These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
 

[Discussion] Entosis Link Tactics and Ship Balance

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
1Robert McNamara1
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#361 - 2015-03-09 17:43:48 UTC
Just make it burn fuel.

The Entosis link should require say heavy water or some PI-goo, spent at the start of the cycle. This would make it so only serious people could or would use them. Interceptors and other kiting ships would have to gimp their fits to bring enough fuel to actually reinforce something. Sov holders will likely have gobs of heavy water laying around because it's only used in Roquals and fuel blocks.
EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#362 - 2015-03-09 17:44:14 UTC
Killian Cormac wrote:
Promiscuous Female wrote:
interceptors don't generate fights


Interceptors destabilize sov, and the threat of losing sov DOES generate fights, with plenty of advance notice.

no it doesn't, because the point of the interceptor is to bore your enemy to death not give him fights
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#363 - 2015-03-09 17:44:21 UTC
Killian Cormac wrote:
Promiscuous Female wrote:
interceptors don't generate fights


Interceptors destabilize sov, and the threat of losing sov DOES generate fights, with plenty of advance notice.

no it doesn't

you just bring interceptors to contest the capture node pimples too

why would you ever risk anything when you don't have to, the job gets done either way
DeadDuck
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#364 - 2015-03-09 17:44:29 UTC
afkalt wrote:
DeadDuck wrote:
The danger is not in the single guy that comes along in a fast ship to mess with your sov.

The abuse will be in a group of 5-10 fast ships protecting the "troll ceptor(s)" that can pretty much mess up the sov of a solid alliance without much effort or risk. That's it...

Bring 2 troll ceptors, 1 of grid booster, 3-5 ortrus/cynabals/Ishtars + 1 or 2 keres + 1 Logistic and you have a winner, to turn sov a nightmare to keep to 99,99% of the alliances in game.

This WILL happen unless there is a penalty to ship velocity of some kind even if It would make so much more sense to restrict the enthosis link to cap ships.


So roaming gangs get a fight? The HORROR! The abject HORROR!

If you live in your space and you cant handle this crap in your own, designated prime time....you deserve to lose it.


Good lord, you'd think these things are going to come crawling out from under your beds whilst you sleep.



Sorry but I dont have afraid of fights ... is what I do 100% (one hundred percent) of the time I'm logged in...

The problem is that Providence is visited by dozens of roams every day. Sometimes there are hundreds of hostiles around in diferent gangs to get fights. Most of them ends dead but it takes time to deal with it...

If every single one of them start bringing enthosis links to get fights, well you can pretty much see what will hapen in no time...
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#365 - 2015-03-09 17:45:23 UTC
Eli Apol wrote:
Promiscuous Female wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:

Because they can be countered by a T1 ewar frig that's even cheaper - so long as there's someone awake in local anyways.

edit: Anyone noticed that goons have to blob the forums to try and win their arguments?

you counter an interceptor at one capture node / sov structure and it just shrugs and goes to another one

nothing warps faster than an interceptor so enjoy spewing logarithmically increasing numbers of evemannen to bore out a single interceptor

I think you mean "Nothing warps faster than an interceptor using an entosis link that can't even start its warp for 2 minutes..."

And the fallacy is revealed...because pretty much everything other than a freighter can do that.

ah yes the situation where you use PSYCHIC POWERS to determine which system the interceptor plans on hitting before its entosis module cycles and allows it to exit system
Arrendis
TK Corp
#366 - 2015-03-09 17:46:06 UTC
xttz wrote:
Gevlon Goblin wrote:
This argument over interceptors completely misses the problem with the proposed Entosis mechanic: The "trollceptor" isn't impossible to catch, it's unworthy to catch. People PvP for 4 reasons:

  1. Fat killmails. Entosis ships will be cheaper than a Retriever.
  2. Tears of the enemy. Entosis ships are sent out to die, no one will cry over them.
  3. "Kudos" for being good. An Entosis ship is a lone (very fast) sitting ducks orbiting a structure with a warning sign over it. It'll likely be AFK.
  4. To win. You'll never win. You can save/take the timer today, but as the enemy suffered no losses, he'll be back. Or someone else, like a drunken highsec miner in a 1 day old alt and takes your Sov if you let down your guard just once.


So a player has zero reason to hunt them. The alliance has, so people will be red pen CTA-d/paplinked into Entosis fleets and will hate it. Living in Sov will be a forever grind of mandatory Entosis-frig hunting. While there were crying over the boredom of structure grind, you could at least hope for an escalation. No one will escalate a tackled frigate. In structure grind, you were at least in a fleet, half-AFK, chatting. In Entosis duty, you'll be all alone, orbiting a structure.

If it will be introduced, everyone who considers EVE a game will leave nullsec. The obsessive-compulsive will orbit the structures with 32 accounts (likely with bots).



