These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Rubicon 1.1] Mobile Micro Jump Unit and Mobile Scan Inhibitor

First post First post First post
Author
Priestess Lin
Darkfall Corp
#581 - 2014-01-08 20:15:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Priestess Lin
Rek Seven wrote:
anyone else think it's silly that the scan inhibitor shown up on d-scan? This thing should only be detectable via probes.


I don't think so. That is part of what makes it balanced. You can know its protecting something without having to put probes in space.

Smart pirates will figure this thing out and how to abuse the illusion of additional safety it might provide to some people.

People should be happy PVErs are getting some defensive tools that will embolden them to take risks outside of high sec. Everyone ultimately benefits from these in some way. Well done CCP!

When discussing weaknesses of heavy drones vs fast frigates: baltec1- " A thanatos with a flight of geckos killed a bomber gang while AFK. So yea, they track frigates just fine." https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4678049#post4678049

Rek Seven
The Persuaders
#582 - 2014-01-08 20:32:02 UTC
well it pretty simple...

1. PVE'ers will just deploy multiple of these to make in harder for people to find them.
2. In PVP it will be used to bait using a inhibitor and a warp bubble
3. It can be used in place of a deep safe spot to hide your fleet

The problem is that if someone sees it on D-scan, they know someone is active, which kind of defeats the purpose imo.
Kawaiian Breeze
Doomheim
#583 - 2014-01-08 20:33:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Kawaiian Breeze
Next deployable please: Mobile Drone Inhibitor. This deployable scrambles the bandwidth of any drones within a 350km radius rendering them unresponsive. Destroying the unit allows one to reconnect to lost drones.

OR something really fun would be to make the drones go Skynet and attack the nearest player Smile
Priestess Lin
Darkfall Corp
#584 - 2014-01-08 20:43:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Priestess Lin
Rek Seven wrote:
well it pretty simple...

1. PVE'ers will just deploy multiple of these to make in harder for people to find them.
2. In PVP it will be used to bait using a inhibitor and a warp bubble
3. It can be used in place of a deep safe spot to hide your fleet

The problem is that if someone sees it on D-scan, they know someone is active, which kind of defeats the purpose imo.


Its not meant to prevent people from knowing something is going on, just to hide the ship types so aggressors don't know exactly what they are getting into.

To deploy and maintain multiple MSI can be cutting into profits quite a bit as they only last 2 hours. This is the part around which the MSI should be balanced. This investment in defense on the part of a PVEr makes it quite obvious as to what they are doing. Pirates have the option of bringing multiple friends and simultaneously scanning down the MSIs in order to better have a chance at getting the jump on someone who operates in locations that are only reachable by probing. Pirates also have the option of scanning the likely locations of MSI beforehand with non-combat probes to discover bogus targets without alerting their prey, amongst other options.

Now that you know you can't hide cosmic signatures/anomalies with the MSI, can't we all agree this is a tool that will greatly benefit the game?

When discussing weaknesses of heavy drones vs fast frigates: baltec1- " A thanatos with a flight of geckos killed a bomber gang while AFK. So yea, they track frigates just fine." https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4678049#post4678049

Novah Soul
#585 - 2014-01-08 20:51:37 UTC
Kawaiian Breeze wrote:
Next deployable please: Mobile Drone Inhibitor. This deployable scrambles the bandwidth of any drones within a 350km radius rendering them unresponsive. Destroying the unit allows one to reconnect to lost drones.

OR something really fun would be to make the drones go Skynet and attack the nearest player Smile

I could see a combination of rage and laughter with this one during the first deployment of a fleet fight. If anything it would be entertaining, lol.

A man is known by the quality of his friends. - Lex Luthor

Tasha Saisima
Doomheim
#586 - 2014-01-08 20:53:10 UTC
Wtb, tools to catch people
Super Chair
Caldari Colonial Defense Ministry
Templis CALSF
#587 - 2014-01-08 20:53:56 UTC
The FW community is bringing up a good point about the mobile micro jump unit. With it only costing 1 million isk, you can literally use one of these every solo fight to escape nano long point kiters. This unit will completely destroy the play style of using nano long point kiters since anyone and their dog will have these units available to escape once they are long pointed.


Should the MMJU be available for gangs to jump 100km to catch snipers (or vice vera, snipers jumping 100km to escape/get range) and create all sorts of interesting and fun gang fights? Yes.

Should it be a get out of jail free card for solo pilots in the event they run into a nanolong point kiter with practically no investment? No, absolutely not. Increase the cost of the structure to at least 10 million. This way the unit is still cheap enough for it to be justified in gang use yes expensive enough that solo pilots will have to make a choice about using it. The option will still be there for solo pilots to use it, but at a cost.


