to another ship. Nor should it be.

I am broadly in favor of every nerf to 'neutral' vessels having any ability to impact a fight whatsoever, from orcas to RR to gang boosters.

Anyway, any mission runner smart enough to know to target the hurricane when it gets spit out is going to be smart enough not to engage you in the first place.

Quote:
Forcing players to disengage, dockup in order to switch ships - is kind of weaksauce when the whole point of the Orca having an SM bay in the first place is for in-space fitting and ship swapping.


Yes, it is for IN SPACE fitting and ship swapping. It is not for IN COMBAT fitting and ship swapping. The entire point of EVE revolves around you planning out a ship and fitting and then being restricted to that ship/fitting for the ensuing combat. Asking to be able to swap fits/ship on the fly because you made a dumb decision is game breakingly bad, IMO.

You want this capability because it helps you kill mission runners better, but take a step back and look at how terrible it is in terms of EVE's philosophy.

Why on earth should you be able to magically transform one ship into a completely different ship on the field of combat? I see no justification for this whatsoever as a game play element other than "well it helps kill mission runners" and there are plenty of ways to do that.

I'd say their new solution is perfect. There is a chance you will still get in your new ship and waste the MR, there is a chance the MR will target the new ship and keep you from boarding it. You could win, you could lose.

Also I would say that as a corporation that specializes in utilizing sneaky/underhanded methods of bringing grief to mission runners ( a cause I fully support) TEARS should be full of professional admiration at CCP's sneak/underhanded method of bringing grief to people who used ORCA's in this way.

Something you used to do doesn't work any longer. You'll have to adapt your tactics. Welcome to EVE.
The best solution would be to make ships scoopable if targeted by someone who has aggro on the owner at the cost of orca aggro ...apart from that you have no idea what this thread is about so read up on it a bit before you say anything.
Herr Wilkus
Aggressive Salvage Services LLC
#103 - 2011-12-08 02:29:32 UTC
Ulstan wrote:
Herr Wilkus wrote:
The name of the game is getting a CNR to shoot at your frigate, keeping the CNR scrambled, and seamlessly switching into a larger ship that can kill the CNR - without having to leave grid. (If you leave grid to change ships, it gives the Mission Runner the opportunity to dock up at their leisure.)


And you're surprised this was changed? If you want to fight them in a larger ship, fight them in a larger ship. CCP is quite right to keep people from magically switching ships mid fight.


'If you want to fight them in a larger ship' fight them in a larger ship".

OK, Beavis, its pretty clear you don't understand what we are talking about.

You have to get the mission runner to shoot first. Without aggro, Concord intervenes. Mission runners will not shoot at a Hurricane. Mission runners WILL shoot at small weak frigates, precisely because they don't feel threatened by them.

Old school baiting required you return to station after drawing fire. Unfortunately, this doesn't work because the Mission Runner will simply dock up if they have two braincells to rub together.

Got it now?

Why does ship swapping in space need a nerf? The only mission bears getting killed are aggressive ones looking for an easy kill against a frigate.

"Lots of ways to kill Mission Runners?"
What, join their corp and gank from within? (doesn't work on NPCs, and you can be instakicked in space now)
Suicide gank? Sure, but its expensive, but requires multiple Battleships - and not all targets are worth it.
Wardecs? A joke - easily evaded, corp dropping, alliance hopping, etc...

What other methods are you talking about? Oh wait, there aren't any others, you are just talking out your rear blowhole.






Boris Ginnungagap
Doomheim
#104 - 2011-12-08 06:54:05 UTC
Pandorath wrote:
...
Grow some balls.
BringerMC
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#105 - 2011-12-08 07:44:38 UTC
Well; the ninja tears a tasty in this thread.

I will say straight out though that the person that said 90% of players are carebears and wanted this fix; well yea if you are a business do you cater to the 1% of Ninjas or your majority of players? That answer is very simple. It is also true for real life. The majority will get what they want and be supported; not the minority.

