Someone suggested to make them immune to scrams.
Probably because it would be impossible to enforce. Iâve lived in high sec, low sec and null sec. I spent 10 years running missions as a casual player in high sec before I moved to null sec. Where would I qualify? Who determines where I qualify?
In the end, itâs better for the voters to make those distinctions than CCP to try to set up some quota system that probably wonât do what itâs supposed to do anyway.
4 Likes
Well, the Navy Griffin can be operating in support of other ships, and trusting to sig/mobility to keep it alive. The structure⌠is just kinda sitting there, and if itâs supporting other ships, thatâs because theyâre defending it, or theyâd be tethered.
I suggest a new module that does not change the mass of a ship but rather obtains information about the remaining mass. Letâs call these modules Anomaly Analyzer or something like that.
This is the single most idiotic way to have dealt with ecm that i can possible imagine.
This is the 10-15% of null sec babies winning a battle for changes.
Listen, the navy griffin is now 100% useless. The rook, in solo medium complexes, is now 100% useless too. There is no WAY to use them, or their bonus, in any way at all for solo engagements.
In that regard this âfixâ is clearly advocated and proposed by blob forming f1 monkeys. Theyâre killing a whole line of ships outright. Theyâre killing a very valid solo mechanic as well.
The only way to save the navy griffin is to change the bonus. ORâchange it so that it can have 1 ECM drone with enough ehp bonus built into it that itâs like 2-3k ehp, AND that if it jams, you cant lock the griffin. Do that, and you might have a hullâotherwise give it resists, or agility or something.
That they dont AT LEAST break the lock of the target is just hideously stupid. That might be the part that kills solo ECM the most.
The damavik losing a mid is dumb as sin too. It relies on overpowering EHP to get the job done, and now youâre removing that. it doesnt NEED range control (mid for web,) and it doesnt need cap eitherâit could use some resists, but it is a fine ship the way it isâand will be DEAD after the change. It will still outclass a cruor in every way imaginable though.
Screwed the pooch on this one guys. Bad.
12 Likes
That make the whole point of the navy griffin POINTLESS, have you forgotten that the bonuses it has affects ecm range. It has no tank and fitting some gimped armor/hull tank punishes players who want to use them like they are supposed to be played.
3 Likes
The players can still make those distinctions because candidates would run for a particular position and campaign accordingly.
1 Like
i dont think ceptors should be restricted by bubbles. the whole point of a light scout is to be able to almost, potentially, penetrate any space with any set of circumstances and provide a means to get behind the enemy liens and get away quickly⌠its like a drone, you can hardly see it, hardly hear it, hardly intercept it, but its there, it can provide intelligence to the commander AND it can evade, AND it can move around effortlessly while doing all of the above. Now there being a separation of powers amongst the ceptor class, I guess you just have to find the niche for the difference, or else its not really a balance is it?
2 Likes
the fact that they continue to just lie to wormholers over and over again is just getting stupid. this mythical mass modue that may or may come out at the same time as the heat death of the universe.
4 Likes
You misunderstand, perhaps.
There is nothing wrong with a fleet of 50 claws one shotting a target.
There is something wrong with a fleet of 50 claws being able to warp past defenses, one shot a target, warp to another system, one shot a target, warp to a third target, one shot it, then moonwalk out.
Iâm stating there should be an opportunity cost to one shotting a target with 50 claws (breaking the escape portion mentioned previously). We need to have a discussion about risk if big null entities donât think that first strike tactics should be allowed in gameâŚ
1 Like
Whatâs to stop somebody in Goons from running for the high sec slot? Itâs not like only high sec players will be allowed to vote for that spot. This is why this whole thing fails. The only way for quotas to work is to limit players to voting for the sector of space they care about, and how you even begin to implement that is beyond me. Youâd basically require the community team to turn into a full blown Elections Department to make it work. Itâs just not worth the effort.
The current system is the most efficient.
1 Like
Its corrupt as far as I can see
But you could jam your own logi, that is jammed, thus permitting them to rep you.
Hostile jams logi, you donât want to rep the hostile, so, yay.
Friendly that wants reps jams the same logi, logi can target that person, they get raps, yay.
All friendly fleet members jam the logi, logi can now rep with impunity on the fleet, yay.
3 Likes
There are already a number of requests for clarification about defensive use of ECM here, but after repeatedly reading the dev blog, I want to ask by myself:
@CCP_Falcon are you really going to block/negate/invert the basic function of ECM in most situations just to address one issue in a specific situation ("âŚtoning down the helplessness that comes with being jammedâŚ")?
Will directed ECM and ECM bursts really do effectively nothing if the opponent(s) do(es) not need/want to target anyone else?
Please note: As a regular user of closing HICtors, I am also concerned about that âfixâ and I really hope Iâll live long enough to see this âwe may address thisâŚat some point in the futureâ.
But breaking ECM will have a much broader impact IMO.
4 Likes
I donât think anyone disagrees with what youâre saying which is why theyâve left the âtacklerâ inties alone. Apparently, the problem is that combat interceptors become more than just scouts when flown in a fleet doctrine.
I understand the reasons for the change but nerfing ALL racial combat inties because Claws are OP when flown en masse feels like going too far. If this problem exists with ALL combat interceptors then a blanket removal of ship bonuses makes sense, otherwise surely itâs better to just tweek the Claw?
1 Like
yeah but what i get from the current blog is that, instead of one big nerf, they will make several smaller ones. The end result will be pretty much the same.
Nope. Havenât forgotten that at all. Yes, it winds up sitting inside web range, and gets pretty damn screwed if it doesnât fit a pair of SPDP IIs, but itâs still more mobile with a smaller sig than a structure is. And itâs not guaranteed to be the primary target of an enemy fleet.
Shield Slaves.
1 Like