Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Resists : I don't think I know enough about fleet mechanics to understand just how important HAC level resists are but I do know that solo a recon with those resists could be far too strong when you add in EWAR to that mix.
IMO squishy with range bonuses and only damage application bonuses would be okay.

Man all these people crying about the resists, if they stayed, why would you ever fly hacs? Damage? In fleets damage output rarely matters, but the ewar utility would have dumpstered the hacs

If you don't understand how that stuff works, how can you say its OP?

Most people don't even know how any EWAR works other than webs and warp disruptors, because the tutorial covers that.

Currently, a solo recon simply isn't very strong. Could they kill a frigate? Sure. But so can a Confessor, or a Thrasher, or another frigate. Does that make every ship in the game OP? Of course not.

Solo recons get absolutely smashed in the current environment. They lack dps and tank. And you won't kill anything if you can't keep it on field. It has more to do with picking the proper time to engage than with recons being OP (or not.)

It isn't that the Falcon is OP. Its that the pilot chose just the right time and place to maximize its ability crush your hopes and dreams. So, pilots OP?

Niskin's D-Scan Immunity Solution Desk is now Open

This service is being provided for those who aren't aware of their options when faced with the possibility of an attack by one or more D-Scan immune Combat Recons. If you are likely to find yourself in this situation and would like suggestions on how to handle it, please fill out the following form and wait for a reply:

1. I am operating in ( ) High-Sec, (x ) Low-Sec, (x ) Null-Sec, ( xxxx) Wspace

2. Please list the content you are trying to run: ______winning and losing fights, bearing occasionally__________________________

3. I am operating ( x) Solo, (x ) Multiboxing, (x ) In a Fleet

4. Please list any additional information that better qualifies your situation: ______my problem with this change is that the tears gimme such a hard on that I stand distracted in game and lose ships________________________

All solutions provided will be for the number of accounts you specified that you have. It may require the use of an alt on the same account, but never the acquisition of additional accounts. If your risk level was already higher before the changes, the solution may point out how you were already at a similar risk and how those risks compare. Solutions may require you to put in more effort than you had to previously.

This service is brought to you by the Foundation for people who can't help but rehash the same sh*t over and over again because they didn't read the whole thread. The FFPWCHBRTSSOAOABTDRTWT is a non-profit organization, created for the benefit of all capsuleers.

I keep reading that the D-Scan Immunity will somehow break the game, FW and W-Space especially. I wanted to out line why this is not true.

The balancing of a ship occurs when its strengths are offset by weaknesses. These strengths and weaknesses come, for the most part, in a power triangle; a ship is balanced around damage, defense, and utility. Lets compare the Rook to the Cerberus, the Cerberus is a damage ship primarily that can fit a good tank, but it lacks utility aside from the MWD bonus. The Rook would sacrifice some of the Damage (1 Launcher, 2 Ship Bonuses, and a Low.), some tank (1 Mid, and a couple more to fit ECM), but gains equivalent utility (ECM in the Mids, and D-Scan Immunity).

Now there are two problems with the balancing of Combat Recons, the T2 Resists and the D-Scan Immunity. First I want to argue why the D-Scan Immunity is balanced by comparing it to the Stealth Bomber. The stealth bomber is balanced because it sacrifice all of its defense for damage and utility. A big portion of that utility is its cloak. Not only can the SB warp while cloaked, not have a scan res penalty, but also no cloaked targeting delay. The SB can pop out of cloak and instantly begin locking any ship. To highlight these strengths I'll lists them. The SB is immune to D-Scan, Combat Probes, Overview, and can instantly lock; for all this they get no tank and big damage. The Combat Recon gets immune to D-Scan and Instant targeting, for this they sacrifice some tank and some damage. The Combat Recon specializes in Utility, they sacrifice damage and tank, gain Utility mostly from EWAR, but also slightly from D-Scan immunity, a lesser cloak.

But if the D-Scan immunity is balanced by a reduced tank and damage, then why should it also get T2 Resists. Because it's strength is its weakness. In solo PvP you could easily run from a Recon, you don't want to fight, as soon as they land on grid because a good player prealigns. Now if they don't, then another good pilot could brawl with the Recon and probably come out on top because they have more damage and tank. Once the fight begins, the D-Scan immunity is pointless. In small gang fights, the D-Scan immunity has less of an impact, because you will probably be grouping with ships that don't have this bonus, the only advantage it gives you is that a D-Scanned fleet may appear smaller than the reality. If you are are running head long into another fleet without Combat Probing or using a cloaked scout on the enemy grid, then you deserve to lose. The further away from solo PvP the Recon gets, the less power the D-Scan Immunity gives. Now for fleet combat, the D-Scan Immunity is pointless, the problem facing fleet combat is that EWAR is usually primaried, and with T1 resists, they become way too fragile for their cost, and become outclassed by their T1 counterparts.

The T2 resists are not the huge buff to the solo pvp'er, they are a buff to the fleet pvp'er. The D-Scan Immunity is the buff to Solo PvP, one that offers more than enough counterplay. Both are needed inorder to make the Combat Recon a viable ship in both fleet and solo.

Train for missiles they say, you will be able to choose damage they say...

This is a good post, but I think you are jumping too far along the spectrum from big fleets to solo. Small gang is in the middle of those two extremes. To me, small gang is ten-twenty ships. E-war is most devastating in these small gang fights. If my ten meets your ten, the struggle for e-war dominance may well determine the outcome of the fight. Recon ships, EAFs, and their T1 counterparts are valuable force multipliers. The harder it is to kill the utility ship - be it Curse, Huginn, Falcon, etc - the longer it is on the field. I don't necessarily agree that these ships should all be squishy, but I think that is why they left them squishy. CCP wants ships to die. I know from listening to Rise during the AT - which is its own little freakish world - that he hates fleet comps which are designed primarily to stay alive. It's boring. Loss is exciting to watch. Loss drives the economy.

Yet Eve players are generally very risk averse. We hate losing ships. Most of us will reach for whatever advantage we can get. That's why we bring OGB, Falcons, logistics, etc to most fights - or why the nano/kiting meta has been dominant for years.

So, consider the implications of the original proposal for Combat Recons - decent damage, T2 resists, faster, and generally more potent than what we have now. Consider the Rook - currently one of the worst ships in the game. How horrible it would be to fight a small gang of 6 of the originally-proposed buffed Rooks with 2 Scimitars, a Huginn, and a Lachesis, with OGB in support? They might not kill that much, but man would that suck to fight with a equivalent gang. As you started to add more tackle and more Rooks, it would just get worse to deal with. Until you get to the scale where we are no longer talking small gang.

There are other people in this thread with more well-established PVP resumes than me. Is what I am proposing a strawman? Do you think that is not a concern? Because if it is not a concern, than perhaps we can make a good argument for keeping the T2 resistances.