These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#1641 - 2014-12-23 15:26:04 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
We are disappointed too with having to pull back the resists for fleets. These ships just need that drawback to balance them at smaller scales where they are more likely to get used anyway.

We have T3 rebalance, black ops rebalance, and potential ewar module changes on the horizon to help address this as well.


Shouldn't the cloaky recons be weaker? Maybe a small boost to combats to seperate them?
Viktor Raybach
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1642 - 2014-12-23 15:26:14 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:

We have T3 rebalance, black ops rebalance, and potential ewar module changes on the horizon to help address this as well.


How exactly does a black ops rebalance affect the usability of recons in fleet fights?
Speedkermit Damo
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#1643 - 2014-12-23 15:31:54 UTC
As if we didn't have more than enough stealthy cloaky bullshit already in this game.

All this D-scan gimmick will do is make people even less likely to take fights than they already were.

Don't get me wrong, I'll abuse the crap out of it, but it's still broken.

Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.
Thanatos Marathon
Moira.
#1644 - 2014-12-23 15:32:07 UTC
Viktor Raybach wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:

We have T3 rebalance, black ops rebalance, and potential ewar module changes on the horizon to help address this as well.


How exactly does a black ops rebalance affect the usability of recons in fleet fights?


blops fleets?

JUSTK is recruiting
Equto
Imperium Technologies
Sigma Grindset
#1645 - 2014-12-23 15:32:45 UTC
afkalt wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
We are disappointed too with having to pull back the resists for fleets. These ships just need that drawback to balance them at smaller scales where they are more likely to get used anyway.

We have T3 rebalance, black ops rebalance, and potential ewar module changes on the horizon to help address this as well.


Shouldn't the cloaky recons be weaker? Maybe a small boost to combats to seperate them?

This is my worry, Force recons are suppose to be hit and run and possibly blackops gangs. Combat recons I thought were solo/fleet. While the combat has higher bonuses to their respective EWAR thats really the only thing separating them now.
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
#1646 - 2014-12-23 15:35:11 UTC
Good job holding out on the tears. Not that there are all that many. As a perfect skills Rapier pilot, i look forward to having a reason to fly a hugin.

Really looking forward to the t3 rebalance. Would love a bit of a nurf and then get rid of the SP loss. If the SP loss remains, i hope they don't get too nurfed.

AKA the scientist.

Death and Glory!

Well fun is also good.
Niskin
The Dead Parrot Shoppe Inc.
The Chicken Coop
#1647 - 2014-12-23 15:36:34 UTC
Lvzbel Ixtab wrote:
Ill give you a scenario

Im on my duo rep ishkur i found a merlin, incursus and rifter, I know i can take them but there is no way to know if a recon is there, i usually roam about 10-15 system so lets say my prober is 5 jump out.

I log out and log back in bring my prober to that system, those guys move on to a different system while i was moving my prober, fight is gone do you really need Eve to be slower than it already is?


Isn't the timer on a plex like 20 minutes? So they'll probably be there a while. Or if they are baiting they will probably sit outside beacon range and will be there even longer. If they move on you can follow them, and you might catch them jumping a gate where you can see what they have. I'd recommend finding targets with your alt in the first place and then rushing to the fight with your main once you have the info you need. Then you'll be switching less and they may not associate the presense of your alt with an incoming threat.

Solo PvP will require more effort if you want comparable intel to what you have today. Anytime they make a change to add difficulty it affects the solo players the most. This is unavoidable. Personally, I will now need to combat probe down my wormhole before getting into anything serious. And that still won't save me, it will just affirm that it's clear to get started, assuming there isn't a cloaky T3 waiting for me to show up on scan.

It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog

Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship.

-MooMooDachshundCow
Reagalan
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1648 - 2014-12-23 15:40:35 UTC
Speedkermit Damo wrote:
Don't get me wrong, I'll abuse the crap out of it, but it's still broken.


Any time a game introduces a gamebreaking or imbalanced mechanic, a subset of players will see the change and think to themselves: "I can use this", and will proceed to support the mechanic wholeheartedly, regardless of how it affects the game. Anything that makes the game easier, anything that helps you win, is desirable.

We saw it with the bubble immune interceptors, we saw it with the outrage over the retracted cloaking nerf, we see it here too.

Mr. Damo. I applaud your honesty.
Thanatos Marathon
Moira.
#1649 - 2014-12-23 15:45:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Thanatos Marathon
Has anyone noticed how fast you can make a Huginn, Rapier, or Lach with these changes? You might want to consider trimming 10 m/s or so off their increases. Once they are fit those things are going to be fast as hell (Huginn is near Orthrus speeds).

JUSTK is recruiting
Jean Luc Lemmont
Carebears on Fire
#1650 - 2014-12-23 15:53:17 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Okay, first major update just edited into the OP.

  • We are going to move one high slot on the Lachesis to a low slot, making armor slightly more viable while still preserving room in the mids for damps as well as long range warp disruption. The damage potential for the Lach is still on par with other combat recons even without the fifth high so we feel this fits better than giving up a mid.
  • The Rook is getting a little more PG fitting room and trading the 5% HAM/HML rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% kinetic missile damage bonus. This is typical Kaalakiota bonus, gives the same number of effective launchers, and favors RLML over the rate of fire bonus.

    • Have a great Christmas o/


    I have literal tears of joy. Our RLML Rooks will blot out the sun.

    Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!

