These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Proteus - January] Recon ships

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#2161 - 2015-01-03 22:31:55 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Iain Cariaba wrote:
Anyone want to place bets on how long after combat recons get d-scan immunity it'll be before F&I gets flooded with suggestions on every single other ship size getting the same treatment?


There's already been at least one suggestion I've seen so far...



The one ship that would really benefit, and it is not in the cruiser class, Is the Nestor. It would remove the biggest downside to using it in wormhole space, and would not "frighten" people like the suggestion that it would benefit from a covert ops cloak.
Warping with a covert fleet, is not currently a sane action outside of the home wormhole, or at best a controlled static.
This would allow the nestor to travel, playing to its main advantage, the low mass, which is currently wasted.

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
Mario Putzo
#2162 - 2015-01-03 23:18:29 UTC
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Iain Cariaba wrote:
Anyone want to place bets on how long after combat recons get d-scan immunity it'll be before F&I gets flooded with suggestions on every single other ship size getting the same treatment?


There's already been at least one suggestion I've seen so far...



The one ship that would really benefit, and it is not in the cruiser class, Is the Nestor. It would remove the biggest downside to using it in wormhole space, and would not "frighten" people like the suggestion that it would benefit from a covert ops cloak.
Warping with a covert fleet, is not currently a sane action outside of the home wormhole, or at best a controlled static.
This would allow the nestor to travel, playing to its main advantage, the low mass, which is currently wasted.



Just need to repurpose the Nestor to be a Blops ship honestly. Not one that can bridge folks, but one that can jump to cyno beacons. MMMMM Black Ops Logistics. One can dream.
Orange Faeces
Farbissina Industrial and Procurement
#2163 - 2015-01-03 23:41:43 UTC
The transition of this thread from dialog about the Recons to Ishtar/Nestor balance signals that substantive contributions are now complete. Its encouraging that most people have really come around in the last 40 pages...


O. Faeces
KIller Wabbit
MEME Thoughts
#2164 - 2015-01-04 00:15:34 UTC
Orange Faeces wrote:
The transition of this thread from dialog about the Recons to Ishtar/Nestor balance signals that substantive contributions are now complete. Its encouraging that most people have really come around in the last 40 pages...


O. Faeces


No, it's because CCP has declared that they don't care what we think - no matter what, game breaking mechanic is going to be shoved down our throats.
Orange Faeces
Farbissina Industrial and Procurement
#2165 - 2015-01-04 00:19:47 UTC
KIller Wabbit wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Okay, first major update just edited into the OP.


  • Finally, I will say again that the directional scan immunity is staying, though we are very aware of concerns (especially concerning FW site abuse) and will watch closely to see how this new capability is used and make any necessary adjustments.

    • Have a great Christmas o/


    A game breaking ******* bullshit mechanic. You should be ashamed.


    The claim that d-scan immunity is somehow game-breaking has been well refuted, even by its most ardent opponents. Do you have something else you wanted to add?


    O. Faeces
    Mario Putzo
    #2166 - 2015-01-04 00:58:47 UTC
    KIller Wabbit wrote:
    Orange Faeces wrote:
    The transition of this thread from dialog about the Recons to Ishtar/Nestor balance signals that substantive contributions are now complete. Its encouraging that most people have really come around in the last 40 pages...


    O. Faeces


    No, it's because CCP has declared that they don't care what we think - no matter what, game breaking mechanic is going to be shoved down our throats.




    Its hardly a gamebreaking mechanic. It is literally no different than having a Cov Ops cloaking device fitted to a ship. So I don't know why you are worked up about it. I mean you could say something sensible like.

    The gimmick change is a placebo that offers no distinct difference between a Force Recon and a Combat Recon. They are still the same ships, with Force Recons still offering more utility to a fleet as a whole. As such I think CCP should focus more on actually making Combat Recons, combat capable, instead of providing them some gimmick to masquerade as a unique function in everyday use.
    FT Diomedes
    The Graduates
    #2167 - 2015-01-04 03:13:47 UTC
    Mario Putzo wrote:
    CCP should focus more on actually making Combat Recons, combat capable


    Completely agree with this. As specialized T2 ships, Combat Recons need to offer more to a fleet than their T1 counterparts - that should be equal or superior performance and superior survivability.

    CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

    Mario Putzo
    #2168 - 2015-01-04 03:38:48 UTC
    FT Diomedes wrote:
    Mario Putzo wrote:
    CCP should focus more on actually making Combat Recons, combat capable


    Completely agree with this. As specialized T2 ships, Combat Recons need to offer more to a fleet than their T1 counterparts - that should be equal or superior performance and superior survivability.


    One thing they should definitely be capable of doing is Black Ops. They should be the combat arm of Black Ops gangs, where Force Recons fulfill the support role of Black Ops gangs. Currently you get to choose between T3's or the Stratios for combat Black Ops cruisers.

    Honestly CCP should just make these HACs -1 weapon slot, and give them the Cov Ops cloak.
    Of course get rid of their EWAR bonus, in favor of a 4% Resist bonus per level of their respective racial cruisers.

    No gimmicky bullshit. A defined role that is clearly absent from Cruiser sized T2 ships.

    And a ship that while not as capable in direct fleet combat as HACs can hide their numbers and inflict decent damage with adequate survivability.

    It also gives Force Recons a defined role as "masters" of EWAR.

    Win, win win, and no gimmick mechanic that doesn't actually add anything to the game.
    Orange Faeces
    Farbissina Industrial and Procurement
    #2169 - 2015-01-04 03:50:38 UTC
    FT Diomedes wrote:
    Mario Putzo wrote:
    CCP should focus more on actually making Combat Recons, combat capable


    Completely agree with this. As specialized T2 ships, Combat Recons need to offer more to a fleet than their T1 counterparts - that should be equal or superior performance and superior survivability.


    I've already shown that the Combat Recons have survivability on par with HACs, especially Huginn, Rook and Lach. As for EWAR superiority, with the exception of the Blackbird/Rook/Falcon range-bonus inversion, I think an EWAR rebalance is separate from the work of a recon ship rebalance.


    O. F.
    Mario Putzo
    #2170 - 2015-01-04 04:02:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Mario Putzo
    Orange Faeces wrote:
    FT Diomedes wrote:
    Mario Putzo wrote:
    CCP should focus more on actually making Combat Recons, combat capable


    Completely agree with this. As specialized T2 ships, Combat Recons need to offer more to a fleet than their T1 counterparts - that should be equal or superior performance and superior survivability.


    I've already shown that the Combat Recons have survivability on par with HACs, especially Huginn, Rook and Lach. As for EWAR superiority, with the exception of the Blackbird/Rook/Falcon range-bonus inversion, I think an EWAR rebalance is separate from the work of a recon ship rebalance.


    O. F.




    And the Rapier, Huginn, and Falcon can all get a similar tank with the same flexibility, similar DPS, and better EWAR.

    The ships are the same son. Time to split their roles. If CCP is serious about making Combat Recons unique they will stick them with HAC like Combat and no EWAR, and remove the combat bonuses from Force Recon.

    I don't even know how you can continue to make an argument that Force Recons, and Combat Recons aren't the same ******* thing with only one having a Cov Ops cloaking device. It boggles my mind really.

    After this change the only effective difference between Combat Recons and Force Recons will be:

    The Curse is a bit better than the Pilgrim at EWAR
    The Huginn is a bit better than the Rapier in Damage
    The Rook has less applied damage than the Falcon
    The Lachesis has a bit better application with damage than the Arazu

    And Combat Recons can land on grid uncloaked without showing on DSCAN. Of course Force Recons can do this too if they time their decloak to coincide with grid loading.
    Orange Faeces
    Farbissina Industrial and Procurement
    #2171 - 2015-01-04 06:47:18 UTC
    Mario Putzo wrote:

    And the Rapier, Huginn, and Falcon can all get a similar tank with the same flexibility, similar DPS, and better EWAR.
    ...


