These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Proteus - January] Recon ships

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron
The Red Circle Inc.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#801 - 2014-12-19 12:34:32 UTC
Jori McKie wrote:
Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron wrote:
I confess to being somewhat concerned about DScan immunity, but I don't think it quite deserves the vitriol it's getting. Is it really that different, now, to a Covert Recon with their cloaks? Ok, you won't get the brief window to DScan one coming through a wormhole / taking an acceleration gate or whatever, but that's offset by the early warning you'll get where EvE gives a massive boom and you see the ship decelerating from warp. Either way, you have the oppurtunity to leave if you're aligned. If you're not, your loss is your fault.

In PvP, they're less effective than cloaks, surely. All you have to do is get your scout to warp to the grid and you find out whether there's combat recons there. That's much more secure intel than if they were the now quite tanky and invisible covert recons.

This change ain't worth the vitriol it's getting. Cloaky force multipliers in the form of T3s and covert recons have not broken the game, this won't either.

Have you seen a cloak T3 fit, like you use in Blops? It is gimped and rightly so, T3 Recons are at least 2.5 times more expansive than Recons (yes T3 have better tank) and you risk to lose a skill.
Force Recons with cloak are gimped and rightly so compared to full tank and full utility Combat Recon. It is simple why should i use a gimped cloak Recon when i can use a Recon with better tank and same utility including being cloaked until probes.


Cloaky T3s are gimped compared to normal T3s, but they are still powerful ships.

Force Recons with a cloak are not that badly gimped, especially with their new tanking levels. And the cloak, obviously, adds the extra advantage of invisibility on grid as well, which seems worth the lower performance otherwise.

Daneel Trevize wrote:
No I don't gamble upon the statisically bad chance that they don't have recons with them, in lowsec. And those odds will of course hugely change if this OP change is available to people.
You would dscan and either see the cloaky recon being not cloaked; or you warp in and have 6+ seconds to reposition/warp away again.

In this proposed world the recons will be dscanning you coming close and ready to tackle you as soon as you land/break landing invulnerability. You will not get to overheated-mwd away, or warp off if fitted for ~5sec agility. Warping anywhere not at 0km to a gate/station would be a total gamble. How then do you solo in anything not mostly covered by plat insurance? In a manner that is skill-based rather than a pure crapshoot dice roll every single jump and/or warp, that is.


Why will it change though? If people don't bring stealthy recons now, why are they suddenly going to bring stealthy recons once this change goes through.

Obviously if you warp a combat ship to a grid that's got a recon on it, you're quite likely to be tackled. That same principle applies for the cloaky recons too though; so what's the difference?

If you see someone on local, but not on DScan, you are ALWAYS taking a risk that they are cloaked up somewhere you want to be. That applies right now, it is not going to be a new thing when this DScan immunity comes in.
Komodo Askold
Strategic Exploration and Development Corp
Silent Company
#802 - 2014-12-19 12:34:57 UTC
l0rd carlos wrote:
Komodo Askold wrote:


Even if you fit your Lachesis that way, that doesn't instantly mean he's pointed and dead. Even when the Lachesis bonused point range (I think it might need to be looked at), if your target did his homework he won't be sitting at the warp-in for you to land on him; he will be several kilometers away, so you'll have to use your MWD for a few seconds to catch him. Since you're warping in uncloaked, if he's aware (as he should), he will see you while decelerating from your warp: enough for him to try to warp away, especially if he's already aligned (as he should try to be). Most site-running ships can do that (the larger ones, such as battleships, should already be taking in account their own slowness and plan accordingly),


Point and web range is 93km.
You want to be in damage range to kill rats.

Lets take an angel 5/10 lowsec DED site example. In the last pocket you need to kill a structure while doging a bunch of npcs. It's will not be possible to kill that from 100km away.

I have run a bunch of sites in lowsec with PvP ships, right now you see recons declack while using the accerlation gate. With multiple pockets you have anough time to position yourself or run away. "It's an Arazu and rapier? I might be able to kill that before the main flet gets here. Oh they got an Oneiros to help them == armor tank == damps == better run!"

