These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Nullification and Interdiction

First post First post First post
Author
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
#341 - 2017-04-19 03:07:33 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
No they can't, thats why everyone used to send bonus T3C through gates before a fleet fight. They were guaranteed to get through no matter how many people are on the gate.


This was a problem with off-grid boosting, and off-grid boosting was nerfed for good reasons. It isn't relevant to the current game.

Quote:
If you want to go hunting you should have the exact same level of risk as every other cov ops cruiser.


This would be a much more credible argument if T3s cost the same as a recon ship and didn't cost you skill points (a far more relevant cost than the ISK). And, assuming a re-balance that nerfs the tank on T3s (a problem regardless of subsystem choices, so the most likely target for a nerf) if they had the same auto-win ewar ability as recons. With a nerfed tank and no bubble immunity there's no real reason to take a T3 over a Stratios.
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#342 - 2017-04-19 06:32:35 UTC
Merin Ryskin wrote:
This would be a much more credible argument if T3s cost the same as a recon ship and didn't cost you skill points (a far more relevant cost than the ISK). And, assuming a re-balance that nerfs the tank on T3s (a problem regardless of subsystem choices, so the most likely target for a nerf) if they had the same auto-win ewar ability as recons. With a nerfed tank and no bubble immunity there's no real reason to take a T3 over a Stratios.

Tank will be paperthin on covops I think. They want to keep SP loss and I do not know why. We have SP injectors now, what's the point? Cooldown would be better.


here are proposed subsystems changes
ship and modules
offensive and defensive subsystems looking good. I would change base agility or speed into warp speed subsystem. I have no idea what they are thinking about core subsystems. I would rather go into: 1) Ewar, 2) Overheat, 3) Sensors. Still don't know where scanning and hacking bonuses will go.

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville

Blossom Rivers
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#343 - 2017-04-19 09:34:27 UTC
Merin Ryskin wrote:
tl:dr


I notice how you entirely avoided my challenge to you “normally decloaking” T3 Cruisers, so we can at least agree that it’s not practical to do so.

But dude you want to operate under the premise of “You can’t catch me, but I can catch you”, you only want the rules of Nullsec to apply for combat when you want them to, rather than all the time. You want to travel in a combat ship in null with with the same level of safety as Hisec.

This promotes gameplay where players avoid combat entirely until circumstances are overwhelmingly in their favour, and only picking the fights they know they can win. I understand mobility is important, but if Nullsec travel is an issue, get instawarp nullified shuttles. Instead we give that ability to arguably one of the most powerful sub capital combat ships in Eve the T3 Cruiser.

Nullsec is about danger, combat and collaboration, it’s not about safety. The only safety there should be in Null is the safety the players themselves create.

Your opinion of “interesting forms of combat” is skewed, what’s interesting for some is not for others, it is just your opinion, one perspective amongst so many others. What it does highlight is your own personal bias that there are forms of combat you specifically want to avoid, because it interferes with your personal play style. Whats good for you isn't necessarily whats good for the game.
Your opinion that gate camps are lazy is one perspective, another is that cloaky nullified ship pilots who press the warp and cloak button is also lazy gameplay, no having to check the map for system activity, no having to use scouts, no piloting skills, nothing, 2 buttons is all it takes. The thing about perspectives is there's more than one.

A gate camp might seem uninteresting to you, but for others blockades form an important role in maintaining strategic objectives (anchoring structures, defending mining ops, reducing enemy combat mobility/reinforcements). Gate camps take multiple pilots (Plex) to maintain, committing resources which may potentially result in no kills at all, but players are spending hours of their own time collaborating and coordinating these blockades to secure strategic objectives, only to have T3 Cruisers pass right by, risk free.

It should be practical to decloak and lock a T3 Cruiser, I didn't say it should be easy, but if a group makes an effort and fits ship specifically for this purpose it should be achievable, right now there are no practical options to counter the cloak+nullified T3 Cruiser. We don't need a specific module or anything fancy, we can achieve it using existing game mechanics (e.g. increasing align time).
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#344 - 2017-04-19 10:44:19 UTC
Blossom Rivers wrote:
But dude you want to operate under the premise of “You can’t catch me, but I can catch you”, you only want the rules of Nullsec to apply for combat when you want them to, rather than all the time. You want to travel in a combat ship in null with with the same level of safety as Hisec.

T3C covops won't have spectacular combat abilities after the changes I think.
Blossom Rivers wrote:
This promotes gameplay where players avoid combat entirely until circumstances are overwhelmingly in their favour, and only picking the fights they know they can win. I understand mobility is important, but if Nullsec travel is an issue, get instawarp nullified shuttles. Instead we give that ability to arguably one of the most powerful sub capital combat ships in Eve the T3 Cruiser.

Shuttles won't work, they'll be smartbombed.
Blossom Rivers wrote:
Nullsec is about danger, combat and collaboration, it’s not about safety. The only safety there should be in Null is the safety the players themselves create.

