These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Strategic cruiser balance pass
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Shallanna Yassavi
qwertz corp
#261 - 2017-04-23 08:07:23 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Shallanna Yassavi wrote:
If you're going out to null to just explore, there's already the wormhole express.

Escalation chasing is another story. That one says "go to X system within 24 hours." I've never chased a null escalation because the only realistic way to pass those null gatecamps with enough firepower to run the escalation is usually... cloaky nullified T3C, or maybe dotlan to find a wormhole within 10 jumps of the target system and hope you don't hit one on the way there.
Or take an interceptor out and try to sell the escalation to someone just passing through. The last time I tried to sell an escalation, the locals thought I was trying to set them up to get hotdropped. Hmm...


Its a false argument anyway, escalations are generally run by the people that own the space, the very same people who generally have the gatecamps and bubbled gates too.



I have seen escalations go as far as 17 jumps. That's still safely behind your intel channels and choke points?


You can go 40 jumps and still be in friendly space.

I thought the big blue donut didn't exist any more.

A signature :o
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#262 - 2017-04-23 08:10:22 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Merin Ryskin wrote:
I assume you mean "your" in a general sense, because I have neither alliance bubble camps nor Rorquals. And if by "dropping" you mean "hot dropping with black ops/capitals" then that has more to do with jump-capable ships being powerful than the cloak + nullifier combo.
Cant drop anything without a cyno ship and getting a cyno ship into the heart of an enemies ratting grounds is super easy with t3c as nothing can stop them.

Good. All you want to do is hide dead end pipes behind anchored bubbles and rat with your carriers. If T3C are the only one that can pass your defences then I'm okay with them. Your ISK printing sand castles should be vulnerable to attack. You are untrustworthy about removing covop cloak + nullifing. You are wirting that it is so easy for your alliance to pass the defences with those T3C but is goes both sides. It would be easy to pass yours as well.

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
#263 - 2017-04-23 08:12:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Merin Ryskin
baltec1 wrote:
Blind luck is the best you can hope for in catching one of these things. This is why it is horribly overpowered and needs to go. If you want to get through the gatecamp then your should have to do what every other cov ops ship does. Beating a gatecamp should be based upon the piloting skill of the cov ops pilot and not be a simply selecting warp to next gate and hitting cloak.


Boo hoo, there's a ship that bubble camps, the laziest zero-effort form of "PvP" in EVE, aren't an automatic win against. If I had my way I'd make more ships immune to bubbles, starting with everything that can fit a covops cloak.

Quote:
Cant drop anything without a cyno ship and getting a cyno ship into the heart of an enemies ratting grounds is super easy with t3c as nothing can stop them.


It's also super easy to throw several cheap cyno ships at the problem. For the price of a single T3 you can buy several covops frigates or 2-3 recons, and it's pretty likely that one of them will get through. Cyno ganking is easy because it lets you instantly turn a single scout into a powerful combat fleet, not because of T3s.

Quote:
Cost means nothing in terms of balance, titans showed everyone that.


Of course cost means something. The fact that certain alliances have way too much ISK to throw around doesn't mean that cost isn't a problem for everyone else. Otherwise there would be no reason for most ships to exist. Why take a T1 cruiser when you can take a HAC? Why take a battleship when you can take a faction battleship?

Quote:
It does also stand to reason that cruisers should not be soloing high end content.


And, again, this is a stupid principle based on obsolete concepts about "leveling up" from frigate -> cruiser -> battleship. A high-end cruiser should be able to out-perform a low/mid-tier battleship that costs half as much, and it's ridiculous to argue otherwise based entirely on the fact that the cruiser is a cruiser. So stop acting like we're talking about cheap T1 cruisers soloing high-end content.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#264 - 2017-04-23 08:25:05 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


You do, but many dont.


Doesn't matter, fact is enough of us do and by enough of us I mean the bulk of null, WH and some lowsec organisations.

Salvos Rhoska wrote:

That T3C you seek to "nerf" (cough, buff for your purposes) is for many their single most expensive asset, and the key to their livelihood and playstyle.