If this module stays at 1 million isk i'm literally going to put one in every brawler ship I have because its 0 investment to me for a get out of jail free from nano long point kiters. This will destroy an entire play style if it stays this cheap.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#588 - 2014-01-08 20:58:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Kagura Nikon
Xaarous wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Xaarous wrote:
Speedkermit Damo wrote:
Lets sum up shall we?

All solo roamers are now going to be obliged to fit an expanded probe launcher, horribly gimping any combat capability.

Meanwhile bears will be able to use a MJD in without even having to bother fitting one to their ship!



Let's not forget that scram'ing a target prevents the MJD.

I'm having trouble believing that people will religiously drop either an "I'm here!" marker on themselves every location, plus 0-N "I might be here!" markers for smoke screen, when every one of those drops costs 5m ISK. That's a sizeable dent in income.



You mean the scram taht cannot be applied over a marauder in bastion mode..t he same marauder that can use that thing while in bastion mode?


[EDIT] Based on Fozzie's update, MJD'ing in Bastion mode is a bug, so this is moot.



Impressive work .. answering a post I made previously to Fozy post with information of fozy post. TOp poster.. Incredble work.. keep it up. You are showing tobe a top notch argumenter.

Anyway, with the super bastion thing fixed the most overpowered feature is neutered at least.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#589 - 2014-01-08 20:59:03 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
anyone else think it's silly that the scan inhibitor shown up on d-scan? This thing should only be detectable via probes.


On the contraire. THey shoudl Show on overview and be warpablwe by ANYONE in system

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#590 - 2014-01-08 21:09:37 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone. Thanks to everyone who has provided useful feedback so far. We're busy squashing bugs that have been reported so far as well as incorporating your valuable balance input into some significant design changes.

As many of you have noticed, these structures arrived on SISI in a relatively untested state due to our opening up of the test server immediately after the Christmas holidays. We decided that the earliest possible testing was the way to go, and I think this was the correct call. We're knocking the bugs down at a very rapid rate and the structures are already in a much improved state in our internal builds in part thanks to your testing help.

We're also implementing a set of significant balance changes that incorporate your feedback. I just put these changes in front of the CSM today so I'll probably give them a chance to look it over before going public, but we believe the changes we have in the works are a strong improvement that will address a lot of the community's concerns. That being said, these structures are intentionally provocative so even after this round of adjustments we expect them to be very disruptive to the status quo in a valuable and exciting way.

I'll quickly go over a few of the bugs that we've either squashed internally or are very close to being squashed, since I know there is quite a bit of confusion:

  • The Micro Jump Unit mass restrictions are not working on SISI, this is a bug and once fixed capital ships (anything above 1,000,000,000 mass) will not be able to use the MJU.
  • The fact that you can eject or board a ship while the MJU is spooling is a bug and will be fixed in an upcoming update.
  • The fact that you can use the MJU while in Bastion mode is a bug and will be fixed in an upcoming update.
  • The fact that the MJU has no graphical model is a bug and will be fixed in an upcoming update.

  • The fact that the Scan Inhibitor prevents scanning of Cosmic Signatures is a bug that will be fixed in an upcoming update.
  • Although Cosmic Anomalies are always visible and warpable in both the discovery scanner and the scan window even when covered by a Inhib, the fact that it prevented probes themselves from getting Anom results (a consistency issue) is a bug and will be fixed in an upcoming update.
  • Although they are always visible on system-wide overviews and (in the case of celestials on right click menus), the fact that the Inhib prevented beacons and celestials from showing up on directional scans is a bug that will be fixed in an upcoming update.

  • The fact that neither structure have proper descriptions on SISI is a bug and will be fixed in an upcoming update.
  • The fact that neither of the structures are in default overview settings is something that we just hadn't had time to do yet as of the most recent SISI update but will be fixed in an upcoming update. (Custom overviews will need to decide if they want to add the structures)

  • None of our tests have ever shown the MJU to allow someone to jump with an active Cyno. The MJU should not allow someone to jump with an active Cyno. It appears likely that the rumor that the MJU jumps people with active cynos is in fact false, but if you have experienced otherwise please submit a bug report.


That is not the entire extent of the changes we currently have in the works to these deployables, it does not cover the extensive balance changes we have in the pipeline. I will be giving the CSM a few hours to comment on the changes first and then bring that plan to you asap.

I'll remind people that hyperbole, personal attacks and rumor mongering are not effective forms of feedback. If you want to argue for a change the most effective way to do so it to provide reasoning for your assessments. Feedback doesn't need to be positive to be constructive, but constructive reasoned feedback is vastly more useful for influencing actual changes.

