These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
ArmyOfMe
Teddybears.
Dead Terrorists
#401 - 2014-12-18 19:46:17 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Appreciate all the discussion. The work day is ending here so I'll let this continue tonight and talk over the feedback with my colleagues in the morning and then get back to you with responses to specific issues.

Thanks

Do not give in, this is a awesome change for recons, and i cant wait to try them out as solo ships Pirate

GM Guard > I must ask you not to use the petition option like this again but i personally would finish the chicken sandwich first so it won´t go to waste. The spaghetti will keep and you can use it the next time you get hungry. Best regards.

Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#402 - 2014-12-18 19:47:30 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Gorski Car wrote:
MukkBarovian wrote:
This is ridiculous.

- "I warp in 2 fite 2 vexor and they also have 2 rook."
Yes this will happen but with the current rules you could warp in to 2 vexors and have 2 falcons decloak on you. Nothing is stopping anybody from doing that.

-"Wormholes are unlivable."
What? Wormholes have all kinds of cloaky things in them all the time. Between the cloaky T3s, the Covops, the Recons and the Stratios its pretty dumb to just wander around without being cloaky. A bomber can target and point you instantly after decloak. A Huginn will have to land on grid decloaked and burn over to you uncloaked. (You're an idiot if you sit within point range of the warp in.) Sure the Huginn is tankier than a single bomber, but its not outright superior as a tackler.

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.
There are so many things that already don't show up in WH directional scan that I just don't get why combat recons are some kind of serious problem. Whats the difference between a cloaked Falcon and an uncloaked Rook? Does it really come down to those few seconds of targeting delay after decloak? How about the upside that you can at least find out about them with probes?

-"Dscan tools are broken!"
No they aren't. The cloaky falcon also didn't show up on the Dscan of the enemy fleet.

-"10 arty Huginn..."
Sure the hidden arty Huginn got a slight buff. But 9 arty Rapiers and an instalock bomber can currently create the same effect. You don't see them on scan. They can point you instantly. They blap anemically for the number of ships involved. Somehow I don't regularly worry about cloaky arty Rapier fleets right now.


*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.
Recons were weak compared to t3s, eafs and sometimes even t1 ewar ships.


True. I fly belli more than huginn just because its bonuses meshed well. The only huginn i had fun with had 500dps, but cost about what 5-6 fully fit bellis did, and was still pretty ****.

im willing to try this, i dont think this will be as game breaking as people claim. And im in FW daily. Quite simple really, if i want to med plex, find a low pop system and plex away. For systems i regularly travel, im familiar with what space junk is on dscan. Add new ships on dscan compared to local, does total ship = local? Yes? All ships accounted for. No? Prob a recon floating around.

You want to plex amamake or some other high population/pirate ridden system? Should probably be in a gang anyway. Low pop fw systems will be largely unaffected.
Edwin Wyatt
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#403 - 2014-12-18 19:49:24 UTC
Again CCP strikes with another ill though out changes to recons.

So my option is to fly a ship that can cloak and I can pick my targets, range and time to strike, or I can fly around in a so called combat recon ship that cannot be seen by directional scanners, 99% of high sec don't use d-scanner. This will only be useful for harassing players who enjoy faction warfare, running anoms or missions in populated lowsec systems and WH space.


You fail to see how these ships are currently used and draw up this encourage others to use the combat recon ships.

Increase DPS in combat recons to HAC levels, they are paper thin and use EW to tank a target.
Why are all damps and tracking disrupters scripted but not warp disrupters or scramblers,Target painters and ECM?

You need to focus on simpler changes, that only affect the change item directly and not make up arbitrary changes that have cascading effects on the entire universe, a great example is "Teams". Complicated solution to such a simple problem!

Good luck CCP, I believe you will truly need it in the months to come.