How is it a buff to my organisation?
Salvos Rhoska wrote:

If cost and SP are not a balance issue, why adjust them in your proposal.


Because they will be greatly nerfed and SP loss has never worked and will never work due to plex and our ability to make vast sums of money quickly.
Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#265 - 2017-04-23 08:32:49 UTC
The 4 day and change -retrain for a lvl 5 subsystem-skill is a inconvenience at most. It's not going to stop anyone from using tech 3 -cruisers.

Wormholer for life.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#266 - 2017-04-23 08:35:33 UTC
Merin Ryskin wrote:


Boo hoo, there's a ship that bubble camps, the laziest zero-effort form of "PvP" in EVE, aren't an automatic win against. If I had my way I'd make more ships immune to bubbles, starting with everything that can fit a covops cloak.


And make it even easier for us to kill capitals. This is what you can't seem to grasp, this would nerf the likes of us even harder than you. As for gatecamps being lazy, this from someone who wants to be able to avoid them by clicking warp to next gate and hitting cloak.

Salvos Rhoska wrote:


It's also super easy to throw several cheap cyno ships at the problem. For the price of a single T3 you can buy several covops frigates or 2-3 recons, and it's pretty likely that one of them will get through. Cyno ganking is easy because it lets you instantly turn a single scout into a powerful combat fleet, not because of T3s.


Those ships cant ignore bubble camps and dont get massive tanks for when they tackle a supercap fleet.


Salvos Rhoska wrote:

Of course cost means something. The fact that certain alliances have way too much ISK to throw around doesn't mean that cost isn't a problem for everyone else. Otherwise there would be no reason for most ships to exist. Why take a T1 cruiser when you can take a HAC? Why take a battleship when you can take a faction battleship?


"We expect there to be only one or two titan in EVE at any point in time. The cost of these ships and the effort required is so high that they will be exceedingly rare."

Cost means **** all. Even the small guys can afford it.

Salvos Rhoska wrote:


And, again, this is a stupid principle based on obsolete concepts about "leveling up" from frigate -> cruiser -> battleship. A high-end cruiser should be able to out-perform a low/mid-tier battleship that costs half as much, and it's ridiculous to argue otherwise based entirely on the fact that the cruiser is a cruiser. So stop acting like we're talking about cheap T1 cruisers soloing high-end content.


We are talking about a cruiser doing content that was built around the idea of needing multiple people or blingy battleships. The only reason t3c can do it where not other can is simply down to the massively overpowered tank on such a small hull. Its like saying nothing would be wrong with a frigate doing a level 4 mission as quickly as a battleship.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#267 - 2017-04-23 08:35:56 UTC
Merin Ryskin wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
I spent 3 months out in null sec in a cloaky Ishtar. I didn't die once and I made around 20 billion isk running combat sites. It was in the old northern Goodswarm space mostly. Using wormholes and giant secure containers I set up a supply base for it and just used my smarts to stay alive. I wrote a guide on how to do it (Infinity Ziona's Guide to Solo Combat Site Running) or something similiar.


This is possible, but the dependence on wormholes prevents it from being a viable option for all but the most dedicated players. You need out-of-game tools to map the wormholes, and a significant degree of luck in getting the right wormhole chains if you ever want to leave your initial system without going through gates. And you're going to be spending precious playing time on the logistics of setting up all that stuff instead of doing the fun things.

Of course if you are that dedicated player then it's a much better option than T3s. By taking a conventional combat ship, especially one with 5x sentry drones and a damage bonus, you're going to out-perform the T3 at actually farming ISK. And I suspect the degree of risk involved is no worse than the cloak + nullifier T3, and probably lower. So really, the whines about cloak + nullifier carebear T3s are targeting the second-best ship instead of the best option.

It doesn't take long at all.

If I wanted to set up a base in curse I'll shoot out in an interceptor to curse with a scan probe launcher. Scan down a wormhole to empire then bring my cloaky hauler through set up the base. Maybe 2 - 3 hours.

Take my T3 into the HS wh => curse. Play.