Big thanks to everyone who has contributed in a constructive manner to this discussion so far. Like I said, we have a significant set of balance changes currently before the CSM and I'll be sharing those with you very soon as well as going over some of the specific larger scope issues that have been raised.



At least the fast recognition that these open HUGE new loopholes is interesting.

But soemthign I would kindly ask for a comment is what is the view of CCP on the possible effect of the jump unit into forcing almsot all fights to scram range ( blaster kingdom).. don' tyou fear this might tip the racial balance.. kind agressively?

If all ships start to use those to get away, peopel will be in all their right to complain that their arazus, rapiers, cerberus etc.. have all been massively nerfed for small scale combat.

Hope your balance pass handle a bit of it.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#591 - 2014-01-08 21:10:24 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
anyone else think it's silly that the scan inhibitor shown up on d-scan? This thing should only be detectable via probes.


IMO that would be overpowering!
Erasmus Phoenix
Avalanche.
#592 - 2014-01-08 21:21:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Erasmus Phoenix
[inset comments about making them directly warpable without probes]

They can still be used as traps, or to prevent information gathering about a fleet, but using them all over the place would be a much less attractive proposition, since then anyone dedicated enough would be able to find you after going to all of them without repeated and easy to detect scanning. Maintaining the decoys with decloaking bubble traps would make this a valid means of forcing a cloaky scout to decloak if he makes the wrong choice.

They'll still be attractive for a PvP fleet trying to hide its composition, but nowhere near as nice for PvE groups just trying to HIDE.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#593 - 2014-01-08 21:28:25 UTC
Erasmus Phoenix wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:
anyone else think it's silly that the scan inhibitor shown up on d-scan? This thing should only be detectable via probes.


IMO that would be overpowering!


Well, no. They can still be used as traps, or to prevent information gathering about a fleet, but using them all over the place would be a much less attractive proposition, since then anyone dedicated enough would be able to find you after going to all of them without repeated and easy to detect scanning. Maintaining the decoys with decloaking bubble traps would make this a valid means of forcing a cloaky scout to decloak if he makes the wrong choice.

They'll still be attractive for a PvP fleet trying to hide its composition, but nowhere near as nice for PvE groups just trying to HIDE.



How so? They already are massively overpowered sicen you an only pinpoint them with COMBAT probes. That basically means its now impossible to solo PVP hunt any PVe activity (because covert ops is basically only thing that can fidn them).

This is already a huge nerf to any chance of solo or very small groups catching any PVE active players :( Except of course in space without local, there chances continue even

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Rek Seven
The Persuaders
#594 - 2014-01-08 21:32:18 UTC
Priestess Lin wrote:

Now that you know you can't hide cosmic signatures/anomalies with the MSI, can't we all agree this is a tool that will greatly benefit the game?


No. How does making it easier for PEV'er to avoid getting caught make the game better?

I might be wrong but to me it sounds like this deployable is intended for 2 things:

1. Make it safer for PVE in dangerous areas (mission success)
2. Allow wormhole fleets to hide (half success success)
Erasmus Phoenix
Avalanche.
#595 - 2014-01-08 21:48:15 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Erasmus Phoenix wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:
anyone else think it's silly that the scan inhibitor shown up on d-scan? This thing should only be detectable via probes.


IMO that would be overpowering!


Well, no. They can still be used as traps, or to prevent information gathering about a fleet, but using them all over the place would be a much less attractive proposition, since then anyone dedicated enough would be able to find you after going to all of them without repeated and easy to detect scanning. Maintaining the decoys with decloaking bubble traps would make this a valid means of forcing a cloaky scout to decloak if he makes the wrong choice.

They'll still be attractive for a PvP fleet trying to hide its composition, but nowhere near as nice for PvE groups just trying to HIDE.



How so? They already are massively overpowered sicen you an only pinpoint them with COMBAT probes. That basically means its now impossible to solo PVP hunt any PVe activity (because covert ops is basically only thing that can fidn them).

This is already a huge nerf to any chance of solo or very small groups catching any PVE active players :( Except of course in space without local, there chances continue even


Oh, balls. Yeah, I thought I was replying to one about being able to warp straight to them, my bad. Will go back and edit.
Onslaughtor
Phoenix Naval Operations
Phoenix Naval Systems
#596 - 2014-01-08 22:03:31 UTC
I find that the potential use of the MJU is diminished by the fact that it only lets one person use it at a time. I would like that functionality to be looked at. Thanks.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#597 - 2014-01-08 22:17:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Kagura Nikon
Onslaughtor wrote:
I find that the potential use of the MJU is diminished by the fact that it only lets one person use it at a time. I would like that functionality to be looked at. Thanks.



