These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Discussion] Entosis Link Tactics and Ship Balance

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Elenahina
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#381 - 2015-03-09 17:53:44 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
afkalt wrote:
EvilweaselFinance wrote:
Trollceptors fundamentally don't fit the "effective control of the grid" argument. The things that can hit an orbiting snaked-out interceptor are few and far between and require very specific fits to counter, allowing a trollceptor to easily keep a link alive without effective control of the grid. This also forces specific metas, in opposition to the view that they should not affect the meta - you have to be able to blap interceptors in your fleet composition.

They also simply allow you to evade committing anything to a fight, and if you're attacking sov at the very least you should be risking a single ship.



A 100m isk, 2k EHP ship with a billion isk pod?

I'm sure they'll be ten-a-penny Roll


We toss around supercaps and titans like subcaps. Cost is in no way a barrier.


That's the problem, you know. CCP continues to think it is.

Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#382 - 2015-03-09 17:53:46 UTC  |  Edited by: PotatoOverdose
Promiscuous Female wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:
[quote=Kaarous Aldurald]
Cormorants, Svipuls, Confessors, Caracals, Cerberii, Cynabals, Instalocking Lokis, Instalocking Gnosis, Vagabonds, Navy Omens, Exequror Navy Issues, Insta Canes, Faction fit Huggins, Faction Fit Rapier, and if they're at long range: Rail Tengus, Rail Eagles, Rail Proteus, Arty Lokis, Cerberii (again), Nagas, Beam Legions, Beam Zealots, Arty Munnin, Faction fit Huggins (again), Faction Fit Rapier (again).

But no, let's just say interceptors are the only thing that can kill an interceptor forced to stay on grid.

Get rekt.

would like to see some eft fits/graphs of any of those tracking an interceptor at long range (150km or so)

I'm at work right now, but plug in an Arty Loki into EFT and it wrecks an inty going at 5k at 120km.

Rail Gus will annihilate an inty at 150 going at any speed.

Rail Cormorants will track with the tracking of small turrets at 90k+

The Cerberus will can be fit to hit an inty at 140km as well as an inty at 10km

The only thing that intys have going in the current meta is their ability to bravely run away. Take that away from them, force them to stay on grid, and it's "Lol Inty go Squish".
EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#383 - 2015-03-09 17:53:49 UTC
MASSADEATH wrote:

see we are a Guerrilla force... we strike and move....strike and move... we dont bash our heads into your 30,000 man alliance head on.... why would we?

"we don't do pvp, because we always lose"
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#384 - 2015-03-09 17:53:54 UTC
Promiscuous Female wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:
Promiscuous Female wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:

Because they can be countered by a T1 ewar frig that's even cheaper - so long as there's someone awake in local anyways.

edit: Anyone noticed that goons have to blob the forums to try and win their arguments?

you counter an interceptor at one capture node / sov structure and it just shrugs and goes to another one

nothing warps faster than an interceptor so enjoy spewing logarithmically increasing numbers of evemannen to bore out a single interceptor

I think you mean "Nothing warps faster than an interceptor using an entosis link that can't even start its warp for 2 minutes..."

And the fallacy is revealed...because pretty much everything other than a freighter can do that.

ah yes the situation where you use PSYCHIC POWERS to determine which system the interceptor plans on hitting before its entosis module cycles and allows it to exit system

This is where living in your space helps.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#385 - 2015-03-09 17:53:55 UTC

I think there is a lot of unqualified whining in this thread that makes me sad.

CCP Rise, as demonstrated through his recent interview, seems to have a firm grasp of our fears. He also has pretty decent goals, and I, for one, appreciate the work he's put in.

Frankly, I'm not concerned about a troll ceptor, as that can be countered.

I have two main concerns:

1.) I fear the effort involved in RF'ing a structure is much less than the effort needed to secure it post-RF, even when it's uncontested. I feel the effort for the initial RF'ing needs to be comparable to the effort required to re-secure it. Perhaps double the time required to initially RF a structure.