Ishtar doesn't outperform the T3, sure it kills quicker but it can't drop a depot and refit to cloaky, scanner, ecm, rails, missiles etc etc that T3's can. If you fly them correctly they're literally uncatchable unless you have the extremely rare (other than in rancer) event that you spawn next to an object.

It sounds like you don't appreciate the effort required to safely rat in Null out of alliance. Yes it will always require effort but that effort has huge rewards.

Its not a race to the bottom, sure alliances dont put in much effort to play but that doesn't mean other areas of the game should be super easy as well. Just means they need to fix up the alliance side of gameplay.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
#268 - 2017-04-23 08:47:17 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
We are talking about a cruiser doing content that was built around the idea of needing multiple people or blingy battleships. The only reason t3c can do it where not other can is simply down to the massively overpowered tank on such a small hull. Its like saying nothing would be wrong with a frigate doing a level 4 mission as quickly as a battleship.


The excessive tank on T3s, which is excessive no matter how they're fitted or used, is not relevant here. I am strongly in favor of nerfing T3 tanks to something more appropriate for a cruiser hull.

And no, there would be nothing wrong with a frigate doing a level 4 mission as quickly as a battleship, if it was a billion-ISK T4 super-frigate. The old "leveling up" through frigate -> cruiser -> battleship is supposed to be gone, battleships are not supposed to be the best at everything just because they're the biggest hull class.
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
#269 - 2017-04-23 08:51:16 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
And make it even easier for us to kill capitals. This is what you can't seem to grasp, this would nerf the likes of us even harder than you.


I'm not sure who you think "I" am, given that the only capital I've ever flown is a carrier I use as a hauler and you're never going to kill it. I'm not shedding any tears for carebear capitals getting ganked because they can't cover nullsec in bubbles and have an eternity to dock up any time a hostile enters the region.

Quote:
As for gatecamps being lazy, this from someone who wants to be able to avoid them by clicking warp to next gate and hitting cloak.


Yep, a lazy counter for the laziest form of PvP. We can talk about having a more skill-demanding counter when gatecamps require more skill than pressing F1 every time something appears in the bubbles and farming the killmails.

Quote:
"We expect there to be only one or two titan in EVE at any point in time. The cost of these ships and the effort required is so high that they will be exceedingly rare."

Cost means **** all. Even the small guys can afford it.


The continued existence of T1 ships would disagree with this idea. If cost is not a factor then T2/faction ships are superior in every way, and we might as well remove every T1 ship from the game. But this doesn't happen because, despite your opinions otherwise, cost is absolutely a balancing factor.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#270 - 2017-04-23 08:53:12 UTC
Merin Ryskin wrote:


The excessive tank on T3s, which is excessive no matter how they're fitted or used, is not relevant here. I am strongly in favor of nerfing T3 tanks to something more appropriate for a cruiser hull.


That tank is critical to running that high end content.

Merin Ryskin wrote:

And no, there would be nothing wrong with a frigate doing a level 4 mission as quickly as a battleship, if it was a billion-ISK T4 super-frigate. The old "leveling up" through frigate -> cruiser -> battleship is supposed to be gone, battleships are not supposed to be the best at everything just because they're the biggest hull class.


There would be a massive issue with that, what point would there be in battleships if said frigate could do that job but better?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#271 - 2017-04-23 08:59:36 UTC
Merin Ryskin wrote:


I'm not sure who you think "I" am, given that the only capital I've ever flown is a carrier I use as a hauler and you're never going to kill it. I'm not shedding any tears for carebear capitals getting ganked because they can't cover nullsec in bubbles and have an eternity to dock up any time a hostile enters the region.


So you can't grasp the basic concept that is " nothing can stop PL from entering your space with a tackle tengu and doing what they want with zero effort on PL's part"

Merin Ryskin wrote:


Yep, a lazy counter for the laziest form of PvP. We can talk about having a more skill-demanding counter when gatecamps require more skill than pressing F1 every time something appears in the bubbles and farming the killmails.


Have you ever tried to catch something with a cov ops cloak? You answers here say no you haven't.

