open All Channels
seplocked Test Server Feedback
blankseplocked Tech 3: Fourth Subsystems - Updated
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 : last (11)

Author Topic

Deva Blackfire
Viziam
Posted - 2009.04.13 20:37:00 - [271]
 

Originally by: Polinus

check the BASE agility of them both. The immune to warp bubble one has a VERY bad agility before the bonus.


It doesnt matter. All ships can warp in 10 seconds doing MWD-warp (it even works when you cloak after hitting MWD). So anything above this value is redundant.

And in current state of game it is impossible to catch cloaking ship within 10 seconds. Even tried to catch plated recon without using dictors? its (almost) impossible. The almost part is either bad luck from cloaker pilot (he lands near other ship thus cant cloak) or just objects spam around the gate (be it cans, corpses, wrecks, drones etc).

Creating ship that can evade bubbles you are de facto re-creating uncatchable cloaker situation with one small exception. There is no way to catch it if you want. Period. He either needs to get unlucky or you need to spam whole gate.

The story about "MWDing ceptor to decloak before he warps" is full of balls. Like i said above: 10 seconds from 0 to warp on any ship. Now lets see: ship clicks warp and spams cloak. 2 seconds before you see his position on screen, 3-4 seconds before yor ships starts moving there. Next 3seconds (so 6-7s total) till you are exactly at his spot (and thats with 4km/s ceptor who instantly took correct curse). You decloak him at 6th or 7th second of his 10 second warp. You need another 1-2 seconds to even start locking (server side delay). 1 second to lock and... another one for scrambler to kick in. At best you can hope to lock him and see him warp. And above situation happens when you are absolutely ready for him. BUT: if he uses mwd-warp trick then he already moved from his spot a bit thus ceptor has even worse chance of finding him...

IMO: stupid idea. Very stupid.

Etho Demerzel
Gallente
Holy Clan of the Cone
Posted - 2009.04.14 19:52:00 - [272]
 

I also think giving a ship cloak AND immunity to bubbles is a very bad idea. I am a heavy blockade runner user and I don't gate camp, so a ship like this would be something that would benefit me greatly, but even I, in my biased view about the subject, can't condone with this absurdity. Such a ship would be by all means invulnerable.

It is already bad enough that people can simply jump through choke points these days, which helped a lot to make most of low sec a desert, but adding a ship like this would be utter irresponsibility.

Ozkar
Decimus Corp
Posted - 2009.04.14 20:16:00 - [273]
 

I like the missile addition to the Legion, very nice one imho, so props there... but why do we lose the laser tracking to get that? Sad

Covops cloaks and bubble immunity.... plz plz plz plz no maybe be (and its a huge maybe) covops cloaks but their tank/dps better be much less to justify it. By all eft fits I have made, a t3 tanks better than most Commandships, to give them a covops cloak is very overpowered imho.

Also, any reason why 90% of the sites in w-hole systems are grav sites? Seems it would be nice to have a couple more of the others, as they actually have something to do with t3 prod....

IceAero
Amarr
Shadow Company
Posted - 2009.04.15 06:09:00 - [274]
 

Is it just me...

Or did the 4th subsystems not make it into the 1.1 patch?

Holy Lowlander
Lone Star Joint Venture
Wildly Inappropriate.
Posted - 2009.04.15 07:38:00 - [275]
 

Yay for adding a khandid subsystem to the legion !
Gives me more and more reasons to train for t2 HAM launchers.

but a very important question that arrises with this , will the legion be sexy khandid-black with blue windows and antennas etc ?!!

Because in my opinion it certainly should , it is by far the most attracktive thing to khandid ships , their awesome looks!

Jettisoned Can
Jenova's Witnesses
Posted - 2009.04.15 19:24:00 - [276]
 

Originally by: CCP Nozh
So, Apocrypha is out with 3 subsystems per category, we're now starting our next development cycle where we'll look at the fourth variation. There are already tons of good ideas floating around at the office, but before we proceed we'd like to hear your ideas.

What bonuses would you like to see on the fourth subsystems?
-What other subsystems would you use it with?
-How does is it differ from the other choices?
-Drawbacks when fitted, if any?

Please keep the thread clean and stay on topic.

Update on page 4


I hate to be that guy, but did you even listen to our ideas? Out of all the suggestions made, you only listened to one that was asked for from multiple people. Only one person asked for warfare links, (though I doubt he wanted it on the defensive subsystem) only one person asked for bubble immunity, (and everyone ignored the naive suggestion) no one asked for a heat bonus, (that's a good idea though) and only one person asked for a probe launcher system.

