These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Major Margret McMurphy
Hellios Prime Industrial Collective
Knights of the Clan
#941 - 2014-12-19 17:19:36 UTC
This non-detectable recon ships on dscan is nothing more than catering to the pvp player and is pure crap and should not be allowed. This change will make WH mining impossible and expensive.
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#942 - 2014-12-19 17:20:01 UTC
Ripard Teg wrote:
Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:
Director Blackflame wrote:
Never thought so many people would be terrified of Schrodinger's recon. I mean his proteus has been or not been lurking for quite some time.

Yeah, especially when Schrodinger's Falcon has been or has not been lurking around for ages.

You guys say that like that situation doesn't prevent fights. I assure you it does. I have heard the phrase "These guys always have Falcon alts" prevent a fight quite a lot.

That's because ECM has no counter play. How come no one ever decides not to fight due to "These guys always have Arazu/Pilgrim/Rapier alts" ??? Because all other types of EW has some degree of counter play. ECM is a broken light switch mechanic that needs to be banished from the game completely and replaced with something else. Something that does 'something' as often as the other EW but leaves room for counter play.
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#943 - 2014-12-19 17:21:24 UTC
Major Margret McMurphy wrote:
This non-detectable recon ships on dscan is nothing more than catering to the pvp player and is pure crap and should not be allowed. This change will make WH mining impossible and expensive.

Your alliance doesn't allow you to fly combat recons?
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#944 - 2014-12-19 17:22:08 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.


    EHP - more HP is fine, its the full T2 resists thats too much same as T3 in that respect it makes them too reppable and competes with HAC's too much as a result.. not every T2 needs T2 resists partial or full ..

    slot layouts are a big issue here , force recons being done a slot and effectively 3 after a cloak and cyno as role bonuses are for those .. please consider giving 1 extra highslot too all force recons so some semblance of dps is possible please.

    gallente are armour tankers same as amarr they must have 5 lowslots no exceptions..

    T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

    ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

    Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

    Tex Raynor
    Guardians of Asceticism
    #945 - 2014-12-19 17:22:11 UTC
    Major Margret McMurphy wrote:
    This non-detectable recon ships on dscan is nothing more than catering to the pvp player and is pure crap and should not be allowed. This change will make WH mining impossible and expensive.


    Right, let's just keep using my covert proteus which does more DPS
    Lugh Crow-Slave
    #946 - 2014-12-19 17:22:23 UTC
    Major Margret McMurphy wrote:
    This non-detectable recon ships on dscan is nothing more than catering to the pvp player and is pure crap and should not be allowed. This change will make WH mining impossible and expensive.



    they still show up on combat probs.. use them. the problem with WH mining is covert op cloaked ships can warp to the belts with 0 warning and yes this should be fixed but these will not change WH mining
    S'No Flake
    Native Freshfood
    Minmatar Republic
    #947 - 2014-12-19 17:23:57 UTC
    Skyler Hawk wrote:
    Kagura Nikon wrote:
    as several peopel pointed. Stratios can already do that.. and is barely used to do that.

    A stratios doesn't suck your cap dry from 37 km or point/web you at 100 km, though.


    But does a lot more DPS than any covert cloaky ships.
    Cloaky proteus can reach 500 DPS but a Stratios can put out more than that... much more.
    Lugh Crow-Slave
    #948 - 2014-12-19 17:24:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
    Harvey James wrote:


    EHP - more HP is fine, its the full T2 resists thats too much same as T3 in that respect it makes them too reppable and competes with HAC's too much as a result.. not every T2 needs T2 resists partial or full ..

    gallente are armour tankers same as amarr they must have 5 lowslots no exceptions..


    please re-read what you just posted you understand that not all T2s need T2 resists however you feel that all of the armor tankers need at least 5 lows
    Antillie Sa'Kan
    Imperial Shipment
    Amarr Empire
    #949 - 2014-12-19 17:24:45 UTC
    Karl Hobb wrote:
    And they use a module for it and (generally) have lock time penalties (circumvented in certain cases). Non-covert cloaks are balanced in that you cannot warp with them on. The big problem with the proposed combat recons is that they sacrifice nothing for what is effectively a cloak; maybe it's not equivalent to a cov ops but it is certainly comparable to a normal cloaking device.

    Don't get me wrong, I'll probably buy a Curse or two post Proteus, but I still feel like this change is a bit much.