    Your first claim isn't exactly correct. I ran the fits for making the rapier and arazu (which is what I think you meant) for HAC fleet/gang compatibility. At least for shield gangs, these just don't measure up without using both rig slots to plug the other hole, or using an additional mid-slot. It depends on how much alpha the opposition has, but Lach and Huginn perform better for that role. You're right that it isn't black and white, and some of the suggestions in page 106 (I think it was) would be helpful, but your chief claim isn't valid.


    O. Faeces
    PastyWhiteDevil
    Wilderness
    IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
    #2172 - 2015-01-04 08:04:47 UTC  |  Edited by: PastyWhiteDevil
    imo if you make the lachesis mostly turrets you will drastically nerf it. currently i run 3 heavies and 2 425 autos so my dmg is not dependent on cap. in the mids i run a 10mn mwd, a true sansha scram (22 km range with recon 5) 3 lse's an invuln and an active em ward. dcu, bcu and a caldari navy pdu in the lows. 2 t2 extender rigs

    with heat i deal about 400 dps, have some 70k ehp w/o links or bonuses and can passively tank like 240 dps (more w/ heated hardeners.

    this is one of the most fun ships to jump into ppl with solo. you basically can't kite it w/o links or a point bonused ship (27km scram when heated), and your missiles and drones ensure dmg application even it you get neuted out.

    please do not ruin this ships by making it all hybrid turrets. the split weapons in conjunction with the drones worked fine. and if you must give it more turret slots at least consider allowing it to use all missiles as well for those of us who like to fly it in this unorthodox manner.

    also d-scan immune is op. it should be shortened range.

    or possibly make it so that if you have any sort of timer it is visible on d-scan (so as to at least slow down it overpowered-ness)

    this is quite literally my favorite ship in game. please don't ruin it. lest we forget that roden favors MISSILES
    Aiyshimin
    Shiva Furnace
    #2173 - 2015-01-04 09:04:31 UTC
    Mario Putzo wrote:
    Aiyshimin wrote:
    [quote=Mario Putzo]
    There are no other ships in game that can perform the role of a Curse, Huginn or Lachesis. The dominant fleet comp today depends on the unique features of Huginns and Lachesises.

    As what comes to wh hunting, the CR used will be an armor Lach, acting as the primary tackler for the gankers, and you certainly can't shoot him. Best protection against it will be to position yourself +80km from the site warpin point. The change from today's ganking tools isn't dramatic, tho.


    With the exception of the Curse, the respective Force Recons of Minmatar and Gallente and Caldari are nearly the exact same as the Combat Recons, with similar fitting.

    A quick comparison

    Lach (4/7/4)
    10% bonus to Hybrids Tracking
    20% bonus to Points
    7.5% bonus to Damps
    10% to Hybrid Optimal

    Arazu (4/6/4)
    5% bonus to Hybrids
    20% bonus to points
    7.5% bonus to Damps
    Cov Ops Cloak
    Cov Ops Cyno

    So what do you gain here...better tracking and optimal range damage wise? I suppose that would be nice. I guess if you shield fit them it would also be beneficial to have a Lach for that extra mid slot. Lach has 1 more weapon but the Arazu gets 25% more damage which is close in straight up damage potential...as well as the free slot to place a cloak in, or a missile launcher to actually end up having more upfront total damage output than the Lachesis if thats your thing.

    The Lach has a bit more base Armor HP, but nothing to write home about, and a bit quicker lock speed, again nothing exceptional. Then the Arazu has the ability to forgo any damage, and act in a pure utility role with Cov Ops Cloak, Cov Ops Cyno can be an on grid warp in as well.

    Similar story between the Huginn and Rapier, and the Rook and Falcon.

    The only Combat Recon with a notable increase in its base functionality is the Curse vs the Pilgrim, the rest of them are all more or less carbon copies, with the same EWAR application and similar damage application. And after the change. 1 will have a Cov Ops cloak, the other will have DSCAN immunity...or Gimmick Cloak. Force Recons still can do Black Ops, Combat Recons still can not.

    Pretty freaking unique eh!.


    Mate the Lachs are indeed shield tanked and currently the Arazu just can't do it. It has almost 30k less EHP.

