Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Probably too late for this release, but I'd like to bring up the idea of adding a cpu reduction bonus for probe launchers to recons again. I feel it would add extra value to these ships in both large engagements and smaller gangs. no bonuses to probe strength, but possibly a bonus to scan time.

Could we get a before and after post so we can see the changes please? I have to search the current fittings/bonuses to compare at the moment.

Lee

Pretty sure the OP and patch notes has this.

So, here's my two cents. I've been flying recons on all of my accounts since the old Nano Curse days, before you guys nerfed all that into oblivion. As sad as that was, it was required.

Ever since then, I have transitioned to primarily using Force Recons. I have continually tried to make the Curse work for me, but it really just doesn't hold up to the Pilgrim for my uses, in my opinion.

The biggest problem I see with every Recon, is the capacitor in regards to the amount required for warping. It's all fine and dandy that I can 120km point someone, or double web from 50km away, but none of that matters if I can't even warp to my target and still have enough cap to activate modules.

The big issue with the Pilgrim was the neut range. A lot of people have a lot of feelings about this. The short range made the Pilgrim required to engage at close range, but also being armour tanked made it sluggish. I feel your changes for the Pilgrim to have a mix of neut range and amount is a good decision.

The visibility of Combat Recons, as compared to their cloaky counterparts, has also been an issue. Everyone scatters when they see Lachesis, Huginn, and especially Curse on dscan. I really feel the decision to make the changes to the Combat Recons, in this regard, is a good one. I know many people feel negatively about this, but a Recon is supposed to be able to perform Reconnaissance work. You can't very well do that if everyone sees you from 14au away. At least the Combat Recons have a chance now, which was traditionally only afforded to Covert Cloaking Device capable ships.

In regards to the tanking ability changes, the raising of resistances was a poor decision in my opinion. The Recon is an EWAR ship. If you want to put out damage, and tank like a champ, then fly a HAC. The Recons bring something else to the table, though. Recons bring all the tricky/techie stuff that the HACs (and many other ships) can't do. I don't need a superior tank on a Recon, if I have my targets damped into oblivion, the ones that I can't damp are jammed, and everyone else is immobilised and drained of all resources. Tank is moot at that point. The sig radius change suggested, seems like it would fit with the rest of the concept of what a Recon is, just don't go overboard on it.

As for the Rook. I understand why you may wish to change it because very few people like the Rook, it seems. The Rook is also one of my least favourite ships, no matter how hard I really do wish to love it. The issue is not in the damage, or mobility. The issue is in the tank and EWAR capabilities both being present at the same time. It is a shield tanked ship, with an EWAR requirement that requires the same slots, in a high count. I would suggest changing the EWAR bonus to buff Multispec jammers to match what a racial jammer is on a Falcon. To contrast this, put a hefty penalty for running X+ amount of jammers on the ship, so people are basically required to run a moderate amount, instead of loading up up with 5 multis. If only two Multispec jammers can jam at the same strength as the buffed racial jammers do on a Falcon, then it can sufficiently act as a combat support ship, with a heavier focus on the combat side.

TL;DR:

Recon Issues:
1. Capacitor consumption for initiating warp.
2. Pilgrim neut range. (addressed)
3. The ability to have some level of stealth when moving to engage a target. (addressed)
4. Stick with the moderate change to sig radius in favour of the higher level of resistance changes. (addressed)
5. Modify the Rook's utilisation of its mid slots.

I actually kind of like that the jams and tank compete for slots on the Caldari ships. Instead of changing around bonuses I think that basically the Caldari should just have high tank hit points and resists. So a fleet commander says, well, jams are the toughest for large fleets and generally not preferred, but the Rook is the only recon that tanks like a brick - now the question is, if we use it, how much tank do we want vs. jams?

I'm with you on the Pilgrim. I was actually kind of sad to see the amount bonus get switched to range because in my BLOPSing I always warped to zero and wanted a quicker neut to keep the bad guy close (and weak) faster. I am aware that most Pilgrim pilots have been complaining about the range forever, though, and I think the mix of range and amount is great.

The cap and cap to warp are going to be improved. Are you saying you are not satisfied with the improvements? I have not been on singularity for this release and have not played with any numbers. But it looks like this issue has been addressed.

I also am a DSCAN immunity supporter. I only ever flew force recons though, and right now I fly what the alliance wants. So my greater curiosity is whether or not the changes are enough to get the big powers to use combat recons in the fleets. My main is in Brave and in the last battles between Brave and PL, it was all about EWAR (damps and TD for Brave and TP for PL). Frankly, for my own use, I found recons working well before the rebalance and these changes are nothing but improvements. I'm just curious if the community will take them.

But I'm pretty much with you except that I am not as disdainful of the Rook (at least in terms of its slot layout and utilization) and I am not sure if you're complaining about the capacitor still being crappy or if you were just pointing out pre-change problems.

The Rook's missile velocity bonus doesn't apply to light missiles. Is that intentional?

This is one of the spots where I think the naming convention really confuses things.

The Force Recon with CovOps cloak and cyano capability seem to really fit the bill for the "recon" flavor. The Combat Recons are THE primary platform for EWAR (of all stripes) in fleets and probably need to focus much more on that than "recon" in the truest since of the word...there are just too many other ships that can fill that function better and none that can preform EWAR as well.

The beef I have with the current bonuses for the Rook and Falcon is that they have the exact same bonus. My opinion...i would much prefer a split range / intensity bonus to jams (ala the Blackbird) to do something that would further differentiate them. With the same bonus on each ship i'm hard pressed to pick the Rook over the Falcon for many application unless I simply prefer missiles.

T3's often take over some of the ECM role, however, I strongly suspect that based on CCP Rise's comments that situation is probably going to get fairly directly addressed. They've been pretty upfront that T3 Cruisers need to be "good" at everything but by no means "best" at anything so that as a fleet option is probably on the way out.

It should be included... Rise seemed keen on making the boat viable and enabling RLMLs. Without that range buff their viability goes down tremendously as they can't reach out anywhere near your preferred engagement range which I consider 50km+. I can only hope this is an oversight or else my excitement for the Rook is now dampened significantly.

For all of you who are afraid of d-scan immunity: it's nothing that cannot be changed back :)

For CCP: guys don't be afraid to make drastic changes and than cancel them if they prove to game-braking. Like HAC restistnce on Recons .

We asked for RLML bonuses on the Rook because they are an excellent point-defense system. He gave us a kinetic damage bonus to all missiles instead. That being said, light missile range is pretty decent with skills at 4s, and even without range bonuses, they will still hit any small tackle that can get within long point range, and rip through unbonused small and medium drones fast enough so as to not have to warp away.