Now you have 10 seconds between notice and before you get pointed, webbed and damped. That means I will try to run == less pvp for both parties.

Oh, unless you use an 0 SP alt to watch the first gate! WHAT A THRILLING GAME MECHANIC! It just forces you to use more alts .. that do nothing but watch overview. Yay.
Fair point with the Lachesis' point/web range; it does is scary. You could always try to get in the opposite side of the site, but that's not exactly easy when rats are shooting.

On the other hand, Mordu's Legion ships can point you from comparable ranges too, and they're not cloaky either, but can be found with D-Scan. Honestly, I think the problem there would not be the D-Scan inmunity of Combat Recons, but rather the Lachesis' own attributes and bonuses. Being webbed from 93 km away is not that bad if all you want to do is warp away (in fact it helps aligning), but being pointed is another matter. The Mordu's Legion ships can do that but are not D-Scan inmune.

Perhaps the Lachesis should get its point range bonus reduced to compensate?
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#803 - 2014-12-19 12:35:23 UTC
Flyinghotpocket wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Flyinghotpocket wrote:
why the literal **** isnt the curse getting a 5th low? do you still want shield tanking curses? i mean thats totaly un amarr.


I know right! Thats like minmatar having to armor tank a muninn... oh? That exists.. probably deal with it like minny pilots do. You at least have wtfpwn neuts going for you.

Well look on the brightside, at least your kin and explo resists will be really high.

deal with what? how minni pilots can change tanks on a whim and amarr cant? ok no thanks i dont want a shield curse i want a god dam armor curse. 4 lows on a punisher is one thing but on a ******* CRUISER designed to be armor tanked is another. especially when your always forced to have a stupid reactor control on it.


Um.. what? Did you even look at muninn slot layout? The only way to shield tank it is without a point. Its shoehorned into the same bad slot layout as most amarr ships. Except it has glaring kinetic/explo holes. So your curse will be the same, just for shield. You'll have glaring EM and thermal holes, but your kin and explo resists will be baller. So again, deal with it.

Ghaustyl Kathix wrote:
T2 cruisers aren't allowed in medium complexes and lower, so this change shouldn't affect FW much.


Yes. Yes they are allowed into a medium plex. I bring my muninn and vagabond into them all the time. I don't see recon's being any different. Not that i'm really worried about this change, just a matter of comparing local to d-scan.


Lelob wrote:
Here's a good solution. Make the curse, AS AN AMARR SHIP, capable of armour tanking. Man wouldn't that be novel.


I'm sure they'll get right on that, as soon as they make the muninn a shield ship. Minmatar are in the same position, and we've managed just fine. Course, theres a lot more wrong with the muninn than the curse.

Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS

Make the Muninn great again!
Daneel Trevize
Give my 11percent back
#804 - 2014-12-19 12:40:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Daneel Trevize
Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron wrote:
Daneel Trevize wrote:
No I don't gamble upon the statisically bad chance that they don't have recons with them, in lowsec. And those odds will of course hugely change if this OP change is available to people.
You would dscan and either see the cloaky recon being not cloaked; or you warp in and have 6+ seconds to reposition/warp away again.

In this proposed world the recons will be dscanning you coming close and ready to tackle you as soon as you land/break landing invulnerability. You will not get to overheated-mwd away, or warp off if fitted for ~5sec agility. Warping anywhere not at 0km to a gate/station would be a total gamble. How then do you solo in anything not mostly covered by plat insurance? In a manner that is skill-based rather than a pure crapshoot dice roll every single jump and/or warp, that is.


Why will it change though? If people don't bring stealthy recons now, why are they suddenly going to bring stealthy recons once this change goes through.

Obviously if you warp a combat ship to a grid that's got a recon on it, you're quite likely to be tackled. That same principle applies for the cloaky recons too though; so what's the difference?