Right. After the changes to the bubbles I still see dead end pipes guarded by them (large T2) with carriers ratting in every system. Null should be dangerous because of T3C passing by defenses.
Blossom Rivers wrote:
It should be practical to decloak and lock a T3 Cruiser, I didn't say it should be easy, but if a group makes an effort and fits ship specifically for this purpose it should be achievable, right now there are no practical options to counter the cloak+nullified T3 Cruiser. We don't need a specific module or anything fancy, we can achieve it using existing game mechanics (e.g. increasing align time).

Nullfied systems already have penalty to align time. In combat spec align time is not that great, my tengu align in 3,5 sec but it has zero combat capabilities. You are talking about T3C as if you don't know huge nerfs are incoming.

As for the gate camps if there are ships that can instalock and hit me with huge alpha damage I have no issiue with instawarping cloaked T3 cruiser - this won't be ever balanced.

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#345 - 2017-04-19 14:31:13 UTC
Merin Ryskin wrote:


This was a problem with off-grid boosting, and off-grid boosting was nerfed for good reasons. It isn't relevant to the current game.


The have not removed the mechanic that allows them to get past any sized gate camp.



Merin Ryskin wrote:

This would be a much more credible argument if T3s cost the same as a recon ship and didn't cost you skill points (a far more relevant cost than the ISK). And, assuming a re-balance that nerfs the tank on T3s (a problem regardless of subsystem choices, so the most likely target for a nerf) if they had the same auto-win ewar ability as recons. With a nerfed tank and no bubble immunity there's no real reason to take a T3 over a Stratios.


T3 would have the ability to adapt without a station or capital/nester and the ability to swap out rigs without destroying them. Cost means nothing to a lot of us but I would expect T3C build costs to drop and the SP loss tossed in the bin as it doesn't work.
Sullen Decimus
Polaris Rising
The Bastion
#346 - 2017-04-21 19:36:36 UTC
baltec1 wrote:


T3 would have the ability to adapt without a station or capital/nester and the ability to swap out rigs without destroying them. Cost means nothing to a lot of us but I would expect T3C build costs to drop and the SP loss tossed in the bin as it doesn't work.


T3C's are one of the best examples of how to add balance to a ship other than just pure isk. Using cost as the only balance has never worked. Yet it still happens. The best recent example of this the T3D's do they cost more than an Assualt frig? sure. is the worst T3D still better than the best AF? yup... cost is no balance at all.

CSM XI Member

Twitter: Sullen_Decimus

Tweetfleet: @sullen_decimus

anton Skor
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#347 - 2017-04-21 20:38:54 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Interdiction should be manned IMO. Anchored bubble are fine if you keep a presence around them. I don't know how it should be made to work in game but but the bubble should deactivate when nobody "guard" it. The only bubbles that should remain active when there is no one around are the interdictor ones since they are temporary anyway.


This all day ^^^^^^^
anton Skor
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#348 - 2017-04-21 20:39:53 UTC
Sullen Decimus wrote:
baltec1 wrote:


T3 would have the ability to adapt without a station or capital/nester and the ability to swap out rigs without destroying them. Cost means nothing to a lot of us but I would expect T3C build costs to drop and the SP loss tossed in the bin as it doesn't work.


T3C's are one of the best examples of how to add balance to a ship other than just pure isk. Using cost as the only balance has never worked. Yet it still happens. The best recent example of this the T3D's do they cost more than an Assualt frig? sure. is the worst T3D still better than the best AF? yup... cost is no balance at all.



nothing like those 100k+ ehp legions for balance eh?
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#349 - 2017-04-21 21:24:38 UTC
Sullen Decimus wrote:
T3C's are one of the best examples of how to add balance to a ship other than just pure isk. Using cost as the only balance has never worked. Yet it still happens. The best recent example of this the T3D's do they cost more than an Assualt frig? sure. is the worst T3D still better than the best AF? yup... cost is no balance at all.

It may go sideways, like marauders costs more than carriers, because of balance...
Famous ship progession tree made by CCP landed in the bin long time ago. T2s prices are almost at the faction prices.

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville

Tessa Sage
Long Pig Luncheon Meat
#350 - 2017-04-28 09:55:06 UTC
Pages ago, there was talk of nullification switching to a lowslot module, to be more in line with warp core stabs rather than the current case innately with Interceptors and T3's subsystems. I'd take it a step further: making your ship immune to interdiction bubbles should behave exactly like fitting 'Polarized' hislots: lose all your resists.
Luc Chastot
#351 - 2017-04-29 16:05:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Luc Chastot
Inherent nullification should only be present in travel and some industrial ships. For combat ships it should be made available in an active module with huge penalties that could be lessened with role bonuses. Currently, nullified ships, especially interceptors, are way too mobile.

Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot.

Tessa Sage
Long Pig Luncheon Meat
#352 - 2017-04-30 18:34:29 UTC
anton Skor wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Interdiction should be manned IMO. Anchored bubble are fine if you keep a presence around them. I don't know how it should be made to work in game but but the bubble should deactivate when nobody "guard" it. The only bubbles that should remain active when there is no one around are the interdictor ones since they are temporary anyway.


This all day ^^^^^^^


Man those bubbles, or the other side will man them for you :P

Quote:
Currently, nullified ships, especially interceptors, are way too mobile.


