These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Caldari 5
D.I.L.L.I.G.A.F. S.A.S
Affirmative.
#1061 - 2014-12-19 21:43:55 UTC
Wow I hadn't looked at F&ID in a couple of days and all of a sudden massive thread on Recons. Haven't read the thread yet, but have read the blue posts.

CCP Rise any chance of adding the PvE bonus for Virus Strength to the Covert Recons? I had mentioned this to you in person at Eve Down Under.
Altirius Saldiaro
Doomheim
#1062 - 2014-12-19 21:44:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Altirius Saldiaro
Malcolm Faust wrote:
This will break exploration.

"Use combat probes?"
Q. Can you probe and hack a container simultaneously?
A. No


"Use a scout?"
I've never heard of an exploration fleet, not once. Not ever.



CCP wants players to interact with other players. Fleet up with friends. We do it all the time in wormholes. We work together to accomplish our goals. If you go solo, then you're on your own. There's a fleet function in EVE for a reason. Plus, did no one pay attention to the exploration trailer? Think it was the Rubicon one. Those explorers were in a fleet. They worked together.

People always bitching about that EVE is a MMO, it should be played with friends etc etc, then they ***** because they might need a scout with them when they go exploring. Learn to adapt.
Kevin Emoto
No Code of Conduct
Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad
#1063 - 2014-12-19 21:46:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Kevin Emoto
Lvzbel Ixtab wrote:
At least it should be consider to have a D-scan immunity up to a certain distance for example 3 AU or at the maximum 1AU that will force scouts to actually get closer to gather intel, but complete D-scan immunity is just crazy


This actually makes more sense....actually, make it combat recons cannot be descanned beyond 1.5 au, or 0.5 au..... the concept of dscan immunity is novel, and as a person who's always loved the recon class, kind of exciting to fly one with this kind of ability... but to have a ship class like recons to be dscan immune at all ranges is truly OP.


In each and every release the Fozzie Rise nuttiness brings me one step closer to being able to warp cloaked in a Sin!
Nivek Steyer
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1064 - 2014-12-19 21:48:21 UTC
I must agree with the above comments. All of the development on not seeing the targets on the scanner in sounds so much like WH space except for the local chat part. CCP get it over with remove local from null and low sec like you have been saying for years. I find it amazing that your trying so hard to go around the issue just remove the local and eve will be a better place for PvP. It really seems like CCP is trying to push for small scale PvP that happens in WH space so just do it already!
Ines Tegator
Serious Business Inc. Ltd. LLC. etc.
#1065 - 2014-12-19 22:01:32 UTC
Maekchu wrote:
Ines Tegator wrote:
Maekchu wrote:
The dscan change is great. At last, some tools are given to the aggressor. Instead of always having all the odds stacked in favor of the defender.


Except it won't. As I pointed out earlier, it's just going to make more people focus on Local as their primary Intel tool. Expect your targets to safe up as soon as you enter system instead of waiting for you to approach their plex/anom/whatever. Even more then they already did that is.

WH's a different story ofc.

Depends what space you fly in. As a lowseccer, you can't always wait till a system is completely empty to do stuff, since many of the systems often have atleast a few characters in them. So this will give the opportunity to jump ratters etc.

For nullsec, I hope they just remove the local completely. The space is too empty most of the times, that people will just dock up when someone enters. So yeah, here I see your point.


Agreed about nullsec. The problem is that Dscan is only so-so as an intel tool, and the vast majority of Nullsec fleet doctrine depends on Local as an intel tool. Can you imagine a roaming gang when you don't even know if targets are in system or not? An entire class of small corp gameplay will evaporate. CCP even acknowledged this (back newar when I joined, when people started asking for WH style local in nullsec) and said they won't remove/change local until they have replaced it with better intel tools. The problem with the recon change is it makes Dscan even less reliable; Local will end up picking up the balance. This makes the issues with too-good intel worse.

As for lowsec, I don't play there, the space isn't valuable enough to be worth the risk. I'll accept your judgements about how it's affected. My concern is directed toward Null.

I should note that the change won't affect me personally. At all. I tend to do my PVE in areas that can't be reached without probes, and seeing probes on Dscan is already my first warning anyway. My complaint with the Recon change is how it ties in to the larger game design, and the answer is badly.