If you see someone on local, but not on DScan, you are ALWAYS taking a risk that they are cloaked up somewhere you want to be. That applies right now, it is not going to be a new thing when this DScan immunity comes in.
You seem to be deliberately ignoring the very answers I've already stated. Do you not see the difference between being able to escape if you land at ~70km but can warp your ship in <6 seconds, and being tackled in ~2 seconds as soon as you try? Do you not see that this utterly huge increase in non-cloaky recon potency would increase the number of people flying these ships??

And that it ruins any attempt at skillful timing of a longer-running solo fight, where you're trying to not only handle what's on grid but also assess what you see coming in ~14AU?
Niart Gunn
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#805 - 2014-12-19 12:40:42 UTC
I'm still wondering about this: Dscan immunity makes Combat Recons encroach on the role of Force Recons. If the purpose of this treat is to make them stand out as a unique ship class, how is giving them half a Covert Ops cloak for free working towards achieving this goal? Just because that line of text has never been used doesn't make the effect actually unique. Fact is, it is very similar to Covert Ops cloaking, and actually better in some cases, like the fact that there are no windows in which you're visible or no locking delay when setting up a trap. Especially for a ship like the Pilgrim there will be very little reason to use it, as long as the Curse does the job so much better while being almost as hidden. There is a case for this for all other races' recons too, the ability is so similar to Covert Ops cloaking that unless you absolutely need to be invisible on grid, there is very little reason to use the Force Recons (except maybe the Arazu for lowslots alone), as they are not only short one slot on their Combat counterpart, but also have to fit a cloak and thereby sacrifice a high, whereas Combat Recons get dscan immunity for free.

Also, the situations this treat caters to are mostly blobbing and ganking, while hurting the small guy the most. I know, there has been a long tradition in eve for this anyways, but does it really need to be continued? Regardless of similar things already being possible with cloaks (that have their drawbacks and actually use up a slot), is it really necessary to introduce yet another mechanic that reinforces camping of different places of interest, and make it even more important to have alts while being largely useless to a roaming gang? At the end of the day I think this just doesn't add any valuable gameplay over what we already have, while making things more tedious for people who can spare less numbers for scouts.

If you want to obscure information from players, it would be much better to either introduce sort of a Mobile Scan Inhibitor in ship form that remains on scan itself, or better yet, start reworking the entire intel gathering in eve towards a system that is more dependent on ship signatures and sensor strengths, where information becomes more detailed the closer something is, or the more narrow your scan angle becomes. A thorough overhaul in this kind of fashion would be much better than an arbitrary gimmick like dscan immunity for 4 ships in the game.

CCP Rise wrote:
Take the example given somewhere in this thread of a low sec camp with 2 Vexors and 2 Rooks. Before these changes, the gang considering fighting them never would because they know they can't deal with the Rooks. After, they won't see them and so they will probably engage. That's more fights because people are risk averse.


Nice logic. So that would mean the removal of local would result in more fights, since the lack of local means the gang considering engaging something never knows that they can't deal with what they can't see, like it's the case in wormholes, right? Because people do not want to take extra risks is exactly why they will work very hard to get all the information possible, now involving getting on-grid eyes or combat probes as well, both of which might scare your potential target away too. Imagine the gang considering engaging the two Vexors seeing that there are 4 members of the corp they want to fight in local, not only will this slow everything down, because that gang now has to get a scout on grid with or probing the Vexors, but also will likely no fight happen because either there are the two Rooks or the Vexors will run because they get scouted.
Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#806 - 2014-12-19 12:43:09 UTC
Syzygium wrote:
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:
2. This only applies to medium FW plexes and PVE acceleration gates. Just go fight somewhere else, space is big.

3. Not much difference from having the calvary cloaked or >14 AU away

And here is why you are soooo wrong.

I am not limited to medium FW plexes, I an set up this trap at ANY celestial where people can warp to 0-100. If there is an acceleration gate that wont let me go in, I simply wait BEFORE that gate at 50km. Same goes for Planets, Belts, Moons, Star. Whoever is warping there will land more or less 50km within my ganksquads range and is simply *dead*. And if other Recons are incoming, my Squad is in Warp before they have a lock.