People can whine that CCP is snuggling up to carebears and the likes but they are the majority players so why not. Now I do agree that using the Orca in the way it was being used in Highsec was kind of on the broke side. I say personally make it so the Orca can only haul Mining Ships in its SMA and it solves the issue all around. Also it wasnt just Ninjas using it in that way. Some corps running HISEC wardecs would keep a neut orca on station with there ships and bait WT out with a small ship and swap into a bigger ship from the Orca to kill them. People should not be able to hide combat power like that and insta hop into it. Now before people mention log off traps or the likes those are not instant and require a bit more planning.

Also for people complaining of the Corp Hanger on the Orca well maybe it is an unscanabble hold with a 0% drop but I bet you CCP is probably working on that issue.

Join **The Ghost Division **Today! Because Pac-man ghosts driving Panzers can't be beat.

Maggeridon Thoraz
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#106 - 2011-12-08 08:21:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Maggeridon Thoraz
BringerMC wrote:
Well; the ninja tears a tasty in this thread.



Also for people complaining of the Corp Hanger on the Orca well maybe it is an unscanabble hold with a 0% drop but I bet you CCP is probably working on that issue.


If that happens i think a lot of peopel will quit. it will make relocation of ships even more a nightmare. i like to relocate my valuable ships unscannabale and not one by one taking over 30 jumps...
even smaller ships in and not valuable are transported easier in an orca around...


and further more it would make hisec imho the most dangerous space while null sec the safest with all the local intel channels and guards...
Marchland
State War Academy
Caldari State
#107 - 2011-12-08 13:29:05 UTC
Ulstan wrote:
Quote:
TLDR; I can understand preventing players from removing ships from combat via Orca. I don't understand why it should be made stupidly difficult/risky to bring a NEW ship into combat. After all - the new ship is now ALSO committed to the battle.
Fix the 'BOARD SHIP' function as detailed above.


Quote:
Forcing players to disengage, dockup in order to switch ships - is kind of weaksauce when the whole point of the Orca having an SM bay in the first place is for in-space fitting and ship swapping.


Yes, it is for IN SPACE fitting and ship swapping. It is not for IN COMBAT fitting and ship swapping. The entire point of EVE revolves around you planning out a ship and fitting and then being restricted to that ship/fitting for the ensuing combat. Asking to be able to swap fits/ship on the fly because you made a dumb decision is game breakingly bad, IMO.


What you've said here is that a mechanic that has worked for years in low sec, is not applicable in high sec, because the targets are losing more ISK and QQing harder about it? And again, like I said, this is one thread about the stealth nerf; carebears don't cry on forums, they just cost CCP money by quitting and petition spam because they lost their bling-boat, so CCP is pretty much sucking their balls making this change, since it doesn't affect any aspect of the same mechanic in low sec. This change does NOT affect Orca or carrier in low-sec, thus: bullshit.

This change is to the high-sec operating SMA, but not to the low sec, thus: bullshit.

Cynos can only be opened in low sec, that's a mechanic. SMA's allow you to switch ships, period.

SMA's allow ship switching in low sec, but NOT high sec, in combat, with the change.

Do you see what I'm saying here? They took out a mechanic that SHIP MAINTENANCE ARRAYS, not the ******* Orca, use, for the sole purpose of satisfying high-sec pussybears. This has been done for years in carriers: dying on the station? Undock carrier and swap to whatever you want, and it still works.

This is a nerf to NINJA's ONLY, because who else would be in combat trying to swap ships in high sec? You can still do it in a carrier if you're playing jack-ass on a station to get out of combat instantly, but you CAN'T do the same thing in high sec, because those we're preying on "waahhh I didn't know he could do that! BAWWWWWWW I lost my billion ISK boat because I thought I could shoot whoever who steals from me without consequence!"
Marchland
State War Academy
Caldari State
#108 - 2011-12-08 13:30:58 UTC
Maggeridon Thoraz wrote:
BringerMC wrote:
Well; the ninja tears a tasty in this thread.



Also for people complaining of the Corp Hanger on the Orca well maybe it is an unscanabble hold with a 0% drop but I bet you CCP is probably working on that issue.


If that happens i think a lot of peopel will quit. it will make relocation of ships even more a nightmare. i like to relocate my valuable ships unscannabale and not one by one taking over 30 jumps...
even smaller ships in and not valuable are transported easier in an orca around...


and further more it would make hisec imho the most dangerous space while null sec the safest with all the local intel channels and guards...