Sure, tons of people asked for a cloaking system, but we were already told you were going to make one. However, not a single person wanted it as the offensive subsystem.

And quite a few asked for a Khanid offensive system, thank you for that. (but it still is lacking on the bonuses)

Zostera
Minmatar
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2009.04.15 21:27:00 - [277]
 

Read patch notes

Sat open mouthed wondering how the idea of a cloaking, bubble immune ship could possibly be considered balanced.

Considering your confidence in the price of T3 falling I am pretty horrified at the prospect of fleets of these things running about with impunity.

Zos

Arimathea Anthalas
Garoun Investment Bank
Posted - 2009.04.15 23:08:00 - [278]
 

Can these ships jump using a Black Ops or not with the appropriate subsystem?

Irida Mershkov
Gallente
The Reformed
Chaos Theory Alliance
Posted - 2009.04.16 00:08:00 - [279]
 

Originally by: Zostera
Read patch notes

Sat open mouthed wondering how the idea of a cloaking, bubble immune ship could possibly be considered balanced.

Considering your confidence in the price of T3 falling I am pretty horrified at the prospect of fleets of these things running about with impunity.

Zos

That's two combat bonuses out the way, perhaps as a covert transporting device?

Trevor Eve
Posted - 2009.04.16 11:35:00 - [280]
 

Have I just read the patch notes correctly.....

You can fit a cov ops cloak

AND

Be immune to bubbles?

.....

um... so how do we catch one?

Deva Blackfire
Viziam
Posted - 2009.04.16 12:59:00 - [281]
 

Originally by: Trevor Eve
Have I just read the patch notes correctly.....

You can fit a cov ops cloak

AND

Be immune to bubbles?

.....

um... so how do we catch one?


By using exploits. Convo spam, drone spam, can spam, corpse spam around gate. The more the better. Other than that? Nope, no counters available in game.

BetaZ
Insidious Existence
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2009.04.16 13:33:00 - [282]
 

Does anyone have problem with the Caldari covert module? +5% damage per level to medium hybrid while the unit gives 4 launchers? What gives here? Is this an indication of CCP gone amuck? Anyone with common sense still work for CCP?

DARTHxFREE
Aliastra
Posted - 2009.04.16 15:00:00 - [283]
 

Do we have intel on the "bonus" to warfair link's?

gonna be the deth of fleet commands Laughing slap on some command processors and run a whole rack

Jettisoned Can
Jenova's Witnesses
Posted - 2009.04.16 18:31:00 - [284]
 

Originally by: BetaZ
Does anyone have problem with the Caldari covert module? +5% damage per level to medium hybrid while the unit gives 4 launchers? What gives here? Is this an indication of CCP gone amuck? Anyone with common sense still work for CCP?


I think the only place the issue was reported was in this thread, which they obviously aren't reading. Seems like they created this thread to only have one person suggest what they were already planning on doing. That way, they can blame the user base when people get up in arms over the bad bonuses.

Either that, or they are worried about getting the 4th subsystems out in a reasonable time (for once) that they couldn't have a single developer spend one more day on it and just used what they already had done.

DaOpa
Amarr
Static Corp
Posted - 2009.04.16 23:28:00 - [285]
 


Is this a Bug ? or Intended ?

Loki Electronics Emergent Locus Analyzer has

SIGNATURE RADIUS
150m

----
How does this work ? Defensive Subs have Sig Rad also .. does one superseed the other ?

Or would this be a mistake and needs to be removed?

Merina Taom
Posted - 2009.04.19 12:23:00 - [286]
 

However the new covert subsystems on sisi do not allow you to open covert cynos, just use a covert cloak. Decided to nerf it or missed the feature?

Brixer
Dai Dai Hai
Posted - 2009.04.20 11:56:00 - [287]
 


What the T3 ships need is a tiny SMA, so gang can change mods when in deep-deep w-space. Like a carrier, but with no chance of getting a real ship in the SMA. That would be awsome!
Then your little gang can fight without gimping the ship with salvager, tracktor beams, codebreakers and whatnot.

IceAero
Amarr
Shadow Company
Posted - 2009.04.20 12:57:00 - [288]
 

It's starting to feel like the Legion/Loki are simply NOT in the same firepower class as the Tengu/Proteus.

