These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123Next page
 

Fix Black Ops (especially jump range)
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Gerrick Palivorn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#21 - 2012-11-17 20:53:32 UTC
Cahvus wrote:
HUGE +1 for BlOp's Overhaul. The concept is soooo awesome, yet the implementation is rather sub-par Evil

Hopefully the devs can do a nice little passthrough after Retribution!


The sooner the better.

MMOs come and go, but Eve remains.  -Garresh-
Konrad Kane
#22 - 2012-11-17 22:26:45 UTC
I don't agree with increasing the bridging range to that of a titan, I'd honestly prefer titan range reduced. They do need love, but with careful thought.
Xanth Eridani
Vengance Inc.
#23 - 2012-11-17 23:33:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Xanth Eridani
Konrad Kane wrote:
I don't agree with increasing the bridging range to that of a titan, I'd honestly prefer titan range reduced. They do need love, but with careful thought.


Any particular reason why? Seems a shame to not back this up with some reasoning.. Smile

I think their jump range needs to be significantly increased, I look at the blops battleship as a subarine able to infiltrate deeply into enemy territory and do it covertly so.

I don't think the damage dealing potential needs to be upgraded if it gets a jump range increase, but something needs to be done one way or another IMO.

Covops cloak on a battleship would be freaking insane and as much as I'd like to see it, I can see ten uproar from this idea being implemented giving the "anti cloak" brigade enough ammunition to get the cloaks permanently nerfed.

+1
Laurence Pinkitin
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2012-11-18 00:19:49 UTC
Kitt JT wrote:
As a proud owner of a widow:


The fact that they cost 800m or so for the hull really means nothing. COST IS NOT A BALANCING FACTOR!


Cost/Performance ratio. For 800m you should be getting more out of the ship.
Konrad Kane
#25 - 2012-11-18 01:12:17 UTC
Xanth Eridani wrote:
Konrad Kane wrote:
I don't agree with increasing the bridging range to that of a titan, I'd honestly prefer titan range reduced.


Any particular reason why? Seems a shame to not back this up with some reasoning.. Smile1


I didn't want to go into it because I didn't want to derail the thread. The reason I'd like to see titan bridge range nerfed is because I believe the power projection that it allows isn't healthy for the game. With good planning a good blops team can cover a significant range without hitting the easy button :) It's purely a personal opinion.

Seraph IX Basarab
Outer Path
Seraphim Division
#26 - 2012-11-18 01:49:04 UTC
Giving the blops bridge range a dramatic increase, is balanced by the simple fact that the only thing you are sending through, are stealth bombers and cloaky cruisers. A titan can bridge in anything. So you cannot compare the two. There's really no reason why blops range increase would be game breaking.
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
#27 - 2012-11-18 09:39:29 UTC
lol @ people expecting a pure ganking risk-free tool to be competative combat-wise with pure combat ships Big smile

Jump range and/or fuel stuff are the only things you might get increased.

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.
Jayne Fillon
#28 - 2012-11-18 17:35:15 UTC
+1

Blops is just too specialized, jump range too low, fuel cost too high, and combat effectiveness nigh laughable.

Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
CaptainFalcon07
Scarlet Weather Rhapsody
#29 - 2012-11-19 21:07:32 UTC  |  Edited by: CaptainFalcon07
Blops use too much fuel, they take 200 times more fuel to jump the same recon at a shorter range than titans.
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#30 - 2012-11-19 21:27:43 UTC
Laurence Pinkitin wrote:
Kitt JT wrote:
As a proud owner of a widow:


The fact that they cost 800m or so for the hull really means nothing. COST IS NOT A BALANCING FACTOR!


Cost/Performance ratio. For 800m you should be getting more out of the ship.

Say that to a Titan pilot. For 80 billion you get a massive e-peen that is only good for jump bridging and the rare drive-by-doomsday of a carrier. It can't dock, it is useless against subcapitals, and has no point defense outside of smartbombs.

How did you Veterans start?
Seraph IX Basarab
Outer Path
Seraphim Division
#31 - 2012-11-19 21:31:40 UTC
ShahFluffers wrote:
Laurence Pinkitin wrote:
Kitt JT wrote:
As a proud owner of a widow:


The fact that they cost 800m or so for the hull really means nothing. COST IS NOT A BALANCING FACTOR!


Cost/Performance ratio. For 800m you should be getting more out of the ship.

Say that to a Titan pilot. For 80 billion you get a massive e-peen that is only good for jump bridging and the rare drive-by-doomsday of a carrier. It can't dock, it is useless against subcapitals, and has no point defense outside of smartbombs.


Titans are the backbone of any serious nullsec entity so there's no real point to even comparing the two. Nerfing Supercarrier tanks will pretty much buff titans. But I digress...