So yes, it is a HUGE difference in reaction time window for the incoming pilots between invisible recons and "cavalry 14 AU out". A HUGE one.

If you warp @10 to an accel gate, you can slide in while remaining invulnerable to anything on-grid. If they can't follow you in, you're fine. Just spam 'activate' the gate while exiting warp.

Space is 3d, if you warp @100 to a celestial from an 'odd' angle you're very likely to land well over 50km away from anything on-grid, potentially up to 200km away.

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#807 - 2014-12-19 12:44:37 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Just finished reading everything that was posted over night. Here's what I can update with at the moment:

  • Biggest concern at the moment is the added EHP. Making recons a more realistic fleet option next to T3 cruisers is good, making them too tanky in smaller situations where their ewar already gives them a lot of damage evasion may be too much. Not sure if change is needed but will keep looking at this and update again asap.

  • Dscan immunity is staying. We understand a lot of the concerns raised, but for most of them you guys are doing a great job making strong counter-arguments and I think it will be very interesting to see how this mechanic plays out on TQ. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that.

  • The Pilgrim. Opinions seem mixed, gaining neut range is obviously nice but many of you still feel that giving up neut strength is too harsh, or that some other added power is needed (more damage for instance). Will get back to you on this as soon as possible but it's possible that we will make adjustments.

  • RLML for Rook. Sure. Consider it done.

  • More low slots for Lachesis. Not sure yet on this one, will talk it over here and see what we can do.

    • Hope that answers some questions. I'm sure many of you would rather have more explanation for the dscan immunity change so I'll try to get that post together as soon as I can.

    Thanks for all the feedback.


    I think keeping t2 resists is good. Could be alil strong, but i'm willing to try it. Can always be changed later. Also, for D-scan immunity, glad you're sticking with it.

    Could you please consider huginn PG, it looks to be meant for arty, but you can't fit the arty that has good range on it. Leaving you with 650's and anemic dps, and still probably needing PG rig or RCU. Or, maybe reducing artillery PG requirements to make them viable for minny long range? Since a/c's are not going to reach 20-40km web ranges. And.. why would i want to brawl with a huginn with long webs?

    Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS

    Make the Muninn great again!
    Dracvlad
    Taishi Combine
    Astral Alliance
    #808 - 2014-12-19 12:46:01 UTC
    CCP Rise wrote:
    Just finished reading everything that was posted over night. Here's what I can update with at the moment:

  • Dscan immunity is staying. We understand a lot of the concerns raised, but for most of them you guys are doing a great job making strong counter-arguments and I think it will be very interesting to see how this mechanic plays out on TQ. I want to put together a lengthier post soon with more explanation for this mechanic and why we feel comfortable with it, but you will have to wait a bit longer for that.



    • What strong counter arguments, they are all chaff type HTFU cheer-leading or weak arguments, I was enticed back by the jump changes and the slight tilt towards role playing, but the D-scan immunity makes it certain death. I am not sure I will wait for your explanation before hitting the de-sub button, in fact damn it I am de-subbing now and I will put this as my reason. Its ill thought out and makes it even easier for the easy gank crowd, WTF are you doing!

    When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

    Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
    Serendipity Lost
    Repo Industries
    #809 - 2014-12-19 12:46:49 UTC
    CCP Rise - the one explanation I would like from you is why D-scan immunity for recons is better than LOCAL IMMUNITY for recons.
    Daneel Trevize
    Give my 11percent back
    #810 - 2014-12-19 12:47:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Daneel Trevize
    Gully Alex Foyle wrote:
    Space is 3d, if you warp @100 to a celestial from an 'odd' angle you're very likely to land well over 50km away from anything on-grid, potentially up to 200km away.
    Almost all Eve systems are limited to being designed on a 2D plane. Statisically most warp angles will come from the centre of the system, almost none offer you even 90degrees deviation, almost certainly not for the outer half of the celestials count.