LULZ. People like you are the reason for changes like this. You think a lot of people will quit if the Orca becomes scannable, but "BAWW HTFU FAGZ, lolpwned ninjas!" for using another aspect of the Orca. GG Whiteknights.
Andrea Griffin
#109 - 2011-12-08 13:50:02 UTC
Wouldn't a better solution be to transfer aggression to the Orca when someone with aggression uses the SMA to change ships? Then the Orca becomes a target, resulting in more explosions. This has been a solution for SMA "abuse" for a long while now and I think it had popular support.

Eve is supposed to be about providing consequences, not outright preventing you from doing something. SMAs are there to swap ships around, so let people swap them around. Just have the consequence of aggression as well.
Ayianapa
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#110 - 2011-12-08 13:58:39 UTC
A question for people upset about the change.

Would you be in favor of ships having a second load out fitted that can be changed instantly?

for instance, bait pve geddon turns in to plated face melter, that would be ok yes?
Zenedia
Doomheim
#111 - 2011-12-08 14:21:14 UTC
ITT: alliance whose purpose is "tears extraction" is boohooing like a little ***** with a skinned knee over a mechanic change. HTFU like everyone else said.
Arrs Grazznic
Poena Executive Solutions
#112 - 2011-12-08 17:04:53 UTC
Marchland wrote:
they changed the way a high-sec SMA works but didn't change the same mechanic in low-sec and then didn't say a ******* thing about it in the patch notes.

Probably because CCP considered it an exploit -- it has been a very long time since they have detailed 'exploit' fixes in the patch notes.
Herr Wilkus
Aggressive Salvage Services LLC
#113 - 2011-12-08 17:35:05 UTC
People who are saying it is an 'exploit' are full of crap.

Using "exploits" gets you banned/suspended and victims of exploits get their ships reimbursed.

No salvagers have been banned for swapping ships, and its been well known and used extensively for years now.

Examples of exploits - Escaping Concord via Black Op Jump Drive; monkeysphere's delayed local technique.

Thus, a) people claiming it is ''fixing an exploit' are full of crap.

b) justifying the undocumented 'stealth patch' is crap, because this never was an exploit.

Something changed recently, and it certainly involved Incursions and Carebear BAWWWWWWWWWW.

Amaya Blaze
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#114 - 2011-12-08 17:46:09 UTC
Marchland wrote:
Do you see what I'm saying here?


Yes, yes I do. Criminals that have spent years using pay to win, multiboxing to run at least 2 clients in order to use a borderline game mechanics abuse to deliver ridiculously overwhelming force against someone who had the audacity to take umbrage against someone STEALING from them are crying because the mechanics were changed and now include a bit more risk.

Quote:
They took out a mechanic that SHIP MAINTENANCE ARRAYS, not the ******* Orca, use, for the sole purpose of satisfying high-sec pussybears.


And the griefers crying about it now are up in arms because their lifestyle of pay to win so called PvP is now a little bit harder. Cry MOAR.

Quote:
This is a nerf to NINJA's ONLY, because who else would be in combat trying to swap ships in high sec? You can still do it in a carrier . . .


In low/null sec, people expect, or learn to expect, things like station games, gate camps, blobs, bubble walls, stealth bombing and other forms of jackassery that make up PvP on the lawless frontier. In high security areas, not so much. For a real world example, in some parts of the world, you can take a rifle, go out and hide somewhere and shoot people. It sucks, people die, others say too bad they didn't run faster, sucks to be you and life goes on. In Washington DC it prompted curfews, a massive police, national guard and intelligence agency deployment, a manhunt and finally catching the pair.


Quote:
. . . but you CAN'T do the same thing in high sec, because those we're preying on "waahhh I didn't know he could do that! BAWWWWWWW I lost my billion ISK boat because I thought I could shoot whoever who steals from me without consequence!"


This should be something more like:

Quote:
. . . BAWWWWWWWWWW, I lost my billion ISK risk free gravy train because my victims got tired of me using pay to win and a borderline game exploit to win my so called PvP after stealing from them in the first place.