Who are you and why are you making good posts with Gevlon's character


It really has been kinda scary, hasn't it?
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#367 - 2015-03-09 17:47:16 UTC  |  Edited by: PotatoOverdose
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

Why should a solo interceptor be the deciding factor for control of an entire system? Or any factor at all?

Why should anyone keep control of a system they don't defend? What entitles them to control of that system if they won't fight for it?

The only time the "solo interceptor" is a sov threat is if it is allowed to capture a sov structure, 11 times. First to reinforce the TCU, and then in ten of the subsequent sovereignty nodes.

I'm sorry, if you can't be assed to defend against one ceptor doing THAT, you don't deserve to hold that particular system.


Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

Yep. Interceptors, and whatever counter they can devise against interceptors. Probably more interceptors.

... That their only counter is themselves?

Well that and:

Cormorants, Svipuls, Confessors, Caracals, Cerberii, Cynabals, Instalocking Lokis, Instalocking Gnosis, Vagabonds, Navy Omens, Exequror Navy Issues, Insta Canes, Faction fit Huggins, Faction Fit Rapier, and if they're at long range: Rail Tengus, Rail Eagles, Rail Proteus, Arty Lokis, Cerberii (again), Nagas, Beam Legions, Beam Zealots, Arty Munnin, Faction fit Huggins (again), Faction Fit Rapier (again).

But no, let's just say interceptors are the only thing that can kill an interceptor forced to stay on grid.

Get rekt.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#368 - 2015-03-09 17:48:02 UTC
Gorski Car wrote:
There are so many things you can do to counter trollceptors I cant help but think that this is a vocal minority overreacting and creating doomsday scenarios.


This kind of incautious thinking is what causes imbalances in the 1st place. You should be thinking "what if they are right, that would be bad, better to prevent that from happening in the 1st place".

It appears that the csm and ccp wouldn't know prudence if it bit them in the warp engines, which is why all these ideas end up being crap when they are implemented. The only reason people like goons get all these tools to run completely over everything is because of this.
Elenahina
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#369 - 2015-03-09 17:48:10 UTC
Leeloo Fee wrote:

. remove 'Truesec'

Agreed. Adding treusec killed nullsec income for your line memebers - this is why so many of them have incursion and mission alts in highsec. It's the fastest way for them to make money, and it scales infinitely.

Quote:

. remove jump fatigue

**** no. It's nice being able to run around in a gang of six cruisers without worrying about the PL super gang 15 light years away hot dropping you because they're bored.

Quote:

. time dilation

They do - they constantly upgrade the hardware. And if any of your suggestions would actually work, don't you think they would have done them by now? Please stop spewing nonsense.

Quote:

. Interceptor Bubble Immunity

I have to admit, I really don't think ceptors should have been given bubble immunity.


Quote:

. Cloakly campers

FFS man up and either ignore the cloaky or kill it when it suddenly ninjas. Cloaky campers are not the effing boogey man, and they're not impossible to kill - people kill them fairly frequently in my experience.


Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#370 - 2015-03-09 17:48:46 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
[quote=Kaarous Aldurald]
Cormorants, Svipuls, Confessors, Caracals, Cerberii, Cynabals, Instalocking Lokis, Instalocking Gnosis, Vagabonds, Navy Omens, Exequror Navy Issues, Insta Canes, Faction fit Huggins, Faction Fit Rapier, and if they're at long range: Rail Tengus, Rail Eagles, Rail Proteus, Arty Lokis, Cerberii (again), Nagas, Beam Legions, Beam Zealots, Arty Munnin, Faction fit Huggins (again), Faction Fit Rapier (again).

But no, let's just say interceptors are the only thing that can kill an interceptor forced to stay on grid.

Get rekt.

would like to see some eft fits/graphs of any of those tracking an interceptor at long range (150km or so)
1Robert McNamara1
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#371 - 2015-03-09 17:49:15 UTC
Not sure if this is the right place for more suggestions but here goes:


  • iHub needs 2 timers. It's by far the most valuable thing in the game that causes the most logistical headache. Give it two timers.
  • Make it so iHub upgrades can push through the true-sec ceiling so lvl 5 upgrades actually have value in every system irrespective of true-sec. True-sec is still useful for belt-rats and maybe determining top end sites, but the number of sites in total should be decided by the iHub
  • The 'Industry' index needs to be mining, salvaging, and PI output at the very least. You need more things contributing to the index that involve industry.
MASSADEATH
MASS A DEATH
Scumlords
#372 - 2015-03-09 17:50:01 UTC
Promiscuous Female wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:
Amyclas Amatin wrote:
You and what army is going to force the 5 of us who actually log in with our 6000 accounts each into what constellation?

What army do we need? I thought absolutely any single player can just jump in an interceptor and roam about Deklein for a lark...we don't need an army/blob remember?


the point is our numbers allow us to defend our sov, but the fact that you need goonswarm federation caliber supernumeracy to hold space is a bit of a problem for anyone else



Well it gets us 1 step closer than the current mechanics....