    All covert ops cloak ships have utility high for the cloak so they don't really sacrifice fitting something else. They also usually have either a cloak CPU usage bonus or lots of CPU to start with so they don't sacrifice any fitting either.They do sacrifice targeting time though.

    Recons do sacrifice something, DPS. All recons do terrible DPS. They are great force multipliers though. Which is the point. I feel this change will bring an interesting amount of unpredictability to EVE.
    Altirius Saldiaro
    Doomheim
    #950 - 2014-12-19 17:24:46 UTC
    Mighty, Mighty Recon
    Second to none.
    Nou Mene
    Rattini Tribe
    Minmatar Fleet Alliance
    #951 - 2014-12-19 17:25:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Nou Mene
    dscan invul... OP

    ON while on sub-warp speed
    OFF during warp

    CR can dscan theirselves

    ?
    Antillie Sa'Kan
    Imperial Shipment
    Amarr Empire
    #952 - 2014-12-19 17:27:29 UTC
    Marlona Sky wrote:
    That's because ECM has no counter play. How come no one ever decides not to fight due to "These guys always have Arazu/Pilgrim/Rapier alts" ??? Because all other types of EW has some degree of counter play. ECM is a broken light switch mechanic that needs to be banished from the game completely and replaced with something else. Something that does 'something' as often as the other EW but leaves room for counter play.

    This indicates an issue with ECM, not DSCAN immunity.
    Aliventi
    Rattini Tribe
    Minmatar Fleet Alliance
    #953 - 2014-12-19 17:28:32 UTC
    CCP Rise wrote:
    Quote:

    I can tell you what will happen most likely:
    - Less fights because people are risk averse
    - A 2nd account with a Prober at all times will be must, not an option.


    I think this is a complex debate and I'm sure that none of us understand player behavior completely, but my experience is actually the opposite of what you're saying.

    Yes, people are risk averse, they want to make good decisions when they're taking risks and that often leads being conservative. That's exactly why I like this kind of mechanic. People want to do the fun thing and take more engagements, but when they have enough information to know that they aren't the favorite they shy away from fighting. However, when some information is obscured they become optimistic and take more risks. I've seen players so willing to make decisions that are likely too risky simply because they lack perfect information. Jumping into gate camps where positional information isn't guaranteed, engaging on stations with people docked, fighting in systems with more in local than can be accounted for, etc. These mechanics that obscure information give people the excuses needed to take risks. 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.

    The negative side for me is your other bullet point. Because people don't want to take unnecessary risk they will work very hard, sometimes doing something very boring or difficult, just to get at those last pieces of information. And they should. But we would want to avoid mechanics that obligate people to this kind of behavior too heavily without enough positive side to make the mechanic worthwhile.

    I would be more worried with this mechanic that people have to spend a lot of time running probe scans when they really don't want to be than that they are avoiding engagements because of the possibility of Recons. I don't think this will be a problem but we'll have to wait and see.

    So... we should have no local in nullsec and either no local/delayed local in lowsec? If less perfect intel brings fights then I hope you take a good long look at the effortless, free, perfect intel source that is local chat.
    Bienator II
    madmen of the skies
    #954 - 2014-12-19 17:28:50 UTC
    sentinel neut power:
    - 108GJ every 6s *3 at 31.5km
    - equals 18GJ per second per neut
    - 54GJ/s total

    new pilgrim:
    - 180GJ every 12s *3 at 37.8km
    - equals 15GJ per second per neut
    - 45GJ/s total

    curse:
    - 360GJ every 6s *5 at 37.6km
    - equals 30GJ per second per neut
    -150GJ/s total


    the pilgrim needs a little more love IMO. Maybe a 10% neut power bonus?

    how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value

    S'No Flake
    Native Freshfood
    Minmatar Republic
    #955 - 2014-12-19 17:29:03 UTC  |  Edited by: S'No Flake
    Marlona Sky wrote:
    Ripard Teg wrote:
    Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:
    Director Blackflame wrote:
    Never thought so many people would be terrified of Schrodinger's recon. I mean his proteus has been or not been lurking for quite some time.

    Yeah, especially when Schrodinger's Falcon has been or has not been lurking around for ages.

    You guys say that like that situation doesn't prevent fights. I assure you it does. I have heard the phrase "These guys always have Falcon alts" prevent a fight quite a lot.