Welcome to real life. Real thieves don't steal from the same victims over and over, don't steal too much in one small area and don't publicize the theft to gloat over the victim's loss. Your gravy train has left the station, adapt, quit your griefing ways or grow a pair and go out to low/null sec and learn real PvP. What you are doing is as much PvP as shooting ducks in a barrel is hunting. You are not stealing for cash, you are out to cause mental grief for others by using pay to win and a borderline mechanics abuse tactic. Any commentary to the contrary is simply a large pile of cow manure.

Time to butch up sally and stop crying like a little girl that skinned her knee while getting her lunch money stolen and adapt or grow up and move on. The U.S. Marines have a wonderful saying “Improvise, Adapt, Overcome.” PI gets taxed, guess what, improvise, adapt, overcome, dramiel gets nerfed, improvise, adapt, overcome, ships get rebalanced, improvise, adapt, overcome, see the theme yet?

Or, you can just shut up and quit.

OH, and can you explain how you can justify that you are "helping Eve"? Someone posted that inane piece of drivel and I was curious to the chain of logic behind it.
Maggeridon Thoraz
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#115 - 2011-12-08 21:05:39 UTC
Marchland wrote:
Ulstan wrote:
Quote:
TLDR; I can understand preventing players from removing ships from combat via Orca. I don't understand why it should be made stupidly difficult/risky to bring a NEW ship into combat. After all - the new ship is now ALSO committed to the battle.
Fix the 'BOARD SHIP' function as detailed above.


[quote]Forcing players to disengage, dockup in order to switch ships - is kind of weaksauce when the whole point of the Orca having an SM bay in the first place is for in-space fitting and ship swapping.



This is a nerf to NINJA's ONLY, because who else would be in combat trying to swap ships in high sec? You can still do it in a carrier if you're playing jack-ass on a station to get out of combat instantly, but you CAN'T do the same thing in high sec, because those we're preying on "waahhh I didn't know he could do that! BAWWWWWWW I lost my billion ISK boat because I thought I could shoot whoever who steals from me without consequence!"



dont get me worng, i am fully on you side and hate this nerf like you do.. when i wanted to start with one of my alt a ninja carrier i trained anotehr one for orca and one day before i could step into it i was hit by the first nerf... and i dont like it that sma behave different in hisec then low or null.

result is actually that ccp has killed the profession of the ninjas, somehow :-(
Marchland
State War Academy
Caldari State
#116 - 2011-12-08 22:12:57 UTC
Amaya Blaze wrote:
Marchland wrote:
Do you see what I'm saying here?


Yes, yes I do. Criminals that have spent years using pay to win, multiboxing to run at least 2 clients in order to use a borderline game mechanics abuse to deliver ridiculously overwhelming force against someone who had the audacity to take umbrage against someone STEALING from them are crying because the mechanics were changed and now include a bit more risk.

Quote:
This is a nerf to NINJA's ONLY, because who else would be in combat trying to swap ships in high sec? You can still do it in a carrier . . .


In low/null sec, people expect, or learn to expect, things like station games, gate camps, blobs, bubble walls, stealth bombing and other forms of jackassery that make up PvP on the lawless frontier. In high security areas, not so much. For a real world example, in some parts of the world, you can take a rifle, go out and hide somewhere and shoot people. It sucks, people die, others say too bad they didn't run faster, sucks to be you and life goes on. In Washington DC it prompted curfews, a massive police, national guard and intelligence agency deployment, a manhunt and finally catching the pair.

Welcome to real life. Real thieves don't steal from the same victims over and over, don't steal too much in one small area and don't publicize the theft to gloat over the victim's loss. Your gravy train has left the station, adapt, quit your griefing ways or grow a pair and go out to low/null sec and learn real PvP. What you are doing is as much PvP as shooting ducks in a barrel is hunting. You are not stealing for cash, you are out to cause mental grief for others by using pay to win and a borderline mechanics abuse tactic. Any commentary to the contrary is simply a large pile of cow manure.

OH, and can you explain how you can justify that you are "helping Eve"? Someone posted that inane piece of drivel and I was curious to the chain of logic behind it.


People keep using that word "exploit", I do not think it means what you think it means. As was mentioned, exloits are thing people get reimbursed for.

Examples of exploits - Escaping Concord via Black Op Jump Drive; monkeysphere's delayed local technique.

