These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[December] Command Destroyers

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Samsara Nolte
Untethered
#141 - 2015-11-17 16:32:56 UTC
I´m quite sure those new Ships will offer a whole lot of new tactical possibilites for fleets of all sizes - and im quite thrilled to see them in action -
but there is also concern.

Have you considered what this ship is gonna do for the Wormhole Resident especially during sieges of your homesystem ?
It is gonna become really hard to fight under the guns of your Citadel because your fleet can be split apart in all directions and unlike elsewhere a lost ship and a lost capsule means, when under sieges that you are out of the fight (and therefore most likely the whole siege) for good.
We can´t just clone jump back in our wormhole - Deciding over the succes or failure of a siege is one decisive battle where the defender is in generall throwing everything they have in the ring - knowing when they are pod killed there is gonna be no redo - than an attacker knowing what they are doing won´t ever allow you back in if they have a say in it.

I for one don´t think it is a good idea to let those new destroyers decide the fate of such fights, and therefore the fate of all the stored assets in it, by a simple cycle of their module and perhaps some lucky falcon jam preventing you from scraming it, and therefore from using this module.
You have to remember, most of the time the only Defenders advantage in j-space is, that you get to use the big ships (bigger ships than the aggresor - and those things are awfully bad at locking something) and your, in the future, manned citadel removing both those advantages through the introduction of one ship is awful.

So i urge you to considere a zone around citadels where this module is prohibited from use, or at least consider somekind of field around Citadels greatly increasing the cycle time of them - giving the defender some well needed edge in those fights.
Because for Wormhole Corps, a fight over a citadel is gonna be a fight for their survival and that is by no means and exaggeration.
Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#142 - 2015-11-17 16:34:59 UTC
Terra Chrall wrote:
Querns wrote:
Question: will MJFG use show up on killmails?

Yes, in the same column as webifiers, logi, painters, points, and bubbles. Oh wait..... then that would be a no. Killmail have always only shown those that did damage to the ship, not the support around those damage dealing ships.



only logi and bubbles out of your example don't get on kills
MukkBarovian
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#143 - 2015-11-17 16:36:46 UTC
Does the, "95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links," apply to command processors as well?
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#144 - 2015-11-17 16:37:23 UTC
Terra Chrall wrote:
Querns wrote:
Question: will MJFG use show up on killmails?

Yes, in the same column as webifiers, logi, painters, points, and bubbles. Oh wait..... then that would be a no. Killmail have always only shown those that did damage to the ship, not the support around those damage dealing ships.

Except for the fact that points, webs, target painters, and bubbles all show up on killmails. Logi is the odd man out.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
#145 - 2015-11-17 16:37:34 UTC
Lady Rift wrote:

only logi and bubbles out of your example don't get on kills

Bubbles do, but only if the victim tries to initiate warp when inside your bubble.
Capqu
Half Empty
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#146 - 2015-11-17 16:37:54 UTC
any thought towards giving them the most powerful single link possible?

something like a 5% per lvl instead of 2%, since they are limited to 1

would mean you could run one link instead of the standard 4/5 in a wc/fc spot and focus on significantly buffing one specific area of your fleet

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5tVbVu9Mkg
Sanders Schmittlaub
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#147 - 2015-11-17 16:38:42 UTC
Samsara Nolte wrote:
I´m quite sure those new Ships will offer a whole lot of new tactical possibilites for fleets of all sizes - and im quite thrilled to see them in action -
but there is also concern.

Have you considered what this ship is gonna do for the Wormhole Resident especially during sieges of your homesystem ?
It is gonna become really hard to fight under the guns of your Citadel because your fleet can be split apart in all directions and unlike elsewhere a lost ship and a lost capsule means, when under sieges that you are out of the fight (and therefore most likely the whole siege) for good.
We can´t just clone jump back in our wormhole - Deciding over the succes or failure of a siege is one decisive battle where the defender is in generall throwing everything they have in the ring - knowing when they are pod killed there is gonna be no redo - than an attacker knowing what they are doing won´t ever allow you back in if they have a say in it.

I for one don´t think it is a good idea to let those new destroyers decide the fate of such fights, and therefore the fate of all the stored assets in it, by a simple cycle of their module and perhaps some lucky falcon jam preventing you from scraming it, and therefore from using this module.
You have to remember, most of the time the only Defenders advantage in j-space is, that you get to use the big ships (bigger ships than the aggresor - and those things are awfully bad at locking something) and your, in the future, manned citadel removing both those advantages through the introduction of one ship is awful.