Merin Ryskin wrote:


The continued existence of T1 ships would disagree with this idea. If cost is not a factor then T2/faction ships are superior in every way, and we might as well remove every T1 ship from the game. But this doesn't happen because, despite your opinions otherwise, cost is absolutely a balancing factor.


Not out in null and WH it isn't.
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#272 - 2017-04-23 09:01:12 UTC
Merin Ryskin wrote:
And no, there would be nothing wrong with a frigate doing a level 4 mission as quickly as a battleship, if it was a billion-ISK T4 super-frigate. The old "leveling up" through frigate -> cruiser -> battleship is supposed to be gone, battleships are not supposed to be the best at everything just because they're the biggest hull class.

That would be a nightmare. "Bigger fish rule"is a must, T3Cs currently don't applay to it.

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#273 - 2017-04-23 09:28:41 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Merin Ryskin wrote:


I'm not sure who you think "I" am, given that the only capital I've ever flown is a carrier I use as a hauler and you're never going to kill it. I'm not shedding any tears for carebear capitals getting ganked because they can't cover nullsec in bubbles and have an eternity to dock up any time a hostile enters the region.


So you can't grasp the basic concept that is " nothing can stop PL from entering your space with a tackle tengu and doing what they want with zero effort on PL's part"

Merin Ryskin wrote:


Yep, a lazy counter for the laziest form of PvP. We can talk about having a more skill-demanding counter when gatecamps require more skill than pressing F1 every time something appears in the bubbles and farming the killmails.


Have you ever tried to catch something with a cov ops cloak? You answers here say no you haven't.

Merin Ryskin wrote:


The continued existence of T1 ships would disagree with this idea. If cost is not a factor then T2/faction ships are superior in every way, and we might as well remove every T1 ship from the game. But this doesn't happen because, despite your opinions otherwise, cost is absolutely a balancing factor.


Not out in null and WH it isn't.


PL does that regardless. Theyre' devs, ex devs and friends of devs...

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Coralas
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#274 - 2017-04-23 09:30:07 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:


"Multipurpose exploration ship" has "exploration" as the primary adjective affecting "ship" which indicates that you consider the ship an exploration ship first and multipurpose second, hence my interpretation of your original comment.



You introduced a word I didn't type and then hung your argument on it, there isn't any amount of hairsplitting that is going to salvage that.

Quote:


Only in whatever specific role you're referring to. If the Ishtar is better at everything then yes, the Proteus would be a flat out lesser ship, but that seems unlikely considering at the very least the Isthar doesn't have a bonus to Data or Relic sites, and the T3Cs do, which seems unlikely to change.

The T3Cs weren't particularly designed with anything other than Wormhole PvE in mind, which was designed at around the same time. CCP never look at every possible thing a ship might interact with when putting it into the game, it's impractical. They rely on the players to point out potential major problem spots but some inevitably sneak through the cracks.

It could be argued that the original Tengu was one of these, since it became one of the most popular Level 4 mission runners more or less over night.

I know the Deimos can be effective, it was downright hilarious for a while before they nerfed Medium Rails.

The Ishtar generally has trouble fitting full sized guns while the Proteus gets a 25% bonus to its guns with the drone subsystem and gets around 400 more PG and more CPU along with an extra low slot and rig slot.



They introduced the whole probing system everywhere at the same time, and they didn't make wormhole space self sufficient (no pos fuel), ie they plainly expected the T3s to be traded to k-space for k-space use. As I recall they didn't even expect people to live in wormholes as much as they did and do. They always knew they were producing a powerful ship, its right there in the names T3, strategic.

Yet I have both ishtar and proteus, and both have guns, and I don't need all the grid on the proteus, that grid is there to run the fits I'm not using, you know, the ones I've advocating people focus on nerfing.

Quote:


I'm really not seeing any statements with much in the way of explanation behind them, certainly not about why T3Cs in general aren't OP. You've said a lot of stuff about your own experiences, albeit in vague terms, and about why you personally don't want the ships to be nerfed, but none of that amounts to much of an explanation.