ITs needed... really.... otherwise ia single fleet can deploy so many of them that you will be hunting fleas not ships in space.

Also thing the spool need to bit a bit longer like 20 seconds. OR the deployment must take way more time

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
#598 - 2014-01-08 22:26:45 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone. Thanks to everyone who has provided useful feedback so far. We're busy squashing bugs that have been reported so far as well as incorporating your valuable balance input into some significant design changes.

As many of you have noticed, these structures arrived on SISI in a relatively untested state due to our opening up of the test server immediately after the Christmas holidays. We decided that the earliest possible testing was the way to go, and I think this was the correct call. We're knocking the bugs down at a very rapid rate and the structures are already in a much improved state in our internal builds in part thanks to your testing help.

We're also implementing a set of significant balance changes that incorporate your feedback. I just put these changes in front of the CSM today so I'll probably give them a chance to look it over before going public, but we believe the changes we have in the works are a strong improvement that will address a lot of the community's concerns. That being said, these structures are intentionally provocative so even after this round of adjustments we expect them to be very disruptive to the status quo in a valuable and exciting way.

I'll quickly go over a few of the bugs that we've either squashed internally or are very close to being squashed, since I know there is quite a bit of confusion:

  • The Micro Jump Unit mass restrictions are not working on SISI, this is a bug and once fixed capital ships (anything above 1,000,000,000 mass) will not be able to use the MJU.
  • The fact that you can eject or board a ship while the MJU is spooling is a bug and will be fixed in an upcoming update.
  • The fact that you can use the MJU while in Bastion mode is a bug and will be fixed in an upcoming update.
  • The fact that the MJU has no graphical model is a bug and will be fixed in an upcoming update.

  • The fact that the Scan Inhibitor prevents scanning of Cosmic Signatures is a bug that will be fixed in an upcoming update.
  • Although Cosmic Anomalies are always visible and warpable in both the discovery scanner and the scan window even when covered by a Inhib, the fact that it prevented probes themselves from getting Anom results (a consistency issue) is a bug and will be fixed in an upcoming update.
  • Although they are always visible on system-wide overviews and (in the case of celestials on right click menus), the fact that the Inhib prevented beacons and celestials from showing up on directional scans is a bug that will be fixed in an upcoming update.

  • The fact that neither structure have proper descriptions on SISI is a bug and will be fixed in an upcoming update.
  • The fact that neither of the structures are in default overview settings is something that we just hadn't had time to do yet as of the most recent SISI update but will be fixed in an upcoming update. (Custom overviews will need to decide if they want to add the structures)

  • None of our tests have ever shown the MJU to allow someone to jump with an active Cyno. The MJU should not allow someone to jump with an active Cyno. It appears likely that the rumor that the MJU jumps people with active cynos is in fact false, but if you have experienced otherwise please submit a bug report.


That is not the entire extent of the changes we currently have in the works to these deployables, it does not cover the extensive balance changes we have in the pipeline. I will be giving the CSM a few hours to comment on the changes first and then bring that plan to you asap.

I'll remind people that hyperbole, personal attacks and rumor mongering are not effective forms of feedback. If you want to argue for a change the most effective way to do so it to provide reasoning for your assessments. Feedback doesn't need to be positive to be constructive, but constructive reasoned feedback is vastly more useful for influencing actual changes.

Big thanks to everyone who has contributed in a constructive manner to this discussion so far. Like I said, we have a significant set of balance changes currently before the CSM and I'll be sharing those with you very soon as well as going over some of the specific larger scope issues that have been raised.


Who ever thought this modules would fit EvE should be waterboarded.

The Tears Must Flow

Candente
Navy Veteran Club
#599 - 2014-01-08 22:36:19 UTC
Giving people more ways to defend themselves from ganking is not necessarily a bad thing, if it's about fairness. The same thing can be said not to allow a warp bubble be set up within the effect of a MSI. It shouldn't be used behind an acceleration gate for the same principle.

These should be no brainers no matter how much status quo is to be changed. Looking forward to see the balance changes.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#600 - 2014-01-08 22:39:39 UTC
Candente wrote:
Giving people more ways to defend themselves from ganking is not necessarily a bad thing, if it's about fairness. The same thing can be said not to allow a warp bubble be set up within the effect of a MSI. It shouldn't be used behind an acceleration gate for the same principle.

These should be no brainers no matter how much status quo is to be changed. Looking forward to see the balance changes.



I am much more worrie don the fact aht now you need to be able to kill your target within 32 secodns 9that measn blob) or you need to be in a blaster boat :(

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"