I guess it's time to start pushing hard for a dscan overhaul, and then for Local to be removed from nullsec. CCP has been talking about it for years, now they are forcing their own hand.

Overhaul Dscan!
Lvzbel Ixtab
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1066 - 2014-12-19 22:02:29 UTC
Kevin Emoto wrote:
Lvzbel Ixtab wrote:
At least it should be consider to have a D-scan immunity up to a certain distance for example 3 AU or at the maximum 1AU that will force scouts to actually get closer to gather intel, but complete D-scan immunity is just crazy


This actually makes more sense....actually, make it combat recons cannot be descanned beyond 1.5 au, or 0.5 au..... the concept of dscan immunity is novel, and as a person who's always loved the recon class, kind of exciting to fly one with this kind of ability... but to have a ship class like recons to be dscan immune at all ranges is truly OP.


In each and every release the Fozzie Rise nuttiness brings me one step closer to being able to warp cloaked in a Sin!



Ya ill be happy with something closer to 1AU it will punish fleets that get lazy and dont take the extra step to get within 1AU to scan and will reward with intel with the people that do
Yahrr
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1067 - 2014-12-19 22:32:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Yahrr
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.


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.

Isn't that what the Force Recons are for?

Invisible Rooks will be the return of the old Falcon. Do you even remember the the 'because of Falcon'-Falcon? If you do then you know that this isn't a good thing. Then there will be 'suddenly point' and 'suddenly neuts', all realistically unprobeable, heavily tanked and without sensor recalibration delay.
Lars Erlkonig
Discrete Solutions Ltd.
#1068 - 2014-12-19 22:35:07 UTC
Because most guns take more grid to fit than missile launchers, will the huginn be getting more power grid to accommodate the change in weapon systems?
Cale Agittain
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1069 - 2014-12-19 22:35:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Cale Agittain
So CCP sees nothing wrong with the scenarios created by combining these combat recons together? You warp onto a grid and are in the space of a few seconds pointed, webbed, damped and jammed, stuck outside of your own engagement range and unable to respond... Oh wait, you think this counts as a fight, and thus as content!

You are not stimulating unknown fights with this, you are stacking the odds even further against people who don't want their gang to be 60% force multipliers. What makes you think the majority of gangs won't now be comprised of invisible HAC-tanked super-ewar boats?

What is the downside of this ability? What are combat recons trading for this? Is the answer nothing? You guys know this is broken and you're releasing it anyway and that's what's pissing us off.

Where is the incentive to keep subbing to this game if you're just going to keep inventing ways to make fights miserable?
Grumpy Grandpa
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1070 - 2014-12-19 22:36:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Grumpy Grandpa
I actually am looking forward to this as it will be fun in faction warfare. However to keep things balanced and in the theme of everything should have a proper counter. Possibly a module that improves dscan capability.

For Example Allows Detection of Combat Recons

For some extra spice: you could make it use scripts
- one allows detection of combat recons
- one increases max range of DScan


on second thought the range might not be that great, but ill keep it in there.
Arla Sarain
#1071 - 2014-12-19 22:36:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Arla Sarain
Ok, if you keep the D-SCAN, bloat their sig and reduce their sensors. If someone even accidentally swipes them with combat probes they light up like the caroline star.

hopefully it won't take 14 days to blap it.

Wouldn't be such an issue if Combat Probes were common but they're not - fights take around celestials and you typically don't need combat probes for that.

If the cost for expanded launchers goes down and Combat Wincons are easier to scan the D-Scan immunity would be deserved.
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#1072 - 2014-12-19 22:54:19 UTC
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:
TuCZnak wrote:
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:
3) Both fighting parties are free to use them


Why nerf Ishtars, both parties are free to use them, right?
Balancing is about giving people options and not making bunches of ships entirely useless.

Ishtars are currently pretty strong compared to all other hacs, but do you seriously think that if this change is confirmed everybody will fly just combat recons?

Ishtars by themselves are not OP. Ishtars with sentries are since it's sentry drones on the ishtar that is the problem, not the ship per se.
Azusa Asara
Asara Corporation
#1073 - 2014-12-19 22:57:59 UTC
It seems the only way you will be able to counter a Combat Recon now is to fly a combat recon yourself.