Jallem Sims
Minmatar
Native Freshfood
Posted - 2009.04.20 17:12:00 - [289]
 

"4th Offensive subsystem:

Covert Ops Cloaking Device fitting bonus. Ability to deploy and use a Covert Ops Cynosural Field. They'll have a single damage bonus (Amarr only gets the standard capacity bonus) and 4 turret slots."

Did this make the patch? can't seem to fit 'covert cyno' on sisi?

Karrade Krise
Posted - 2009.04.22 15:48:00 - [290]
 

I'm still waiting for them to give us a "Stealth Bomber" style set of bonuses for cloaking.

Quesa
D00M.
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2009.04.22 19:45:00 - [291]
 

Quote:
By this time in our minds, we were certain that now close to 3 weeks after release the market would be flooded with Tech3 ships and people would be bored with the 3 variations already in and would be anxiously awaiting the 4th. It seems the required ventures into Wormhole space, with the accompanying Sleeper encounters as well as the manufacturing involved, has proven to be quite the challenge even for the most seasoned of players.


Disconnect anyone?

You had the expac released and within a few weeks this thread started. If you thought that people would be wondering around in all areas of space in T3 ships you really aren't paying attention to your game, or so it seems. Do you not pay attention to history? How long was it until you found people galloping around in Battle Cruisers or better yet, Battleships after release? How long was it before T2 ships were a mainstay in fleets after release?

I take a look at T2 rigs and find that it's just another area where the Devs didn't complete the 'spit and polish' that is needed. T2 ships were made with only 2 rig slots and higher calibration. To me, that says that T2 ships were MEANT to equip T2 rigs. At the current cost of T2 rigs, there isn't much of an incentive to equip them with the minor improvement they offer by quadrupling the cost of a ship that isn't even insurable.

I see so much potential in your current endeavors but I don't see the follow through to get that potential. For years, many players have simply dealt with overly cumbersome UI's, bugs and procedures and instead of continuing the fruitless persuite of bug reporting they just state; "it's a feature, not a bug".

Quesa
D00M.
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2009.04.22 19:47:00 - [292]
 

Edited by: Quesa on 22/04/2009 19:53:24
Forum lag double post ftw.

Attrezzo Pox
Amarr
The Concordiat
Concordiat Alliance
Posted - 2009.04.23 13:06:00 - [293]
 

Edited by: Attrezzo Pox on 23/04/2009 15:24:26
Originally by: Quesa


Disconnect anyone?

You had the expac released and within a few weeks this thread started. If you thought that people would be wondering around in all areas of space in T3 ships you really aren't paying attention to your game, or so it seems. Do you not pay attention to history? How long was it until you found people galloping around in Battle Cruisers or better yet, Battleships after release? How long was it before T2 ships were a mainstay in fleets after release?

I take a look at T2 rigs and find that it's just another area where the Devs didn't complete the 'spit and polish' that is needed. T2 ships were made with only 2 rig slots and higher calibration. To me, that says that T2 ships were MEANT to equip T2 rigs. At the current cost of T2 rigs, there isn't much of an incentive to equip them with the minor improvement they offer by quadrupling the cost of a ship that isn't even insurable.

I see so much potential in your current endeavors but I don't see the follow through to get that potential. For years, many players have simply dealt with overly cumbersome UI's, bugs and procedures and instead of continuing the fruitless pursuit of bug reporting they just state; "it's a feature, not a bug".


fyp

The answer is "not very long" people were gallivanting around in battleships less than a month after release. HACs took a bit longer but not Assault Frigs, an Interceptors (before Interdictors) were never in short supply after their release. In terms of time it took to learn, well many had to lvl their final prep skill up to 5 but lots had it to 5 already.

Honestly, what I think is really taking tech III a little time to catch on is the fact that it requires bigger ******* and more time for one person (or a small group) to see the process through all the way to the sweet end. You don't have to just get hold of a ship bp and rare ore, you have to kill sleepers, research many bps, invent, have a pos to make the components, then you can finally build the freaking thing. At that point you have to train up not one or two, but no less than 6 skills to just to fly it not counting the skills you level as prereqs. All of those cost isk too..