I've explained exactly what i'd prefer. I'd prefer the overpowered fit to be nerfed. That is not difficult to understand. In the case of the tengu, that may be the 850 dps pve fit, in the case of the proteus that may be buffer fits. Even as it stands, I'm still shipping my ishtar to my current ratting location because its faster at anomolies.

Quote:


You also seem to have missed something somewhere about relative ship power levels. If you'd care to refer to the original ship tiericide devblog post that I've linked previously, specifically this graphic which is what is being referenced here you'll note that they're putting T3s on about the power level of navy ships but with more generalization.

Based on what's been done with the T3 Destroyers this means you can have the power level of a Navy ship, but in a couple of areas. For example a Drone Proteus might end up looking a bit like a VNI in terms of drone power but probably tank a little better and either have a cloak, better base stats, nullification, or some additional specialization but not quite at the level of a T2 ship.



Except that isn't how the T3Ds work. They are vastly more powerful than the t1 variants. The only thing that the T1 can compete on is raw dps, and only in suicide mode - as soon as you put a damage control on a hecate, it still matches the cat for damage, and as soon as you put a damage control on a cat, the hecate is just more of everything and with a neut AND its uncatchable in lowsec. Ring any bells ?

I'm sure that if I make a suicide mode vexor i'd get the exact same relationship right now with the drone proteus.

Quote:


Again, I never asserted the Drone Boat Proteus was bad, just generally not eclipsing the Isthar as a pure drone boat.

You're the one who said several times that using a drone boat was disadvantaging you at whatever sites you're running, and as I said I can't really comment on your specific setup or issues without more detail than you've provided so far, and I assume are willing to provide.

If you don't find the Proteus a compelling alternative to the Isthar post-nerfs then I don't think there's anything stopping you from bringing one.

If the Proteus provides more safety from players but doesn't run the sites as well then that's a meaningful trade off and good game balance.


Aye, in the 1 in 30 case or whatever that any site decides to roll 30 second aggro. All the advantages remain, like better dps in the midfield than rails, ammo conservation, you know all the things you skipped over in your reply.

Several structures and tanks in exploration require ~600 dps to break. its make or break number. Not only that, 600 dps is on the edge of making some encounters interminably long as it is (and I bet a great number of tengu pilots will complain bitterly if their pve ship is nerfed to 600 dps, let alone below), and the 250mm railgun vigilant with a proper tank fitted, has a lot more dps than that, ie it is not pirate ship performance.

nerf the fits that are broken.
Salvos Rhoska
#275 - 2017-04-23 09:36:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
baltec1

So let me get this straight:

1) You have so much isk, that you want T3Cs to cost LESS.

2) You have so much SP, that you want SP loss REMOVED from T3Cs.

3) Currently EVERYONE can fly a cloak/null T3C, but you want NOBODY to be able to do so.

4) You want T3Cs turned from a multi-tool for all, into a single use tool ideal for fleet PvP.

5) You want T3C cap/pg/cpu and fittings reduced, so that using it as a multitool becomes impractical, but use as a dedicated fleet PvP ship remains convenient.

6) Though you claim cost and SP are not relevant to balance, you use them as counterweights as equity for the "nerfs" you propose.

7) You refuse to acknowledge that the changes you propose will infact increase and incentivize use of T3Cs in fleet PvP, which is contrary of your own premise of there already being too many.

Do you really not recognize your own hypocrisy and blatant self-serving bias?

baltec1 wrote:
We are talking about a cruiser doing content that was built around the idea of needing multiple people or blingy battleships.


You are putting the cart before the horse.

The content existed before T3Cs where implemented, thus it is clear that CCP intended them to be able to run the content as an alternative to teamwork or blingy BS (both of which options you can still use to clear the same sites if you wish), or T3Cs would not be as they currently are.