    So now you want to start bouncing moons to generate odd angles. Yet another pressure to fly something that can align fast and deal with frigs, because you're going to have to deal with POS and tacklers following you as you spend more time lumbering about at locations with no 'out' choice.
    Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron
    The Red Circle Inc.
    Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
    #811 - 2014-12-19 12:47:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron
    Daneel Trevize wrote:
    You seem to be deliberately ignoring the very answers I've already stated. Do you not see the difference between being able to escape if you land at ~70km but can warp your ship in <6 seconds, and being tackled in ~2 seconds as soon as you try? Do you not see that this utterly huge increase in non-cloaky recon potency would increase the number of people flying these ships??

    And that it ruins any attempt at skillful timing of a longer-running solo fight, where you're trying to not only handle what's on grid but also assess what you see coming in ~14AU?


    Obviously I'm not deliberately ignoring anything. It just doesn't make sense to me.

    In regards to your point; I see the difference there, but I don't follow how you're arriving at the conclusion that that scenario will happen. How is the situation different between landing on grid with a dscan immune Lachesis and a cloaky Arazu? I really don't see it at all. In both case, the ship can see you coming in warp, and you can't see it before you land. They both point the same distance, and in basically the same time. So why is it better to have this new Lachesis than it is to currently have a cloaky Arazu?

    Your second point, again, is completely the same as the current situation. You can't see cloaky ships currently coming in either, so why is it different that you can't see the new dscan immune ships coming in when they perform basically the same function.
    Jhaelee de'Auvrie
    Amarrian Vengeance
    Ragequit Cancel Sub
    #812 - 2014-12-19 12:48:58 UTC
    Over all the stat adjustment on the Recons seems like a good idea. Giving the non-cloaking ones more durability should hopefully see increased usage in comparison to how it is now. The major thing that got my attention was the idea of Recons not showing up on D-Scan. That seems crazy.

    The directional scanner is one of the fundamental mechanics in the game. It is probably the single most useful tool in EVE when it comes to in-space decision making. Messing with core decision making dynamics will have drastic effects. Even if it is just a single class of ships, damaging players trust in that will lead to more avoidance of conflict than it will enjoyable content.

    Considering the advantage (and thus reason for taking a high slot/fittings) of a cloaking device is to avoid detection. Be it from the overview, probes, or the directional scanner. Giving that advantage to Recons for free negates the importance of having normal detection avoidance fitted on ships. Suddenly you have stealth ships with no downside (no slot loss, no scan res loss, nothing).

    Looking at the Mobile Scan Inhibitor as an example, if this kind of change is going to go forward, at how things should be done without providing no possible chance of detection. Instead of just not having the Recon ship show up at all, have it show up as a non-informative “Recon Cruiser” (instead of Curse/Falcon/Rapier/whatever). This would still provide that all important information that there are Recon ships there, just not specifically which ones. This would also be in line with the Mobile Scan Inhibitor, which itself shows up on scan telling the detector that something might be there.
    Dullmeyr Prodomo
    Gnartz
    #813 - 2014-12-19 12:50:22 UTC
    CCP Rise wrote:

    Dscan immunity is staying.


    I bet you did not had to read all the posts in this thread to make this "decision". :p

    o/
    Daneel Trevize
    Give my 11percent back
    #814 - 2014-12-19 12:51:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Daneel Trevize
    Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron wrote:
    How is the situation different between landing on grid with a dscan immune Lachesis and a cloaky Arazu? I really don't see it at all. In both case, the ship can see you coming in warp, and you can't see it before you land. They both point the same distance, and in basically the same time. So why is it better to have this new Lachesis than it is to currently have a cloaky Arazu?

    Your second point, again, is completely the same as the current situation. You can't see cloaky ships currently coming in either, so why is it different that you can't see the new dscan immune ships coming in when they perform basically the same function.

    Because the lach won't have to be on the ball and make the player action of decloaking sufficiently in time to have cleared their decloak delay. The lazy lach ****** can just see you land and go 'oh, something to tackle' and ruin your day. They won't be caught out trigging their decloak from their dscan assessment just to find you'd warped to a nearby offgrid tactical exactly to provoke that response in order to test for awake recon pilots!