2.) I feel the prime-time window is too small, especially for unused systems. I'm ok with a heavily utilized system having a small vulnerability window, but an unused system should not be isolated from off-time zone attacks. Ideally, you'd have the vulnerability start at 12 hours of vulnerability, and shrink to 4 hours with increased Sov usage indexes.
John McCreedy
Eve Defence Force
#386 - 2015-03-09 17:54:07 UTC  |  Edited by: John McCreedy
MASSADEATH wrote:
Corey Lean wrote:
MASSADEATH wrote:
The whole point is to end the sprawling wasteland of empty SOV space.... and this should do it. If a 30,000 man alliance cant have a few people with entosis ships on the standby to stop SOV attacks on thier structures then they dont deserve that space


No the point is about fights. Mr. Fozzie the the design goals and end-state of all these changes is to generate fights by controlling the grid through force of arms, not slippery petes or interceptors. So that should exclude the usual suspects from this conversation about sovereignty.




so come out and fight...it will be YOUR choice to defend YOUR space or not..... maybe you will have to PvP instead of ratting 24/7?

or perhaps you will be forced into 1-5 systems instead of who knows how many you guys "own" And i use the word "own" loosely as they are empty anyway. Forget the past...this is the new future....and it seems to be burning BRIGHT :)

What CCP needs to do..is tie POS/moon goo to SOV as well.... so it breaks your ISK control over the game :)


This is a misconception of the issue sov holders have with the proposed changes. My Alliance holds 51 systems of which half (26) have either a Station or an Outpost in them. These systems are held for a variety of reasons, be it jump bridges, moons, good ratting space or strategically important locations for potential wars. AU time zone is the quietest in Eve for the most part so let's say, for example, we have 80 people online during it. Late night Americans, a couple of good AU tz corps.

Under the proposed changes, each structure - TCU, iHUB or Station - can be hacked using the new module. Because a single Interceptor can contest our sov, we need 26 people to cover the Outposts, 51 people on the TCUs and 51 people on the iHubs. That's a total of 128 people needed online to secure our sovereignty. That's a bare minimum based upon one ship with one module attacking the structure. We're 48 men short on being able to protect it.

It isn't about choice. It isn't about whether we want to fight or hide in the station giving you blueballs, it's that under the proposed system, most alliances simply lack the man power available to protect their system. Because of the vulnerability window, this assumes the 80 people we have online are willing to do nothing in Eve ever but camp one of three structures night after night. How long before people bugger off and do something other than null sec? So the alliance ends up with no AU time zone so picks the next quietest one, for example, U.S. time zone. But 128 people in the U.S. time zone don't want to sit there night after night camping one of three structures so they all leave as well. And so on and so forth.

The proposal is ultimately self defeating.

13 years and counting. Eve Defence Force is recruiting.
Amyclas Amatin
SUNDERING
Goonswarm Federation
#387 - 2015-03-09 17:54:53 UTC
Borachon wrote:
MASSADEATH wrote:


Its ok..... you can stage out of X-70 and become"NPC trash" as well :)



Be careful what you wish for.

If this happens, basically every ihub iun the game will die within a month, and no one will put up new ones. Anomaly ratting will, as a result, die. If I was GSF leadership (thankfully I'm not), I would keep sov in one consteallation of station systems for industry bonuses and move all combat pilots to NPC nullsec. 5zxx, X-70, and N5y are about to get very full, while almost all of sov 0.0 would be completely empty.

And you think this is better?


I'm an Ihub slaying addict.

If we burn we will take a world with us, a world in flames.

No Ihubs no people, get it?

For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/

Remember that whenever you have a bad day in EVE, the correct reponse is "Thank you CCP, may I please have another?"
MASSADEATH
MASS A DEATH
Scumlords
#388 - 2015-03-09 17:55:09 UTC
Promiscuous Female wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:
Promiscuous Female wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:

Because they can be countered by a T1 ewar frig that's even cheaper - so long as there's someone awake in local anyways.

edit: Anyone noticed that goons have to blob the forums to try and win their arguments?

you counter an interceptor at one capture node / sov structure and it just shrugs and goes to another one

nothing warps faster than an interceptor so enjoy spewing logarithmically increasing numbers of evemannen to bore out a single interceptor

I think you mean "Nothing warps faster than an interceptor using an entosis link that can't even start its warp for 2 minutes..."