Industrialists will make easy isk off this change as everyone will want to fly a one!

Start Construction!
Ehud Gera
Wildcard.
Boundary Experts
#1074 - 2014-12-19 22:59:19 UTC
For everyone who says "This will be awesome for Wormholes"

You are the PVP WH'er who wants to gank (and dont get me wrong, i'm a pvp nut as well) but here's your problem:

Your targets are going to disappear. Any kind of solo or small gang operation just became so risky that its not even worth trying to do anoms in WH's.

The only sites that will be done in WH's will be Signatures because then at least pilots can dscan for probes.

CCP if you're going to make these ships not D-Scannable then please replace all WH Anoms with Signatures so that pilots can at least rely on DSCAN to see probes if not the actual combat recons.

Otherwise RIP WH anom farming for all except the larger(est) groups
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#1075 - 2014-12-19 23:14:01 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:

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.

Going back to a post I made earlier, if Recons got a bonus to fitting probe launchers, this would provide some counter play that doesn't force alts.
Obviously more T2 ships like Cov Ops & Black Ops BS should also be getting this bonus, but currently Combat Probes are T3 only if you want to be using the ship for anything else, which isn't good game play.
Leon Mantis
Limul Tribal
#1076 - 2014-12-19 23:21:24 UTC
Hmmm, Rapier becomes missile ship. Huggin becomes projectile ship... Thats nice... I think.
Don't get the utility high slot on the huggin tho...
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1077 - 2014-12-19 23:24:41 UTC
Caldari 5 wrote:
Wow I hadn't looked at F&ID in a couple of days and all of a sudden massive thread on Recons. Haven't read the thread yet, but have read the blue posts.

CCP Rise any chance of adding the PvE bonus for Virus Strength to the Covert Recons? I had mentioned this to you in person at Eve Down Under.

I don't see why it has to be only covert recons?

I agree that it would be nice to see them get a +10 virus strength for hacking

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Xe'Cara'eos
A Big Enough Lever
#1078 - 2014-12-19 23:25:18 UTC


CCP - have you REALLY considered how this is going to affect WH play?

I know this is an alt-heavy environment (or teamwork-heavy), but I worry this will make combat recons the new HAC, as they have pretty good 'damage evasion' and you're buffing their resists to HAC levels......

just a concern

also - what is the point to using a force recon now? since the main bonus of the cloak is nullified by the combat recon's role bonus?

For posting an idea into F&I: come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it..... If your idea can be abused, it [u]WILL[/u] be.
Caoni Mar
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1079 - 2014-12-19 23:26:02 UTC
RTSAvalanche wrote:



Well that's just complete and utter bullsh!t...

As if Solo pvp wasn't hard enough, we can not even rely on our D-Scan now?? somthing that we have relied on for the past 10 years.. You are basicaly breaking around some core mechanics here.
Faction Warefare has been completely broken since Incarna, now you are telling me that recons with web, neut, damp & ECM bonuses will be able to hide in plain site in FW plexes and there is no conventional way to find them.

Even if combats work to find them, we would have to do that for every plex...

I smelt somthing bad in the air when the mobile scan inhib came into game, didn't realise things were going to be this bad.


POWER CREEP is getting excessive..


You didn't think it through. Here is why your assertions are hyperbolic nonsense.

1) The mechanic you speak of hasn't been around for 10 years. No such feature existed back then.
2) You would be safe in novice and small plexes. The recons can only enter mediums and large plexes. And large already have no gate on them so if you are in them and scanning, they would already be in warp to you so you might not notice anyway.
Caoni Mar
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1080 - 2014-12-19 23:27:01 UTC
I'm fairly happy with the changes except for the huginn getting a turret bonus and not a missile bonus. However, it is understandable considering its painting and web bonus and combined with the fact that it is getting the resist increase as well might make it too strong.

The Lachesis and Azaru would probably benefit more from a small optimal range increase. I'd probably start somewhere around 4 or 5% and play with the numbers to see how it works.

I am just glad that the Huginn and Lachesis are losing the split weapon systems.