    It's promoting brain-dead gameplay from those that already have the numbers advantage because they're risk-averse blobbers. In a game supposedly with a huge basis in risk:reward.
    Altayr555
    Enter Ice
    #815 - 2014-12-19 12:56:38 UTC
    -1 for a big enormous error^^
    Zappity
    New Eden Tank Testing Services
    #816 - 2014-12-19 12:58:29 UTC
    Gully Alex Foyle wrote:
    Just for the sake of discussion:

    1. Try Pirate's Little Helper. Awesome intel on carebears vs. pvpers (based on zkill stats), corp/alliance and affiliation, common EWAR/cap ship/cyno bait pilots, etc. It's super easy to use (just ctrl-a ctrl-c local). And come on, even on weekends there's rarely more than 20-30 or so in lowsec local...

    2. This only applies to medium FW plexes and PVE acceleration gates. Just go fight somewhere else, space is big.

    3. Not much difference from having the calvary cloaked or >14 AU away


    Not saying that you're flat wrong, but thankfully EVE PVP is complex enough that players will always find solutions to other players' tactics. That's part of the fun.

    Just saying you honestly can't be 100% (or even 90%) sure that this d-scan thing will be bad, instead of fun for all.

    Excellent post which pretty much sums it up for me. A typical solo system would see 5-10 in local. Copy into PLH will quickly identify the PvP toons and a quick rollover will show any with recent Combat Recon kills. You already do this when you enter system. If you identify a probable pilot, go to the Small or Novice, or go to the next system, or drop probes, or YOLO. Or hop in a Combat Recon and go hunting!

    Seriously, yes this will shake things up a bit. But it isn't the dire crisis some are predicting.

    I would LOVE to see a solid solo hunter ship get local immunity. Maybe the Stratios...

    Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
    Challus Mercer
    Viziam
    Amarr Empire
    #817 - 2014-12-19 12:58:42 UTC
    CCP Rise wrote:

  • Dscan immunity is staying.
    • Ok, if there is no sense to discuss about cancelling this feature, i would propose another approach to milder the negative effect of this on solo and small scale pvp. Nerf the scan res of combat recons so that their locking time would be equal to force recon with recalibration delay after decloaking. It wont have big impact on fleet fights but it will help smaller ships to escape this recon madness. I think it will help a lot with balancing this OP ability. Like this post if you agree!
    Kane Fenris
    NWP
    #818 - 2014-12-19 13:00:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Kane Fenris
    i feel like the target painter boni on the minmatar hulls are still pretty useless (esp on the huginn)
    cause i feel like you always want the web and dont want to use up your mids fitting both... and if i think youd fit 2x webs...
    gabrial13
    Republic Military School
    Minmatar Republic
    #819 - 2014-12-19 13:02:07 UTC
    Undetectable on directional scan, that is just stupid .
    Come on ccp , I know recons have lost popularity due
    to the t3's but this will make hunter killer recons
    unstoppable and way overpowered, the solution
    is to wait for the t3 rebalance and of course try and
    find some use for the pilgrim. This will just cause
    more problems than solutions, just my view of it
    Daneel Trevize
    Give my 11percent back
    #820 - 2014-12-19 13:02:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Daneel Trevize
    Challus Mercer wrote:
    CCP Rise wrote:

  • Dscan immunity is staying.
    • Ok, if there is no sense to discuss about cancelling this feature, i would propose another approach to milder the negative effect of this on solo and small scale pvp. Nerf the scan res of combat recons so that their locking time would be equal to force recon with recalibration delay after decloaking. It wont have big impact on fleet fights but it will help smaller ships to escape this recon madness. I think it will help a lot with balancing this OP ability. Like this post if you agree!
    Only if they're also made immune to RSBs.

    And it still ruins the solo or small gang players that have committed to a fight and want to react to dscan to time their leaving/repositioning.