So i urge you to considere a zone around citadels where this module is prohibited from use, or at least consider somekind of field around Citadels greatly increasing the cycle time of them - giving the defender some well needed edge in those fights.
Because for Wormhole Corps, a fight over a citadel is gonna be a fight for their survival and that is by no means and exaggeration.


Scrams. They are called scrams.

Us scary wormhole people use them liberally. They turn off MJFG.
Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#148 - 2015-11-17 16:39:00 UTC
Torgeir Hekard wrote:
Lady Rift wrote:

only logi and bubbles out of your example don't get on kills

Bubbles do, but only if the victim tries to initiate warp when inside your bubble.



thanks for the info. dont do much in space where bubbles are allowed.
Zockhandra
Canadian Bacon.
Honorable Third Party
#149 - 2015-11-17 16:41:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Zockhandra
Capqu wrote:
any thought towards giving them the most powerful single link possible?

something like a 5% per lvl instead of 2%, since they are limited to 1

would mean you could run one link instead of the standard 4/5 in a wc/fc spot and focus on significantly buffing one specific area of your fleet



Whilst i get where your coming from, when these go into wormholes (lets use a C3 armor bonus one for example) will you be happy fighting a 40k ehp armor dessie? (okay figures are off but you get the idea) , or imagine boosts like that on specific types of T3 dessies. (svipul for example)


I think the current stats are a nice lead up to the battlecruiser level command vessels imo.

Shield are red, Armor is too, i slapped my heavy neut, all over you. Fingers crossed, broken shattered and burned, across from the bubble and into your hull.
Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
#150 - 2015-11-17 16:50:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Terranid Meester
Does this mean that attack battlecruisers will now be able to use the Medium Micro Jump Drive module since now they will able to micro jump with the command destroyers now anyway?

Will there be variants of the MJDFG?
Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance
Ragequit Cancel Sub
#151 - 2015-11-17 16:50:12 UTC
Any particular reason the magus has more grid than the pontifex? It's flipped around with these compared to the tech 1 counterparts.....the dragoon has more grid than the algos.
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
#152 - 2015-11-17 16:50:22 UTC
Rosal Milag wrote:
afkalt wrote:
Rosal Milag wrote:
afkalt wrote:


There is instant counterplay.

You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time.


Again, if you can expect combat fleets to do this, you can JUST as easily expect incursion fleets to do this.


ed: And it should only go suspect, imo.


Problem is, in high sec, a gank attempt targets one ship. Yes with a large enough suicide fleet, you can kill an entire incursion fleet. But that is committing numbers and can be noticed on D-scan.

With these destroyers, they can kill a whole fleet in ~5 seconds. With one ship. Tell me how that is not overpowered. I don't care what your thoughts are on incursion runners, that is not the point here. One ship, in high sec, should not be able to effectively kill 10 others illegally in 5 seconds.

PvP fleets are fit to take down PvP ships. A PvE fleet is not designed nor intended to engage a PvP target, especially a destroyer sized target with battleship targeting.



So bring a SeBod HIC. It's not exactly hard to stop these.

Maybe, >gasp< you need to adapt your fittings. The horror.



But again, what this comes down to is "MAH ISK/HOUR!!!!!"


I don't care about incursions, I don't run them.

The bigger point is that ONE ship can, without much warning or notice, wreck an entire incursion fleet. Currently, you need to provide a level of trust (joining a fleet for fleet warps), do something to become a legal target (suspect/killright), or be specifically targeted to lose your ship.

If this class of ship is allowed to use its MJD in high sec, then bombs should be allowed, as they are as indiscriminate and provide at least 10 seconds of warning for ships to get out of the way.

This isn't about who's fun is more important, incursion or gankers. Its recognizing player trends and possible usage cases and ensuring that there is a level playing field for PvP.

You want to kill an incursion fleet, put some effort into it and not 5 seconds to glory. Risk = reward. And 5 seconds is not nearly long enough for the billions from a dead incursion fleet.


Hi-sec was not intended to be this big mass safety zone. It was intended that if you were bad, Concord punished you. I see more of CCP playing this role lately then Concord itself. Player engagement is what established this game, what grew this game. More and more this is removed due to safety nets needing to be put in place. You know whats a constant trend since eve got safer and player friendly? Less players. An amazing trend that started since the NPE and increased protections around all classes of space was the reduction of active players, of subscribed players, of fleets filling quick, of guys and gals to do content with.