NOW we cant hold anything since you need a cap blob to grind a bazillion EHP structures..

FUTURE.... at least we can deny YOU (CFC/GOONS) all/most of your sov... save a few systems that you can 24/7 monitor (and even then we will offline your station services cause we can) and or cloaky camp you and strike when you move your "entosis guards"

so .... all and all... its a WIN....

will we take some SOV...yes.... will we lose it.... YES .... will we kill you and have lots of PvP doing it...oHHH YESS
Rovinia
Exotic Dancers Union
Hatakani Trade Winds Combine
#373 - 2015-03-09 17:51:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Rovinia
- Perhaps the Entosis Link should have the same mechanic like a Cyno?

You can warp to it from everywhere in the system and the user is immobile for a certain amount of time. So the user needs backup (--> Grid control) or takes a large risk to lose his ship.

- Exclude ships with the "Interdiction Nullfied" ability from using Entosis Links. Interceptors are just too hard to catch if you are not in a very specialized gang.

- Also, let large ships like Battleships use the Entosis Link significantly faster than smaller ones (not sure about caps here...). Would make up a bit for their lower warpspeed, at least in Sov space. And encourage players to use bigger ships than frigates.
Borachon
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#374 - 2015-03-09 17:51:03 UTC
MASSADEATH wrote:


Its ok..... you can stage out of X-70 and become"NPC trash" as well :)



Be careful what you wish for.

If this happens, basically every ihub iun the game will die within a month, and no one will put up new ones. Anomaly ratting will, as a result, die. If I was GSF leadership (thankfully I'm not), I would keep sov in one consteallation of station systems for industry bonuses and move all combat pilots to NPC nullsec. 5zxx, X-70, and N5y are about to get very full, while almost all of sov 0.0 would be completely empty.

And you think this is better?
Amyclas Amatin
SUNDERING
Goonswarm Federation
#375 - 2015-03-09 17:52:17 UTC
MASSADEATH wrote:


Well it gets us 1 step closer than the current mechanics....

NOW we cant hold anything since you need a cap blob to grind a bazillion EHP structures..

FUTURE.... at least we can deny YOU (CFC/GOONS) all/most of your sov... save a few systems that you can 24/7 monitor (and even then we will offline your station services cause we can) and or cloaky camp you and strike when you move your "entosis guards"

so .... all and all... its a WIN....

will we take some SOV...yes.... will we lose it.... YES .... will we kill you and have lots of PvP doing it...oHHH YESS


You underestimate the lengths an alliance will go to in order to monitor things if it has to. It's serious business after all.

For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/

Remember that whenever you have a bad day in EVE, the correct reponse is "Thank you CCP, may I please have another?"
EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#376 - 2015-03-09 17:52:29 UTC
MASSADEATH wrote:

FUTURE.... at least we can deny YOU (CFC/GOONS) all/most of your sov... save a few systems that you can 24/7 monitor (and even then we will offline your station services cause we can) and or cloaky camp you and strike when you move your "entosis guards"

only so long as you can do it at zero risk, considering how quick you run away anytime you get punched in the nose

hence your zeal for trollceptors, because you know you're going to get murderized if you use any ship that can't flee instantly
Princess Cherista
Doomheim
#377 - 2015-03-09 17:52:40 UTC
Promiscuous Female wrote:
would like to see some eft fits/graphs of any of those tracking an interceptor at long range (150km or so)

They would have to lock it first before it warps off.
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#378 - 2015-03-09 17:52:44 UTC
MASSADEATH wrote:
will we kill you and have lots of PvP doing it...oHHH YESS

nah you will grind out sov in interceptors like everyone else

these do not generate pvp
MASSADEATH
MASS A DEATH
Scumlords
#379 - 2015-03-09 17:53:06 UTC
Corey Lean wrote:
MASSADEATH wrote:
so come out and fight...it will be YOUR choice to defend YOUR space or not..... maybe you will have to PvP instead of ratting 24/7

Haha what, people try to fight you all day long but you run away..in your interceptors and stealth bombers. At least you finally came clean about wanting sov though Smile


ohh by fight you mean..... blob 4 various fleets onto our 1 fleet with 5:1 plus ratios?, and then dogpile on all the CFC alliances as well...and then a few caps and dreads to boot.. :)

ohh that kind of fighting....

see we are a Guerrilla force... we strike and move....strike and move... we dont bash our heads into your 30,000 man alliance head on.... why would we?

more goon tears please ....

Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#380 - 2015-03-09 17:53:32 UTC
Princess Cherista wrote:
Promiscuous Female wrote:
would like to see some eft fits/graphs of any of those tracking an interceptor at long range (150km or so)

They would have to lock it first before it warps off.

please do not interject reality into the argument