    Nobody gives a **** about recon dps, their unique feature is to be long range tackle in shield fleetsand like said, there are no alternatives and the dominant fleet comp today hinges on the existence of the combat recons. They aren't "unused crap", they are ships which Ishtars Online depends on.












    Mario Putzo
    #2174 - 2015-01-04 16:47:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Mario Putzo
    Aiyshimin wrote:

    Mate the Lachs are indeed shield tanked and currently the Arazu just can't do it. It has almost 30k less EHP.

    Nobody gives a **** about recon dps, their unique feature is to be long range tackle in shield fleetsand like said, there are no alternatives and the dominant fleet comp today hinges on the existence of the combat recons. They aren't "unused crap", they are ships which Ishtars Online depends on.


    I didn't say they were unused crap, I said they are marginally better than Force Recons in performing the EXACT same fleet role, and that this Gimmick change is going to do nothing to enhance that An Arazu will still be just about equal as a Lach after this change in a combat role, yet still have its host of other beneficial utility.

    I think my favorite line though is. No one gives a **** about recon dps.

    Case in point as to why these changes miss the mark. Combat Recons should combat. Force Recons should specialize in EWAR.


    Also 30K more EHP from a Lach vs an Arazu....hue hue hue. You high son?
    Freelancer117
    So you want to be a Hero
    #2175 - 2015-01-04 22:24:03 UTC
    Quote:
    Combat Recons will now be permanently undetectable by directional scanners


    This is a nice change in the ship stats, plz keep it balanced when force recons lose a high slot equipping a cloak and combat recon do not lose a slot getting this new stat.

    Eve online is :

    A) mining simulator B) glorified chatroom C) spreadsheets online

    D) CCP Games Pay to Win at skill leveling, with instant gratification

    http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg

    http://bit.ly/1egr4mF
    Solaris Vex
    The Scope
    Gallente Federation
    #2176 - 2015-01-04 22:27:00 UTC
    As it stands only the huginn and lachesis are viable in nullsec fleets and this patch will not change that, or the fact that T3s do the job better then recons themselves.

    Please bring fozzie back.
    Harvey James
    The Sengoku Legacy
    #2177 - 2015-01-05 11:19:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
    would be nice too hear from rise if any further changes are being considered from the many suggestions put forward
    key ones being

    - curse, arazu and lachesis need an extra low slot and more pg too make armour tanking them viable
    - force recons lack of usable high slots (-1 slots compared too combat recons effectively -3 highs after cloak/cyno)
    - high sig radius on most of them
    - consider removing the cpu for cloak bonus .. compensate any cpu needed .. thus allowing a new bonus for force recons (dps)
    - maybe look at the minnie recons again, an armour tanking huginn maybe?

    and some of mine
    - reduce the web range bonuses please.. also nerfing the skirmish links would help the well OP ranges here
    - making curse a proper missile khanid ship .. think missile ashimmu with TD's

    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
    Azazel The Misanthrope
    Oblivion's Pendulum
    Top Tier
    #2178 - 2015-01-05 13:19:30 UTC
    Seriously, if you are going to make them immune to d-scan they need to have serious scan resolution penalties so they are n't just sitting around everywhere in space waiting to instant lock whatever shows up and hold it there forever.
    Harvey James
    The Sengoku Legacy
    #2179 - 2015-01-05 14:12:44 UTC
    Azazel The Misanthrope wrote:
    Seriously, if you are going to make them immune to d-scan they need to have serious scan resolution penalties so they are n't just sitting around everywhere in space waiting to instant lock whatever shows up and hold it there forever.


    lock range nerf is in order for sure they have huge lock ranges

    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
    Hicksimus
    Torgue
    #2180 - 2015-01-05 19:34:23 UTC
    I'm going to move into a C1/C2 with dual static. I will rotate my statics until I find something to attack.....their only warning will be a new signature. Seems fair to me! But maybe because I will be the one winning.

    Recruitment Officer: What type of a pilot are you? Me: I've been described as a Ray Charles with Parkinsons and a drinking problem.