Marcel Devereux
Aideron Robotics
#404 - 2014-12-18 19:49:40 UTC
Ripard Teg wrote:
Catherine Laartii wrote:
-I need to point this out since it keeps popping up in this thread like a demented gopher and needs to be put down:
The Huginn should not get missiles. Core Complexion ships in this game have missiles as part of their identity with the new balance meta, so Boundless Creation ships shouldn't be getting it at all in any instance. You want a TP bonus on a t2 missile cruiser? Tough sh*t! Caldari are the ones who need the bloody TP bonuses to compliment their missiles; minmatar just needs something else like web strength or extra combat usability. Web range is a bonus as effective if not more so in pvp since it is the literal definition of range control. They should have fixed this a LONG time ago but it's never once been addressed.

Hm. You raise a good point about the corporate tendencies. I p.much never think about that (frankly, because I think it adds very little to the game).

This does pretty efficiently neuter the Huginn, though. Rapier or Lach will be better for anything that I can think of off the top of my head. Am I missing a use case, perhaps in FW?


pssh. The Lach will get great for those nano-shield gangs and nothing else.
Nitrah
Adhocracy Incorporated
Adhocracy
#405 - 2014-12-18 19:50:20 UTC
Aiyshimin wrote:
MukkBarovian wrote:
Whats the difference between a cloaked Falcon and an uncloaked Rook? Does it really come down to those few seconds of targeting delay after decloak?


The difference is that you can see the Falcon on dscan when it enters the system, but you can't see the Rook. Previously no ship could enter a wormhole unnoticed.


Unless you put a listening picket on the wormhole. Or have someone with combat probes out to see him instantly.

this is absolutely no different than running a site in a wormhole which is larger than 14.3AU across where the wormhole is off of d-scan. Except this is safer for you because it takes one button push of the combat scanner to light up his presence like a Christmas tree.

If he's going to warp in on you in an anomaly, it'll be at zero from the warpin. If you're not a dope, you won't be within 30km or so, and will be able to warp out. You are still at a much greater risk of an astero than you are of any combat recon bogeyman.
Trii Seo
Goonswarm Federation
#406 - 2014-12-18 19:50:39 UTC
The pilgrim could use some of its old neuting strength bonus, not just range - especially with Curse being dscan-proof.

With Rapier and Arazu being your primary tackle&cyno ships due to, well, their bonused tackle (and the fact that they can fit the typical hunting setup of 2 cynos + probes + cloak without gimping themselves, since their job-slots are mids - unlike the Pilgrim which uses high slots primarily).

Other than that, good changes all around.

Proud pilot of the Imperium

Arek'Jaalan: Heliograph

Azzie Stardust
Unimpressed Collectors
#407 - 2014-12-18 19:54:13 UTC
> Combat Recons no longer show up on d-scan.

This is rly big gamechanger. EVE will never be the same. Maybe you should send some industries team to re-check that.
Discomanco
We pooped on your lawn
#408 - 2014-12-18 19:54:14 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Levina Windstar wrote:
Discomanco wrote:
MukkBarovian wrote:
This is ridiculous.

- "I warp in 2 fite 2 vexor and they also have 2 rook."
Yes this will happen but with the current rules you could warp in to 2 vexors and have 2 falcons decloak on you. Nothing is stopping anybody from doing that.

-"Wormholes are unlivable."
What? Wormholes have all kinds of cloaky things in them all the time. Between the cloaky T3s, the Covops, the Recons and the Stratios its pretty dumb to just wander around without being cloaky. A bomber can target and point you instantly after decloak. A Huginn will have to land on grid decloaked and burn over to you uncloaked. (You're an idiot if you sit within point range of the warp in.) Sure the Huginn is tankier than a single bomber, but its not outright superior as a tackler.

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.
There are so many things that already don't show up in WH directional scan that I just don't get why combat recons are some kind of serious problem. Whats the difference between a cloaked Falcon and an uncloaked Rook? Does it really come down to those few seconds of targeting delay after decloak? How about the upside that you can at least find out about them with probes?

-"Dscan tools are broken!"
No they aren't. The cloaky falcon also didn't show up on the Dscan of the enemy fleet.

-"10 arty Huginn..."
Sure the hidden arty Huginn got a slight buff. But 9 arty Rapiers and an instalock bomber can currently create the same effect. You don't see them on scan. They can point you instantly. They blap anemically for the number of ships involved. Somehow I don't regularly worry about cloaky arty Rapier fleets right now.