    This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury

    It's bonuses, not boni, you cretins.
    Jean Luc Lemmont
    Carebears on Fire
    #1651 - 2014-12-23 15:54:26 UTC
    S'No Flake wrote:
    TrouserDeagle wrote:
    so people are saying to 'just use probes'.

    how do I fit an expanded probe launcher to my thorax?


    Are you alone in your alliance?


    Friends? In an MMO? Are you daft man? I'll have to share my rewards!!

    Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!

    This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury

    It's bonuses, not boni, you cretins.
    Equto
    Imperium Technologies
    Sigma Grindset
    #1652 - 2014-12-23 15:56:37 UTC
    CCP Rise is the shield amount on the curse a typo? you say its going down by 187 to 1650 but the curse currently only has 1238 shields, that would be a massive increase not a decrease
    S'No Flake
    Native Freshfood
    Minmatar Republic
    #1653 - 2014-12-23 16:01:11 UTC  |  Edited by: S'No Flake
    Jeremiah Saken wrote:
    afkalt wrote:
    All this drama would make a lot more sense if cloaks didn't exist. Invisible ships aren't new. Invisible instant tackle isn't new. There are now a couple less 100% safe areas in eve - OH THE HUMANITY!!

    Cloaks have drawbacks. Invisible instant tackle? What are you talking about? Ask players why they are not leaving hisec? We have one more reason they won't. If we don't want 100% safe areas in EvE lets remove d-scan completely. You take what's land on grid or leave, only probes and visual scouting.
    afkalt wrote:
    I do feel for the Pirates, targets will thin a little at first. But it shouldn't last.

    It shouldn't? So you know the date when this will be rolled back?Big smile


    Cloaks have drawbacks if don't know how to use them.

    You can't lock right away after you uncloak?

    Bump the target out of alignment. You will be 2000m away when you uncloak so, he won't have time to react.
    You are waiting cloaked in that juicy relic site? When you see the target on D-Scan at < 1au, uncloak (and cycle your MWD to get in range if you are in a FW plex).
    By the time the target lands on grid your delay it's gone and you can do your job.

    Invisible instant tackle ... well, it's a faction AB fit + dc + dual asb stealth bomber.
    Enough HP to keep you locked until the gang comes and it doesn't have any lock delay caused by the cloak.

    Today you learned something new. Have fun!
    TrouserDeagle
    Beyond Divinity Inc
    Shadow Cartel
    #1654 - 2014-12-23 16:04:16 UTC  |  Edited by: TrouserDeagle
    CCP Rise wrote:

    We are going to move one high slot on the Lachesis to a low slot, making armor slightly more viable while still preserving room in the mids for damps as well as long range warp disruption. The damage potential for the Lach is still on par with other combat recons even without the fifth high so we feel this fits better than giving up a mid.


    when are you adding a 5th lowslot to the curse and lachesis?
    TrouserDeagle
    Beyond Divinity Inc
    Shadow Cartel
    #1655 - 2014-12-23 16:05:49 UTC
    CCP Rise wrote:
    We are disappointed too with having to pull back the resists for fleets. These ships just need that drawback to balance them at smaller scales where they are more likely to get used anyway.

    We have T3 rebalance, black ops rebalance, and potential ewar module changes on the horizon to help address this as well.


    when is the logi rebalance (nerf)?
    TheMercenaryKing
    Collapsed Out
    Pandemic Legion
    #1656 - 2014-12-23 16:10:48 UTC
    CCP Rise wrote:
    We are disappointed too with having to pull back the resists for fleets. These ships just need that drawback to balance them at smaller scales where they are more likely to get used anyway.

    We have T3 rebalance, black ops rebalance, and potential ewar module changes on the horizon to help address this as well.


    For ships like the Rook, shield tanked but most mids are used for ECM. With dropping of the resists, are there any thoughts of adjusting the Missile Velocity bonus to 4% shield resist per level?
    S'No Flake
    Native Freshfood
    Minmatar Republic
    #1657 - 2014-12-23 16:11:19 UTC
    Please Turn wrote:

    ...
    Anyway, Eve is not dying and all that. However, these changes don't provide any new meaningful game-play(they just buff the gank-bears), they promote (once again) the use of alts and send a message that is opposite with the recent CCP's claims(we would like more people in space doing things together).
    ...



    You know, having somebody in your fleet with combat probes doesn't mean it needs to be an alt.
    Right?
    Shaleb Heworo
    Viziam
    Amarr Empire
    #1658 - 2014-12-23 16:12:37 UTC
    You killed the pilgrim for solo. 24km neute range means that it will just easily 25km + orbited by point range bonused/linked inties now Sad

    now it's just another fleet boat. Thanks.
    S'No Flake
    Native Freshfood
    Minmatar Republic
    #1659 - 2014-12-23 16:12:56 UTC
    mulgrew Zero wrote:
    can i just ask for a role bonus on the astero so it can fit an expanded probe launcher seems as well have tobe doing combat scanning to find some ships ?


    Astero can fit an expanded probe launcher you just have to make decisions and use some faction mods Pirate
    CCP Rise
    C C P
    C C P Alliance
    #1660 - 2014-12-23 16:13:52 UTC
    Equto wrote:
    CCP Rise is the shield amount on the curse a typo? you say its going down by 187 to 1650 but the curse currently only has 1238 shields, that would be a massive increase not a decrease


    Sorry, yes. 1650 was the armor amount and it got pasted twice :( Fixed now.

    @ccp_rise