I don't know about that Luc, the agility plays a factor here - interceptors can and do get warp scrammed if they are aligning out of gate cloak in the presence of 'instalocking' T3s. I have managed on a cheap cruiser hull about 1500mm base scan res before remote boosts, it's fun.
Kuromiko
No Expectatlons
#353 - 2017-05-09 05:00:12 UTC
Luc Chastot wrote:
interceptors are way too mobile.
Oui. And have 0-150 dps with the tank of a wet noodle. All they have is mobility and and a point. Essential for fleet scouting and tackling.

There is a rebalance coming, let's see what proposed changes are. More penalty for nulified t3 would be good, like slower align time (even 1-2s) -1 low/med slot etc. So they aren't uncatchable and have weaker tank/ control.
Dior Ambraelle
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#354 - 2017-05-19 20:48:15 UTC
In my opinion interceptors (as they are currently MWD-based) should have protection from AoE interdiction.
T3Cs: naturally.
Blockade runners: not really, the already have cloak and covert cyno. DSTs could be nullified though.
Yachts: of course.

Kythren wrote:
Maybe start by gate rats shooting anchored bubbles. As others have noted you could add a timer that requires players do to maintenance on anchored bubbles. For example every 6 hours bubbles power down and need to be onlined again. Maybe require a small amount of t2/3 PI materials to run.

I like the idea of an anchored bubble that needs regular interaction. Make it be able to hold enough fuel for 4-6 hours only.

And here is my controversial idea for the day: what about a low-slot module that gives you nullification for the cost of 15-20% of your powergrid? You can't have many other defensive or offensive modules, but at least you are safe from bubbles.

If you want an intelligent argument, please do, I'm up for it!

But if you want a trolling contest, I will win it by simply not participating.

BiBaBumm
Balanced Unity
Goonswarm Federation
#355 - 2017-05-23 09:07:37 UTC  |  Edited by: BiBaBumm
Zanthar Eos wrote:
Remove nullification from interceptors, leave it for t3s. Allow non combat ships to be nullified. Add a 24 hour life to bubbles.



The other way round.

Interceptors and other paperplanes can have these skills, they can be stopped in an bombing gatecamp -> counter avaible.
A T3 Cruiser has more tank and can hardly be stopped when fitted properly.

A T3 Cruiser, a good savespot and a mobile depot allow to many bad things. An nullified DST would become a good "mobile refit station" for this ...
Xair Nuitarius
BAND of MAGNUS
#356 - 2017-05-29 13:18:23 UTC
Hmm i think it will be nice to have more ships that have nullification. Like covert-ops ships.

All ships that are supposed to be exploration: T3C, covert ops frigs, astero and stratios should have nullification too. They should be sneaky and specialized to sneak in hostile territories.
It's rly fun when you want jump lat say 50 systems, lot of time you must slow boat tenths of km in cloak, cause there is anchored bubbles. It ruins exploration.

Nullification in interceptors is ok. They are supposed to catch and slow down prey.
Dior Ambraelle
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#357 - 2017-05-30 04:02:01 UTC
Xair Nuitarius wrote:
All ships that are supposed to be exploration: T3C, covert ops frigs, astero and stratios should have nullification too. They should be sneaky and specialized to sneak in hostile territories.
It's rly fun when you want jump lat say 50 systems, lot of time you must slow boat tenths of km in cloak, cause there is anchored bubbles. It ruins exploration.

Wouldn't this make them OP? The bombers and the Stratios especially?
Also, poor Nestor is left out of the fun again :(

If you want an intelligent argument, please do, I'm up for it!

But if you want a trolling contest, I will win it by simply not participating.

Kassimila
The Northerners
Northern Coalition.
#358 - 2017-05-31 18:15:21 UTC
I think nullification should make you immune to anchored and dictor bubbles. However nothing should be immune to hictor bubbles. Gives you a reason to bring the 600mil ship, instead of the faster 90mil ship that does the same thing.
Kassimila
The Northerners
Northern Coalition.
#359 - 2017-05-31 18:16:39 UTC
Xair Nuitarius wrote:
Hmm i think it will be nice to have more ships that have nullification. Like covert-ops ships.

All ships that are supposed to be exploration: T3C, covert ops frigs, astero and stratios should have nullification too. They should be sneaky and specialized to sneak in hostile territories.
It's rly fun when you want jump lat say 50 systems, lot of time you must slow boat tenths of km in cloak, cause there is anchored bubbles. It ruins exploration.

Nullification in interceptors is ok. They are supposed to catch and slow down prey.


You misspelled "Be able to fly around null sec being nearly un-catchable."
Old Pervert
Perkone
Caldari State
#360 - 2017-06-08 20:25:36 UTC
Kassimila wrote:
[quote=Xair Nuitarius]
You misspelled "Be able to fly around null sec being nearly un-catchable."


Cepters can get smartbombed all too easily.

That said, I'd love for hictor bubbles to stop nullified ships. I agree with you there's very little point in hictors most of the time when a dictor will do the same thing faster and at lower cost. It'd take the wind out of a T3C blops scout's sails in no time.