Pretty much well said.
I have never seen any concern about wormhole due to the huge amount of cloaked danger there's already out there, so people just whine to whine right now.

I can understand the concern for FW though, but I guess you just have to prepare for the worst.



It's nice to see so many comments regarding WH coming from ppl who actually doesn't live there and have no clue of what they are talking about Shocked.

Anyway, it's your opinion so it's fine, and mine is I think a ship that is immune to D-Scane is too OP in WH. Hell, I'll be the first one to use it but I still think this is too OP and need at least some balance and/or huge drawback.

I have lived in WHs, granted it was not for long but I lived there.
Everything I saw coming in to kill me was cloaky. Everything. What would the Combat Recons change? Those I can actually see landing on grid and have a chance to get out before I get tackled.
Xercodo
Cruor Angelicus
#409 - 2014-12-18 19:57:53 UTC
Kyle Yanowski wrote:
On Forced Recon changes:

Limiting the feature of DSCAN immunity to a single class of ships is somewhat folly. I personally feel that that DSCAN immunity should be reserved for a module or rig. Thus giving capsuleers a choice on reducing DPS, or Tank, or Maneuverability in favor of anonymity.

Force Recon implies that these ships should fill a reconnaissance role in fleets (or solo). My proposal is simple:

Force Recon Role Bonus: 200% increase to DSCAN effective range instead of what is currently proposed. This will give the ships a significant role in fleet through the ability to quickly scan down systems as well as in solo.


Good idea, however would require some potentially significant back end changes as dscan is limited by the range of values for a 32-bit integer right now and nothing else as far as I can tell. I don't know how hard it'd be for CCP to change the datatype underneath but they would also need to put in extra work to ensure that the current limit is maintained artificially instead of automatically being capped by data type limitations.

The Drake is a Lie

Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#410 - 2014-12-18 20:00:42 UTC
I'd like to see Pilgrim get something in between it's current bonus and the proposed one.... Bit of a range bonus, but bit of an amount bonus. Considering it's already slower and less tanky than the Curse, plus pretty much stuck with an armour tank it could do with some extra neuting to counter the Curse imo.
Nova' Darkstar
Doomheim
#411 - 2014-12-18 20:00:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Nova' Darkstar
After the initial "Omg no combat recons on d-scan? that would be hilarious!" thoughts wore-off, and I actually realized what this would do, I am going to have to put my vote against making combat recons immune to d-scan.

It is way too over powered, and this is coming from a pure cov-ops/recon pilot. Not only does this hurt small gang/solo PVP, and FW (Curse sitting in a medium plex? goodbye almost anything that warps in) but it will also make any bears that are piracy targets insanely risk averse since they will always be expecting a curse or something sitting somewhere in system waiting to land on them. It will actually make low-sec/wh even more dead due to bears just not going there at all because they will be expecting the worst. At least they go there now and have d-scan as a little cushion of security which makes them feel a little safer. If they know they won't feel safe at all, it isn't really "lol yeah bears! in your face! can't wait to gank you!" because they simply will just not be there to gank. Making such a drastic and over powered change might seem like a great buff, but when a change is so overpowered, people won't even try to fight it and thus you have less pew and no targets to even use your super awesome new buff on.

I also am going to have to put a vote against swapping the Pilgrims neut/nos strength bonus with range. The Pilgrim is a great solo/small gang boat, and is known for being a very close range heavy tackle ship that takes a while to grind down it's opponent. Swapping the strength bonus for range bonus kind of takes away some of the reason to even fly a Pilgrim over the Curse at all in addition with the new d-scan changes. With the Curse, you need the range because you can be seen on grid when you land. With the Pilgrim, you need the strength because you are de-cloaking on-top of them anyway since you are most likely heavy tackle in a small gang, or solo.

The other buffs to their tanks and bringing them in line with HAC tanks look great.

tl:dr

-No on the d-scan immunity for combat recons

-No on the Pilgrim swapping it's neut/nos strength bonus for a range bonus because why not just fly a Curse then?

