No. The mass reduction would have to be part of the ‘navigational changes’. It offsets the inertia change that would otherwise make a HIC completely immobile once the bubble’s up.
1 Like
Please don’t screw over your Anoikis-dwellers like this. Please.
1 Like
ECM has been a touchy subject for a long time, but in every forum proposed changes to ecm got shutdown and with good reason
2 Likes
Exactly! While inconvenient, there’s always a way to make it work while mitigating losses
Yeah I understand that reducing mass is the current strategy. I was looking at a possibility of going the other way, there instead of starting with a medium/high mass ship, you start with a ship that has pretty low mass, then heavily increase its mass. Are the stats perfect? Probably not, I don’t work in game design, I’m just a theorycrafter. I was hoping to put a new proposal on the table for how to address the problem. Maybe the module is restricted to frigates and gives a bigger bonus, idk. Just a possibility
1 Like
I made a post somewhere earlier where is stated that not the adaption is the problem. We will adapt as always, even if we dont like a change. It is the way how the change is brought to us…and the feeling that most changes werent thought through properly.
2 Likes
It’s not just reducing mass, it’s that you reduce it in one direction, and increase it in the other, so as to minimize the chance of being stuck on the wrong side.
The thing is that we already have a way to heavily increase mass. We fit battleship prop mods. That’s not the part of the equation that needs fixing. Restricting it to frigates and letting it reach battleship mass would maybe work, but it seems a lot easier and more sensible to just give a mass-reduction module instead, with appropriate workarounds to prevent lurch hics and instawarping.
1 Like
how about a buff to ecm fighters ? they are pretty laughable now.
also, the fax were introduced exactly to be what they are, a very powerful logistics ships ( separated from the carriers a few years back especially for this ). They are the single option for small corporation to make a stand against 50+ fleets in the whs. Without that, the w-space will empty fast.
1 Like
So, together with that we install numerical counters on wormholes how much mass is left? Imagine you come online after your workday, and a static hole in your home is verge. do you wait 16h until it pops or do you suicidethrow anything through it because you have no idea how much mass you can bring on it until it collapses?
2 Likes
dislike.
i use interceptor only as safe taxi, for example raptor can stand for 3 emp smart machariel, and now you want to deprive it from me. why not to create t3 frigates then? i want frigate with huge shields, very fast with no weapons
I obviously get this.
But when I hear that the ‘projection’ of Artillery Fit claws is the reason for the immunity removal, and try to discuss alternatives that don’t nerf many other aspects of gameplay, what I’m understanding is that it’s not projection that is the issue, it’s that they cannot be firewalled with a gatecamp.
It would be one thing if I was flat out told that immunity supression wasn’t feasable from a coding perspective; the discussion would be irrelevant at that point. Anyway, I thank you for your responses.
If you start with a ship that has low enough mass, then you don’t need a method of reduction. That was my goal with the proposal. The other end of the spectrum would be starting with a ship with very high mass (like a battleship) and have a way to significantly reduce its mass. But as we know, this leads to lurch battleships. As such, the modules should not provide a combat advantage, which is why I went to the low-mass side to start with. Maybe the Higgs Field Generator is scriptable, and has one set of scripts to reduce mass, and another set to increase mass.
1 Like
Griffin Navy Issue will need to be adjusted then as this obsoletes the ship, and I am also curious as to how this will affect ECM bursts
1 Like
oh so they removed the mass reduction when bubble up… seems like ccp is trying to fix the problem but changing the wrong stuff to get that outcome…
the HIC should be able to mass reduce itself as it bubbles up so it can serve as a wh roller,
the HIC should be able to bubble up and move around but not at the velocity and agility of an interceptor,
The 100mn AB HIC works fine for rolling wh’s, the 100mn MWD HIC is where the problem seems to lay,
So instead of ■■■■■■■ everyone over in WH space by removing the roller, why not just nerf the ability to fit oversized mwd on the HIC ?
maybe add a restriction to the prop mod for that hull, rather than make changes that affect other systems or consequences too?
3 Likes
Use a yacht or a T3?
They wont know how to, as this is a poorly thought out change.
2 Likes
Mass reduction modules seems to provide too much benefit for invasion fleets and etc that aren’t interested in closing a hole…
That is what Im thinking too, just not well thought out enough, we can improve it is all I mean.
but they already have mass increasing modules… prop mods and higs rig…