And the fallacy is revealed...because pretty much everything other than a freighter can do that.

ah yes the situation where you use PSYCHIC POWERS to determine which system the interceptor plans on hitting before its entosis module cycles and allows it to exit system



Thats easily solved it you only own 1 system :) perhaps thats what you will have to do, if goons are incapable of the task to monitor more than one :)
Alp Khan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#389 - 2015-03-09 17:55:10 UTC
Gevlon Goblin wrote:
This argument over interceptors completely misses the problem with the proposed Entosis mechanic: The "trollceptor" isn't impossible to catch, it's unworthy to catch. People PvP for 4 reasons:

  1. Fat killmails. Entosis ships will be cheaper than a Retriever.
  2. Tears of the enemy. Entosis ships are sent out to die, no one will cry over them.
  3. "Kudos" for being good. An Entosis ship is a lone (very fast) sitting ducks orbiting a structure with a warning sign over it. It'll likely be AFK.
  4. To win. You'll never win. You can save/take the timer today, but as the enemy suffered no losses, he'll be back. Or someone else, like a drunken highsec miner in a 1 day old alt and takes your Sov if you let down your guard just once.


So a player has zero reason to hunt them. The alliance has, so people will be red pen CTA-d/paplinked into Entosis fleets and will hate it. Living in Sov will be a forever grind of mandatory Entosis-frig hunting. While there were crying over the boredom of structure grind, you could at least hope for an escalation. No one will escalate a tackled frigate. In structure grind, you were at least in a fleet, half-AFK, chatting. In Entosis duty, you'll be all alone, orbiting a structure.

If it will be introduced, everyone who considers EVE a game will leave nullsec. The obsessive-compulsive will orbit the structures with 32 accounts (likely with bots).



Your rationalization of people seeking kills is partially inaccurate as 'tears' are just something you have been introduced with EVE Online and you treat it as some perfectly measurable variable. It isn't, one can't do that with individual psychology and emotions. I suspect that 'tears' is a concept that you tried to empathize and comprehend but failed, and decided to treat and write-off as if it's a measurable variable.

Anyway, the second of part of your post is a surprisingly well forecast, one that I completely agree with and believe in it's accuracy.

Seeing a sensible analysis and a good forecast coming from you is truly a rare sight. Well done.
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#390 - 2015-03-09 17:56:02 UTC
John McCreedy wrote:
First off, thanks for posting this. It's good that you're prepared to listen rather than railroad through changes.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA - *gasp* - AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Good one mate.
Takeshi Kumamato
Blaze Orange Expeditions
#391 - 2015-03-09 17:56:21 UTC
A lightweight method to discourage trollceptors:

When the entosis link is active, prevent propulsion mods from cycling.
The entosis link can be turned off at any time.
The entosis link has a one minute reactivation timer.

This makes it very frustrating to try to use the link unless you've gained control of the field, as you need to turn off the link every time you need to run away, get reps, or warp off. But every time the link turns off, you have to wait a minute before trying again. While this won't completely discourage the use of trollceptors, it doesn't interfere as much as other suggestions with the intended use of the links.
rsantos
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#392 - 2015-03-09 17:56:24 UTC
Gevlon Goblin wrote:
This argument over interceptors completely misses the problem with the proposed Entosis mechanic: The "trollceptor" isn't impossible to catch, it's unworthy to catch. People PvP for 4 reasons:

  1. Fat killmails. Entosis ships will be cheaper than a Retriever.
  2. Tears of the enemy. Entosis ships are sent out to die, no one will cry over them.
  3. "Kudos" for being good. An Entosis ship is a lone (very fast) sitting ducks orbiting a structure with a warning sign over it. It'll likely be AFK.
  4. To win. You'll never win. You can save/take the timer today, but as the enemy suffered no losses, he'll be back. Or someone else, like a drunken highsec miner in a 1 day old alt and takes your Sov if you let down your guard just once.


So a player has zero reason to hunt them. The alliance has, so people will be red pen CTA-d/paplinked into Entosis fleets and will hate it. Living in Sov will be a forever grind of mandatory Entosis-frig hunting. While there were crying over the boredom of structure grind, you could at least hope for an escalation. No one will escalate a tackled frigate. In structure grind, you were at least in a fleet, half-AFK, chatting. In Entosis duty, you'll be all alone, orbiting a structure.