Blops on the other hand don't fulfill their intended goal of really getting behind enemy lines and providing an entry way for 5th column entities to disrupt enemies.
Jayne Fillon
#32 - 2012-11-19 22:00:46 UTC
Seraph IX Basarab wrote:
ShahFluffers wrote:
Laurence Pinkitin wrote:
Kitt JT wrote:
As a proud owner of a widow:


The fact that they cost 800m or so for the hull really means nothing. COST IS NOT A BALANCING FACTOR!


Cost/Performance ratio. For 800m you should be getting more out of the ship.

Say that to a Titan pilot. For 80 billion you get a massive e-peen that is only good for jump bridging and the rare drive-by-doomsday of a carrier. It can't dock, it is useless against subcapitals, and has no point defense outside of smartbombs.


Titans are the backbone of any serious nullsec entity so there's no real point to even comparing the two. Nerfing Supercarrier tanks will pretty much buff titans. But I digress...

Blops on the other hand don't fulfill their intended goal of really getting behind enemy lines and providing an entry way for 5th column entities to disrupt enemies.


I think that hit the nail on the head right there, blops serve too much as stationary object instead of getting behind enemy lines, and being really truly mobile. When is that last time you saw a blops jump with the fleet and join the fight? May as well be an anchorable part of a POS tbh.

Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
Syrias Bizniz
some random local shitlords
#33 - 2012-11-19 22:17:23 UTC
Split BlackOps into more Ships. Like Commandships are now. One more logistical orientated, one combat orientated.

The logistical line should be able to bridge ships that can fit a covert ops cloak at long ranges. Fuel consumption bonus, larger fuel bay, maybe without damage roles but with some bonus to RR. Yeah, RR. If you give it say 4 or 5 Highslots, you would be able to fit a Jump Portal, a cloak (cov ops would be cool. but normal is cool, too) and 2-3 Large reps, maybe slightly bonused.

The combat line would be more of a tough ship. Has a jumpdrive, not the jumprange as the logistical one, and can't fit the covert jump portal array. It would be a DPS platform, capable of fitting a covert ops cloaking device.
Gneeznow
Ship spinners inc
#34 - 2012-11-19 23:43:38 UTC
A covert ops cloak would be a good start, for the price of them they can't do a whole lot except spew a few stealth bombers to a system practically next door anyway. Either keep current jump range and give them a covops cloak, or give them a huge jump portal range increase, as they are right now, they're just an expensive gimmick.

Also lowering the covert cyno to need cyno 4 instead of 5 would be good since you're already reducing carriers to need battleship 4 instead of 5, why not open up covert warfare to newer players in the same way?\

Another option is splitting them like syrias said, give the logistics one the ability to bridge non-recon ships (but at a much greater fuel need; it should be EXPENSIVE to bridge a gang)
Tara Tyrael
Quantum Anomaly Corporation
#35 - 2012-11-21 12:59:45 UTC
+1
Mole Guy
Bob's Bait and Tackle
#36 - 2012-11-21 14:32:08 UTC
dont split them. i paid 800m for 1 ship, i dont wanna have to pay another 800 for a 2nd. then i would have to train up my alt and he is already trained as the bomber pilot.

just give them better range for jumping, and a few other goodies.flying with cov ops cloak would be really kewl for sneaking up on guys and opening up. bring the bombers in for the initial bomb run and then decloak for some laser support...
cloak and run if yer taking too much damage, then cloak and return. select targets carefully...then light em up.
Seraph IX Basarab
Outer Path
Seraphim Division
#37 - 2012-11-26 20:02:31 UTC
Hey! CCP Can we get this in by Retribution? At least a blops range boost? Pretty please?
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#38 - 2012-11-26 20:20:01 UTC
If we are lucky they will work backwards with T2 rebalancing, starting with battleships and working there way down to frigates.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Seraph IX Basarab
Outer Path
Seraphim Division
#39 - 2012-11-27 03:51:17 UTC
I'm all for doing the balancing in whatever order they see fit, but at least boosting the range on blops shouldn't be hard. Maybe allow them to fit cov ops cloaks, and that's pretty much it. I doubt anyone will complain.
Azurfale
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#40 - 2012-11-27 05:05:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Azurfale
A jump range increase is definatley needed. Titan range would be sufficient just so you don't feel like your only skipping one system.

Fuel costs should be reduced but remain higher than a Titan.

I am on the fence about the Cov-Ops cloak because my 137.5 m/s Redeemer would go 859.4 m/s cloaked (imagine if you hit AB or MWD just before) with the bonus as it is which seems OP, although warping cloaked like every other cov-ops would be nice.

TL;DR

+1
Previous page123Next page