Everything else looks good.
Kyle Yanowski
Malevelon Roe Industries
Convocation of Empyreans
#412 - 2014-12-18 20:00:46 UTC
Edwin Wyatt wrote:
Again CCP strikes with another ill though out changes to recons.



Feller, you do know that this is a Features and Ideas forum? Soliciting the community for feedback on an idea...

Host of the High Drag Eve Online Podcast ( http://highdrag.wordpress.com). Director of Aideron Robotics.

Edward Olmops
Gunboat Commando
#413 - 2014-12-18 20:03:04 UTC
Ripard Teg wrote:

I'm torn on the invisible-to-dscan thing. It feels OP, particularly in w-space. It also makes me nervous because you guys don't have a good strategy around "What intelligence tools should there be in EVE?" So you probably shouldn't be screwing around with the intel tools we do have until you know what the strategy is going to be.


Always appreciating your judgement... but this time...
Why is this OP?
Where is this better than a regular cloak? (aside of the invisible Gas Harvester)

1. Please notice that regular cloaks also make you PERMANENTLY INVISIBLE ON D-SCAN. Uh-oh. What if cloaked ships sit in wormholes?

2. If you are ambushing someone I very much doubt that warping in on someone and locking him is faster (and thus more OP) than decloaking right next to him + locking. A bomber is definitely faster and a T3 most likely.

So that leaves which aspect of overpoweredness?

[Note to self: post that concept on intel tools.]
vikari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#414 - 2014-12-18 20:05:46 UTC
CCP historically the rebalances to ships have simplified them, as well as updated their stats. All of these ships contain token weapon ships that will not be used, as well as in some cases, undefined tanks. Consider these changes for review please:

Pilgrim: Change the layout to support armor tanking. Move a mid slot to a low slot. As it stands now 5 mids are unnecessary. This ship's damage is mostly in drones, and will need low slots to push that damage without crippling it's tank.

Curse: Change the layout to support armor tanking. Move 2 mid slots to low slots. The 6 mid slots come largely as a waste to this ship. This ship's damage is mostly in drones, and will need low slots to push that damage without crippling it's tank.

Falcon: Remove the launcher slot, keep it as an utility slot for the cloak. This boat will engage at mid to long range, and there for next mix it's guns with missiles.

Rook: Remove the turret slots. Consider also having a missile bonus apply to rapid light and heavy assault, this ship has a change to be close range, as its mid slots support it.

Arazu: Remove the launcher slot, keep it as an utility slot for the cloak. Decide if you want this boat to be armor or shield, the slot layout supports shield but the defense numbers support armor. Consider swapping one mid to a low, or removing some armor and adding shield to the defense.

Lachesis: Remove the launcher slot, pilots are going to run 5 turrets in their 5 high slots. Decide if you want this boat to be armor or shield, the slot layout supports shield but the defense numbers support armor. Consider swapping 2 mid to 2 low, or removing some armor and adding shield to the defense.

Rapier: Remove the turret slot and keep it as an utility slot for the cloak, or consider a 2 turret /2 launcher layout to force a mix of weapon types. Current configuration leave the turret unused.

Huginn: Remove the launcher slot, or consider a 2 turret /2 launcher layout to force a mix of weapon types. Current configuration leave the launcher unused.
Levina Windstar
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#415 - 2014-12-18 20:05:52 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Discomanco wrote:
Levina Windstar wrote:
Discomanco wrote:
MukkBarovian wrote:
This is ridiculous.

- "I warp in 2 fite 2 vexor and they also have 2 rook."
Yes this will happen but with the current rules you could warp in to 2 vexors and have 2 falcons decloak on you. Nothing is stopping anybody from doing that.

-"Wormholes are unlivable."
What? Wormholes have all kinds of cloaky things in them all the time. Between the cloaky T3s, the Covops, the Recons and the Stratios its pretty dumb to just wander around without being cloaky. A bomber can target and point you instantly after decloak. A Huginn will have to land on grid decloaked and burn over to you uncloaked. (You're an idiot if you sit within point range of the warp in.) Sure the Huginn is tankier than a single bomber, but its not outright superior as a tackler.