    That's because ECM has no counter play. How come no one ever decides not to fight due to "These guys always have Arazu/Pilgrim/Rapier alts" ??? Because all other types of EW has some degree of counter play. ECM is a broken light switch mechanic that needs to be banished from the game completely and replaced with something else. Something that does 'something' as often as the other EW but leaves room for counter play.


    You again with ECM has no counter?
    I told you once. Keres can lock faster and damp the damn Falcon to send him out of the grid.
    Even Arazu can lock faster than Falcon because of the scan res.

    Because ECM will miss cycles, Falcon pilots fill a full rack of ECM mods and no sebo which means even a T1 Celestits will make the Falcon to leave the grid.

    Geezzzz fly the damn thing for a week or two and see how much time you spend on grid compared with bouncing from planets or BMs.
    Kharnakh
    Imperial Academy
    Amarr Empire
    #956 - 2014-12-19 17:30:02 UTC
    The one role the pilgrim was good at was that of a covert hunter-killer, sneaking up on other ships, locking them down from a range under their guns and neuting them dead.

    The the neut power bonus was extremely useful in this role, and because you uncloaked at 2.5km (or a little further if you wanted to get a run up after activating a prop mod for a bump) to maximise the effect of the tracking disruptor bonus and cloak, a neut range bonus is completely unnecessary.

    To remove the neut power bonus is just a further nerf to an already niche ship.
    Gurny Atreides
    Simple Businessmen
    #957 - 2014-12-19 17:33:03 UTC
    Excited to try these out.

    Expect they'll be about the same as current cloaky recons. If they're off grid their 'targeting delay' is you seeing them exiting warp on grid, except they're not going to be able to bump tackle you like cloakies to get around this, or able to be a warp-in for rest of fleet right on top of you

    Ability to use them in actual fleets will be a nice change, they're still going to be primaried, maybe not instantly popped.

    8 corp members in space, d-scan shows fleet of 5, maybe something's up. Character has out of corp character(s) in recon on lots of kills, not going to engage. Really not much of a change except people might actually fly combat recons.

    Wormholes, youll see them probe your sites, youll see them land on grid. Assume every lone ship is initial tackle for a fleet, so what's the change

    Fw plexes need a shakeup, there's a predominating mentality of ' I'm in x so i'm only going to engage y'

    Honestly wouldn't mind if all fw plexes acted as dscan inhibitors, or simply showed number of pilots in a plex on the entrance gate
    Lvzbel Ixtab
    State War Academy
    Caldari State
    #958 - 2014-12-19 17:33:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Lvzbel Ixtab
    I really dont like a total d-scan immunity it should at least be detectable withing 1 AU because it does not have any downsides.

    For example Cloaky ships are usually weaker and that is a trade off

    The argument that combat probes can be use who has the time to be using combat probes at every place you want to scan? specially with small gang

    Being detectable at 1 AU still gives great opportunity for surprises all they have to do is sit outside a LS plex and when you land u will into a big surprise.

    This will just encourage more cheesy tactics and lest desire to engage what looks like an engage able gang

    I also want to engage this gangs but how is this fare if I'm not able to see if they have 5 or 15 ships on grid, D-scan is a great idea and combat recons should not be totally immune to this
    DFA200
    Hard vs Soft
    #959 - 2014-12-19 17:37:16 UTC
    Major Margret McMurphy wrote:
    This non-detectable recon ships on dscan is nothing more than catering to the pvp player and is pure crap and should not be allowed. This change will make WH mining impossible and expensive.


    Yes, and they also bring two of the most uncounterable, frustrating and cheap mechanics in the game - neuts and ECM.
    TrouserDeagle
    Beyond Divinity Inc
    Shadow Cartel
    #960 - 2014-12-19 17:38:26 UTC
    Bienator II wrote:
    sentinel neut power:
    - 108GJ every 6s *3 at 31.5km
    - equals 18GJ per second per neut
    - 54GJ/s total

    new pilgrim:
    - 180GJ every 12s *3 at 37.8km
    - equals 15GJ per second per neut
    - 45GJ/s total

    curse:
    - 360GJ every 6s *5 at 37.6km
    - equals 30GJ per second per neut
    -150GJ/s total


    the pilgrim needs a little more love IMO. Maybe a 10% neut power bonus?


    how about nerfing the sentinel instead? then pilgrim wouldn't look like it's out of line, and also it would fix the sentinel.