May we stop this shyt and go back to what made eve popular in the days that filled its server? The days that filled fleets and voice channels? Stop holding everyones hand and let the players engage. It's what made EVE. Let the players relearn how to protect their ships. Let us relearn how to safeguard our assets. Get your filthy dev hand off mine and let me get ganked in my Blingdicator while chasing a mothership. If I got caught obviously my group wasnt watching the area. We didnt have gates or stations scouted, or warpins guarded. EVE is about choice, and risk, stop taking it away damnit.

I want the damn rush I had playing this game. I fight enough to log in. I used to get excited mining, there was risk. Gankers always were around, you paid attention in local , you slipped attention an extra twenty bucks when you had to go bio, hoped attention had you back while you were gone. You rushed that damn bathroom also. You had no safety switch, no warning for pvp. You had a decision to make, ruins someday or show humanity. That was your choice in EVE. You did not have to cross check the TOS, EULA, FORUMS, Reddit to make sure your combat wasnt going to be petitioned and be handed a 30 day vacation, because suddenly it was considered Griefing someone if you shot them while they were in the bathroom in the middle of the third shake. What you had to worry mercs were sent after you, or there corp. Bring back the days of players policing themselves. Bring back player engagement and actual risk. Give back the blood rush people kept thru the day. Kill off the monotony we now face. Let us go back to playing the game and stop deciding how it should be. That was never your selling point. Get the adults out of my sandbox!
Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
#153 - 2015-11-17 16:56:17 UTC
Incursions will be nerfed in the near future so they won't have to worry about their precious Incursion fleets.
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
#154 - 2015-11-17 16:56:19 UTC
Samsara Nolte wrote:
I´m quite sure those new Ships will offer a whole lot of new tactical possibilites for fleets of all sizes - and im quite thrilled to see them in action -
but there is also concern.

Have you considered what this ship is gonna do for the Wormhole Resident especially during sieges of your homesystem ?
It is gonna become really hard to fight under the guns of your Citadel because your fleet can be split apart in all directions and unlike elsewhere a lost ship and a lost capsule means, when under sieges that you are out of the fight (and therefore most likely the whole siege) for good.
We can´t just clone jump back in our wormhole - Deciding over the succes or failure of a siege is one decisive battle where the defender is in generall throwing everything they have in the ring - knowing when they are pod killed there is gonna be no redo - than an attacker knowing what they are doing won´t ever allow you back in if they have a say in it.

I for one don´t think it is a good idea to let those new destroyers decide the fate of such fights, and therefore the fate of all the stored assets in it, by a simple cycle of their module and perhaps some lucky falcon jam preventing you from scraming it, and therefore from using this module.
You have to remember, most of the time the only Defenders advantage in j-space is, that you get to use the big ships (bigger ships than the aggresor - and those things are awfully bad at locking something) and your, in the future, manned citadel removing both those advantages through the introduction of one ship is awful.

So i urge you to considere a zone around citadels where this module is prohibited from use, or at least consider somekind of field around Citadels greatly increasing the cycle time of them - giving the defender some well needed edge in those fights.
Because for Wormhole Corps, a fight over a citadel is gonna be a fight for their survival and that is by no means and exaggeration.


If your a womrhole resident your chuckling at this. What wormholer isnt scram fit/ PVP fit? How would you not see this coming into your territory? Defensive bubbles, Long hic scram, arazu, proteus, any scram, all kill it, It's a 6k range, your point is 9k. If you cant stop this, you never belonged in the wormhole.

Get out of the wasteland deary, it's a lil rough here.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#155 - 2015-11-17 16:59:29 UTC
Rosal Milag wrote:
afkalt wrote:
Rosal Milag wrote:
afkalt wrote:


There is instant counterplay.

You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time.


Again, if you can expect combat fleets to do this, you can JUST as easily expect incursion fleets to do this.


ed: And it should only go suspect, imo.


Problem is, in high sec, a gank attempt targets one ship. Yes with a large enough suicide fleet, you can kill an entire incursion fleet. But that is committing numbers and can be noticed on D-scan.

With these destroyers, they can kill a whole fleet in ~5 seconds. With one ship. Tell me how that is not overpowered. I don't care what your thoughts are on incursion runners, that is not the point here. One ship, in high sec, should not be able to effectively kill 10 others illegally in 5 seconds.

PvP fleets are fit to take down PvP ships. A PvE fleet is not designed nor intended to engage a PvP target, especially a destroyer sized target with battleship targeting.



So bring a SeBod HIC. It's not exactly hard to stop these.