So yeah it's going to take some time, as it should. I personally think that at some point CCP will need to re-balance many of it's ship types. For instance, a battleship should never be at a significant disadvantage against a single cruiser class/size vessel. Even the most advanced weapon systems against a mighty ship like that would have a hard time sinking it.

yikes.

yakubiz
Posted - 2009.04.23 20:17:00 - [294]
 

hi there
This issue might have been addressed already but i cant really read 10 pages in order to find it.
Could somebody make it at least 125 of bandwidth for galente t3 becouse so far it cant take 5 heavy drones (like ishtar would) wich is pathetic if u try to make a dedicated drone carier.

And also it could be a good idea to make a similar to stealth bomber tech cruiser - so for example it can fit capital lounchers. (ddd is wanted but we all know it would never be done for the sake of balance)))))

Hawk Firestorm
Posted - 2009.04.26 20:37:00 - [295]
 

Edited by: Hawk Firestorm on 26/04/2009 20:38:56
One thing that's always made me scratch my head is why you guys have BC's and heavy cruisers shooting with pop guns and throwing pebbles.

Move the cruise missiles and unpopular BB weapons such as 350mm rails to BC's and T3 cruisers.

But most of all and this goes for all t2+ ships make them accessable and something more than something shiney to collect in your hanger that can be used in fleet combat etc.

Few are willing to use high tech items in combat other than npc's ecause of the loss factor and the insane pricing of them in EVe which completly negates them being in the game in the first place.

That being speed up the conveyor belt for T2+ ships by alowing producers to produce them at reasonable prices for them to be used, and the players that can use them to do so in everyday use, and not worry about lossing their shirts when doing so.

4bill for a cruiser that can go poof in a few secs isn't sensible, same for the majority of t2+ ships.

After playing all these years what's the point of higher content if you make it so bone crushing to loose especially if your the older more casual player like myself?

Which should be one point of new content being in the game in the first place giving your older players something new, but allowing newer players a chance to access it.

It time it was sorted out.

Qinoly
Gallente
Avib VOV
Posted - 2009.04.27 12:51:00 - [296]
 

Not alot is suggested on the industrial end for Tech 3.
All T3 that is ingame now is aimed at pvp and if that stays that way.. then Apocrypha might just not have happened for the industrial players in eve.
T3 expanders
T3 stripminers
T3 salvage mods
T3 Line of ships to followup the Hulk (and its smaller brothers)

Many try to workout the attributes on each and every module they suggest.. I won't .. not my job, that is CCP's job.
But do keep in mind that the customer base in EVE does not consist of just PVP pilots.

Hawk Firestorm
Posted - 2009.04.27 21:50:00 - [297]
 

Edited by: Hawk Firestorm on 27/04/2009 21:51:14
Personally I think introducing new tech levels as a ongoing thing should be a method of replacing bad design elements from previous years with the ultimate goal of phasing out out tech levels entirely, along with the bad design elements of the game.

But like I say I see little point in introducing any more items or any new tech level until CCP tackles the economy in eve that prevents high tech ships especially from being used in combat and general use rather than hanger trophies.

Not to mention as a method of keeping the database in check.

Plestvarnis
Posted - 2009.05.04 16:27:00 - [298]
 

Edited by: Plestvarnis on 04/05/2009 16:44:59
I dont like updated subsystem for legion. Once it hade tracking bonus and than its gone for misiles? Pathetic... Lets make galente using misiles or projectile maybe? Its wrong, t3 should be specialized to the race and its original bonuses.

And for another updates. We got sensor boosters for targeting range or rezolution, tracking computers for optimal and tracking. So i gues we need such subs. Web range <> increased web effect, like paladin bonus. Neutralaizing range <> increased neutralaized cap. and so on ... For egzample if we want we can web from 40 km with 50% or from 10km but 90% ...

Dalton West
Minmatar
bellum omnium in omnes
Posted - 2009.05.26 05:52:00 - [299]
 

i would love to see a bomb launcher subsystem

+3 high slots + 3 launchers
+1 med

Can fit Siege/Cruise missile launchers
10% damage bonus to siege/cruise missile launchers
(whatever reduction required to balance)% for power use

Quesa
D00M.
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2009.05.27 00:12:00 - [300]
 

Edited by: Quesa on 27/05/2009 00:12:12
Trying to keep this thread up on the first page to continue to highlight how stupid their idea was to give a ship the ability to warp cloaked and have bubble immunity.

I just keep thinking it was an overdue April fools joke because I never thought the Devs would actually do something so stupid.


Pages: first : previous : ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 : last (11)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only