If it will be introduced, everyone who considers EVE a game will leave nullsec. The obsessive-compulsive will orbit the structures with 32 accounts (likely with bots).



And then maybe they will realize that living in 10K man alliances is complete bull ****. We will have smaller entities and instead of of troll ceptors you will actualy get a fight without TIDI.
MASSADEATH
MASS A DEATH
Scumlords
#393 - 2015-03-09 17:56:36 UTC
Promiscuous Female wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:
[quote=Kaarous Aldurald]
Cormorants, Svipuls, Confessors, Caracals, Cerberii, Cynabals, Instalocking Lokis, Instalocking Gnosis, Vagabonds, Navy Omens, Exequror Navy Issues, Insta Canes, Faction fit Huggins, Faction Fit Rapier, and if they're at long range: Rail Tengus, Rail Eagles, Rail Proteus, Arty Lokis, Cerberii (again), Nagas, Beam Legions, Beam Zealots, Arty Munnin, Faction fit Huggins (again), Faction Fit Rapier (again).

But no, let's just say interceptors are the only thing that can kill an interceptor forced to stay on grid.

Get rekt.

would like to see some eft fits/graphs of any of those tracking an interceptor at long range (150km or so)



come on a corm sniping fleet :) and it will cure your doubts
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#394 - 2015-03-09 17:56:53 UTC
Eli Apol wrote:

This is where living in your space helps.

deklein is the most populous and densest region in eve with the best indexes so i am not sure where you are going with this
Fix Lag
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#395 - 2015-03-09 17:57:55 UTC
It's amazing how someone could post so many words with absolutely no meaning behind them.

CCP mostly sucks at their job, but Veritas is a pretty cool dude.
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#396 - 2015-03-09 17:58:30 UTC
Promiscuous Female wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:

This is where living in your space helps.

deklein is the most populous and densest region in eve with the best indexes so i am not sure where you are going with this

Ofc those players living there also have to be willing to defend...not just dockup their ratting ships and ask their landlords for a blob to form.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
Amyclas Amatin
SUNDERING
Goonswarm Federation
#397 - 2015-03-09 17:58:54 UTC
Gevlon Goblin wrote:
In structure grind, you were at least in a fleet, half-AFK, chatting. In Entosis duty, you'll be all alone, orbiting a structure.


To alleviate sentry burn out, I'd use 4-man quadruples, each member of the team should be sexually compatible with the others.

For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/

Remember that whenever you have a bad day in EVE, the correct reponse is "Thank you CCP, may I please have another?"
Arkon Olacar
black.listed
#398 - 2015-03-09 17:59:18 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
The only thing that intys have going in the current meta is their ability to bravely run away. Take that away from them, force them to stay on grid, and it's "Lol Inty go Squish".

As long as ceptors with an active link can continue to burn at 6-8km/s, they can still GTFO. Doesn't matter if it can't warp off for another minute if it's 300km away.
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#399 - 2015-03-09 17:59:32 UTC
MASSADEATH wrote:
come on a corm sniping fleet :) and it will cure your doubts

ah yes the cormorant with its staggering 80-100km range
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#400 - 2015-03-09 17:59:43 UTC
MASSADEATH wrote:
Promiscuous Female wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:
[quote=Kaarous Aldurald]
Cormorants, Svipuls, Confessors, Caracals, Cerberii, Cynabals, Instalocking Lokis, Instalocking Gnosis, Vagabonds, Navy Omens, Exequror Navy Issues, Insta Canes, Faction fit Huggins, Faction Fit Rapier, and if they're at long range: Rail Tengus, Rail Eagles, Rail Proteus, Arty Lokis, Cerberii (again), Nagas, Beam Legions, Beam Zealots, Arty Munnin, Faction fit Huggins (again), Faction Fit Rapier (again).

But no, let's just say interceptors are the only thing that can kill an interceptor forced to stay on grid.

Get rekt.

would like to see some eft fits/graphs of any of those tracking an interceptor at long range (150km or so)



come on a corm sniping fleet :) and it will cure your doubts

Look, even if you don't believe the rail boats (and the better arty and beam boats) can make intys squish at 100+ (and they do), the Cerberus can be fit to hit past 140km with RLML.

I trust everyone here knows what RLML does to an inty? Cool