Maybe, >gasp< you need to adapt your fittings. The horror.



But again, what this comes down to is "MAH ISK/HOUR!!!!!"


I don't care about incursions, I don't run them.

The bigger point is that ONE ship can, without much warning or notice, wreck an entire incursion fleet. Currently, you need to provide a level of trust (joining a fleet for fleet warps), do something to become a legal target (suspect/killright), or be specifically targeted to lose your ship.

If this class of ship is allowed to use its MJD in high sec, then bombs should be allowed, as they are as indiscriminate and provide at least 10 seconds of warning for ships to get out of the way.

This isn't about who's fun is more important, incursion or gankers. Its recognizing player trends and possible usage cases and ensuring that there is a level playing field for PvP.

You want to kill an incursion fleet, put some effort into it and not 5 seconds to glory. Risk = reward. And 5 seconds is not nearly long enough for the billions from a dead incursion fleet.



And one ship can stop it. Put the effort in only applies to one side though, right?
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#156 - 2015-11-17 17:00:30 UTC
these could have some value in high sec in relatively low skill small gangs with frig logi, but with only 1 link each its questionable, too be useful on their raw stats would require D3's getting a big nerf especially on their tank and dps too make these even vaguely competitive with D3's, but either way D3's need a big nerf anyway.

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
Wrecking Machine.
#157 - 2015-11-17 17:00:55 UTC
Terra Chrall wrote:
Querns wrote:
Question: will MJFG use show up on killmails?

Yes, in the same column as webifiers, logi, painters, points, and bubbles. Oh wait..... then that would be a no. Killmail have always only shown those that did damage to the ship, not the support around those damage dealing ships.



my hyena is on my kill mails with not a single bit of damage.
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#158 - 2015-11-17 17:02:41 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Arline Kley wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
When it finishes. Doesn't matter what happens during spool up.


What about chaining spools? So CD#1 starts to spool up, and then just before it fires CD#2 starts to spool its one up


This works, can't wait to see what's possible with it.

So if we stuffed 170 CDs in the jump area, the group could move at 100 km/sec, indefinably.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
Wrecking Machine.
#159 - 2015-11-17 17:05:14 UTC
Capqu wrote:
any thought towards giving them the most powerful single link possible?

something like a 5% per lvl instead of 2%, since they are limited to 1

would mean you could run one link instead of the standard 4/5 in a wc/fc spot and focus on significantly buffing one specific area of your fleet


they arent limited to 1
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
#160 - 2015-11-17 17:08:11 UTC
Rosal Milag wrote:
afkalt wrote:
Rosal Milag wrote:
afkalt wrote:


There is instant counterplay.

You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time.


Again, if you can expect combat fleets to do this, you can JUST as easily expect incursion fleets to do this.


ed: And it should only go suspect, imo.


Problem is, in high sec, a gank attempt targets one ship. Yes with a large enough suicide fleet, you can kill an entire incursion fleet. But that is committing numbers and can be noticed on D-scan.

With these destroyers, they can kill a whole fleet in ~5 seconds. With one ship. Tell me how that is not overpowered. I don't care what your thoughts are on incursion runners, that is not the point here. One ship, in high sec, should not be able to effectively kill 10 others illegally in 5 seconds.

PvP fleets are fit to take down PvP ships. A PvE fleet is not designed nor intended to engage a PvP target, especially a destroyer sized target with battleship targeting.



So bring a SeBod HIC. It's not exactly hard to stop these.

Maybe, >gasp< you need to adapt your fittings. The horror.



But again, what this comes down to is "MAH ISK/HOUR!!!!!"


I don't care about incursions, I don't run them.

The bigger point is that ONE ship can, without much warning or notice, wreck an entire incursion fleet. Currently, you need to provide a level of trust (joining a fleet for fleet warps), do something to become a legal target (suspect/killright), or be specifically targeted to lose your ship.

If this class of ship is allowed to use its MJD in high sec, then bombs should be allowed, as they are as indiscriminate and provide at least 10 seconds of warning for ships to get out of the way.

This isn't about who's fun is more important, incursion or gankers. Its recognizing player trends and possible usage cases and ensuring that there is a level playing field for PvP.

You want to kill an incursion fleet, put some effort into it and not 5 seconds to glory. Risk = reward. And 5 seconds is not nearly long enough for the billions from a dead incursion fleet.


You dont want to lose your incursion fleet in 5 seconds of glory? Put some effort into it and defend it. Risk = reward. A few ships to counter this is no where near the cost of the billions to replace a dead incursion fleet