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.
There are so many things that already don't show up in WH directional scan that I just don't get why combat recons are some kind of serious problem. Whats the difference between a cloaked Falcon and an uncloaked Rook? Does it really come down to those few seconds of targeting delay after decloak? How about the upside that you can at least find out about them with probes?

-"Dscan tools are broken!"
No they aren't. The cloaky falcon also didn't show up on the Dscan of the enemy fleet.

-"10 arty Huginn..."
Sure the hidden arty Huginn got a slight buff. But 9 arty Rapiers and an instalock bomber can currently create the same effect. You don't see them on scan. They can point you instantly. They blap anemically for the number of ships involved. Somehow I don't regularly worry about cloaky arty Rapier fleets right now.

Pretty much well said.
I have never seen any concern about wormhole due to the huge amount of cloaked danger there's already out there, so people just whine to whine right now.

I can understand the concern for FW though, but I guess you just have to prepare for the worst.



It's nice to see so many comments regarding WH coming from ppl who actually doesn't live there and have no clue of what they are talking about Shocked.

Anyway, it's your opinion so it's fine, and mine is I think a ship that is immune to D-Scane is too OP in WH. Hell, I'll be the first one to use it but I still think this is too OP and need at least some balance and/or huge drawback.

I have lived in WHs, granted it was not for long but I lived there.
Everything I saw coming in to kill me was cloaky. Everything. What would the Combat Recons change? Those I can actually see landing on grid and have a chance to get out before I get tackled.


They are cruiser type ship with insanely fast warp speed. Believe me when I'm telling you that when you see it comig on grid, you wont' have time to warp away unless your in a frig.

"I can make billions using my mouth ...

... and sometimes when I talk, too" --- Solecist Project

Tarek Raimo
Eleutherian Guard
#416 - 2014-12-18 20:08:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Tarek Raimo
Many people have (correctly) pointed out the problematic implications of D-Scan immunity for WH Space and Lowsec solo/small gang pvp, but that is not all of it.

Imagine the following scenario in 0.0:

Local spikes with 100 enemies. Your spotters see that 50 of them are Ishtars/Tengus/Whatever FOTM + Logi, the other 50 are unaccounted for. Therefore, they could be any of four shiptypes with HAC tanks, dangerous EWAR and the damage potential of at least an AF. Even if you have a specialized combat prober in your fleet, you wont be able to determine what they are if they keep warping around in system.

Now take an educated guess what your FC will do.

My money would be on either fleeing or docking up since they can't estimate the risk of the upcoming engagement.

The net effect on nullsec fleet-fights will be negative, of that I am sure.
Suzuma
Makiriemi Industries
#417 - 2014-12-18 20:08:58 UTC
Lumpymayo wrote:
I have been waiting for over a year and a half for the Rorqual rebalance.


I've been waiting since they added it into the game

CEO

Makiriemi Industries

Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
#418 - 2014-12-18 20:09:20 UTC
While I can fly a lachesis to full ability, how about making the undetectable on d-scan bonus a module that can only be fitted on combat recons like how marauders are used with bastion modules these days. Id be inclined to suggest that the interceptor immunity to bubbles be a module too.
Teleil Zoomers
Royal Sphynx Ltd
#419 - 2014-12-18 20:09:50 UTC
heres the skinny of it imo.

how much time do you spend combat probing systems/sites now?

how much time would you be willing to spend combat probing systems/sites?
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#420 - 2014-12-18 20:10:01 UTC
Nova' Darkstar wrote:
It will actually make low-sec/wh even more dead due to bears just not going there at all because they will be expecting the worst. At least they go there now and have d-scan as a little cushion of security which makes them feel a little safer


You mean just as dead as it is with people being able to sneak up on a bear with a cloak? Let's face it the majority of bears in Lowsec and Nullsec dock up as soon as you appear in local, whether you are dscan immune, cloaky or saying hello in local makes no difference.

As for wormholes, I don't think it makes a whole lot of difference. Covert recons can land on grid and get into position before they have a 5 second decloak delay and lock/point you. Combat recons will show visible on grid then take a couple of seconds to slow down and lock you whilst not having the advantage of being able to get into a nice position before targetting.