Thus, a) people claiming it is ''fixing an exploit' are full of crap.

b) justifying the undocumented 'stealth patch' is crap, because this never was an exploit.

Look up Pay-to-win while you're at it; if anyone is pay-to-winning is mission runners who turned on the level 4 faucet on 4 account and are botting missions 24 hours a day. Just because I make good use of the alt's I did make is not paying to win.

Also LOL: "Welcome to real life. Real thieves..."
Internet spaceships = real life amirite?

Look, more risk, like flagging the Orca as aggressed is fine but breaking the way the SMA worked to satisfy only mission runners is not cool or cute. Also, besides costing people one really expensive mistake, I don't agree that ninja's "help" EVE Online; I do this one or 2 times a month to pay for the "real" PVP I actually do know how to do.

Quote:
You are not stealing for cash, you are out to cause mental grief for others by using pay to win and a borderline mechanics abuse tactic. Any commentary to the contrary is simply a large pile of cow manure.


Wrong. Problem with low/null sec pvp is there is no money in it. By it's design, if everyone goes there looking to fight, no one is going to risk losing expensive ****. Trust you me, I have been -10 for 3 years and raised my sec for the sole purpose of doing this, then going back to low sec with my accounts paid for by ninjaing. I don't want people to quit, au contraire, the more people who keep running missions or join the game to do so, the more opportunity I have to make ISK from their ships.

Quote:
In low/null sec, people expect, or learn to expect, things like station games, gate camps, blobs, bubble walls, stealth bombing and other forms of jackassery that make up PvP on the lawless frontier. In high security areas, not so much.


Again with the real life examples haha. Because they don't know that's how the world works, since we ALL know "nowhere is safe in EVE Online" and we ARE teaching them that, we should be punished? Sure.
Mimiru Minahiro
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#117 - 2011-12-09 01:10:48 UTC
Herr Wilkus wrote:
Something changed recently, and it certainly involved Incursions and Carebear BAWWWWWWWWWW.


With no change-

Carebear: BAWWWWWWW.
Ganker: LOLOLOLOLOL


With current change-

Ganker: BAWWWWWWWW.
Carebear: LOLOLOLOLOL




My wife is a 6th grade math teacher and after a hard day of prepubecent drama all she ever says is "At least they are not as bad as those kids on your video game!". Personally, I feel bad for CCP being forced to police this crap.
m0cking bird
Doomheim
#118 - 2011-12-09 01:27:43 UTC
I recently lost a rookie ships with 2 faction gryos in **** cargo bay, because of a suicide Thrasher. High security space is suppose to be safe. So, yeah! I'm all for suicide gankers being nerfed and pretty much all war and aggression mechanics in high security space. If you want to pvp. Go to low sec, which would be a good boost to low security space or null sec.

I have been grief and I am angry, but I never liked High sec losers anyway. I'd also like high security space to be shrunk in size significantly. Increasing the size of low sec and making high sec islands that means a pilot in cal space has to go threw cal low sec and gal low sec to reach gal high sec.

AGAIN. I WOULD LIKE ALL HIGH SEC AGGRESSION TAKEN OUT OF THE GAME entirely. No can flipping no 1 v 1's no weapon activation outside of plex's missions and even then no ability to activate anything that does damage to another player in high sec.
Liou Pin
Doomheim
#119 - 2011-12-09 08:37:49 UTC
m0cking bird wrote:
AGAIN. I WOULD LIKE ALL HIGH SEC AGGRESSION TAKEN OUT OF THE GAME entirely. No can flipping no 1 v 1's no weapon activation outside of plex's missions and even then no ability to activate anything that does damage to another player in high sec.


LOL... this is the best post with the best posting name. Mocking hyper carebears. Love it. Lol
Beliar Gray
I'm quitting Eve PV Rock I want to talk with you
#120 - 2011-12-09 17:43:05 UTC
m0cking bird wrote:

AGAIN. I WOULD LIKE ALL HIGH SEC AGGRESSION TAKEN OUT OF THE GAME entirely. No can flipping no 1 v 1's no weapon activation outside of plex's missions and even then no ability to activate anything that does damage to another player in high sec.


That post made me *** buckets, thats exactly how bears think, game without danger best game, no worries about ships etc, that would be the best. /sarc