PS: You misquoted me in your post to Merin.
Please edit them to have the correct author.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6917371#post6917371

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Coralas
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#276 - 2017-04-23 09:41:25 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:


I spent 3 months out in null sec in a cloaky Ishtar. I didn't die once and I made around 20 billion isk running combat sites. It was in the old northern Goodswarm space mostly. Using wormholes and giant secure containers I set up a supply base for it and just used my smarts to stay alive. I wrote a guide on how to do it (Infinity Ziona's Guide to Solo Combat Site Running) or something similiar.



Just bear in mind that I remember when you did that, and it was long before the changes to anoms, fozzie sov etc. IMO no entity is reserving as much space per pilot as that era, and therefore no space is as empty as that was.

I stopped playing in the intervening period, and for me, the difference when looking at "players in space in the last 30 minutes" on the map is stark. At those times vast swathes of null was black, nowadays most systems are lit up, and all the time. Really empty systems are basically just NPC null.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#277 - 2017-04-23 09:58:13 UTC
Coralas wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:


I spent 3 months out in null sec in a cloaky Ishtar. I didn't die once and I made around 20 billion isk running combat sites. It was in the old northern Goodswarm space mostly. Using wormholes and giant secure containers I set up a supply base for it and just used my smarts to stay alive. I wrote a guide on how to do it (Infinity Ziona's Guide to Solo Combat Site Running) or something similiar.



Just bear in mind that I remember when you did that, and it was long before the changes to anoms, fozzie sov etc. IMO no entity is reserving as much space per pilot as that era, and therefore no space is as empty as that was.

I stopped playing in the intervening period, and for me, the difference when looking at "players in space in the last 30 minutes" on the map is stark. At those times vast swathes of null was black, nowadays most systems are lit up, and all the time. Really empty systems are basically just NPC null.


I would agree with this, it is not the same at all, I used to go into empty space held by Blob sov warfare and no use and rat in them, can't do that now...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
Shallanna Yassavi
qwertz corp
#278 - 2017-04-23 09:58:49 UTC
Merin Ryskin wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
We are talking about a cruiser doing content that was built around the idea of needing multiple people or blingy battleships. The only reason t3c can do it where not other can is simply down to the massively overpowered tank on such a small hull. Its like saying nothing would be wrong with a frigate doing a level 4 mission as quickly as a battleship.


The excessive tank on T3s, which is excessive no matter how they're fitted or used, is not relevant here. I am strongly in favor of nerfing T3 tanks to something more appropriate for a cruiser hull.

And no, there would be nothing wrong with a frigate doing a level 4 mission as quickly as a battleship, if it was a billion-ISK T4 super-frigate. The old "leveling up" through frigate -> cruiser -> battleship is supposed to be gone, battleships are not supposed to be the best at everything just because they're the biggest hull class.

This whole "Cost is a significant balancing factor" goes out the window when you see exactly how many combat anomalies the magical sov anomaly generators make, how much they're worth, how quickly carriers can chew through them, and how many carriers are out in null doing exactly that. You think you're lucky to find 10 dens in a system? Try tens of yards, rally points, ports, and up.

A signature :o
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#279 - 2017-04-23 10:02:18 UTC
Shallanna Yassavi wrote:

I thought the big blue donut didn't exist any more.


It never did, doesn't mean there isn't vast empires out there.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#280 - 2017-04-23 10:04:26 UTC
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Merin Ryskin wrote:
I assume you mean "your" in a general sense, because I have neither alliance bubble camps nor Rorquals. And if by "dropping" you mean "hot dropping with black ops/capitals" then that has more to do with jump-capable ships being powerful than the cloak + nullifier combo.
Cant drop anything without a cyno ship and getting a cyno ship into the heart of an enemies ratting grounds is super easy with t3c as nothing can stop them.

Good. All you want to do is hide dead end pipes behind anchored bubbles and rat with your carriers. If T3C are the only one that can pass your defences then I'm okay with them. Your ISK printing sand castles should be vulnerable to attack. You are untrustworthy about removing covop cloak + nullifing. You are wirting that it is so easy for your alliance to pass the defences with those T3C but is goes both sides. It would be easy to pass yours as well.


Because PL is well known for its vast tracts of space and ratters behind bubble camps...