Nullsec blocs are still going to prefer HACs because the assault damage control is way too powerful when it comes to making sure reps land
3 Likes
While you’re adjusting the T3cs… Can we get a +1 Utility high for the covert subsystem?
1 Like
I do not know if you have used the Observatory yet. It takes generally more than 1 because of the 40% odds. They will only last as long as two of those boosters. So they will need to be priced at about 300 mil per dose if the value will be higher that the amount of observatory actually deployed. To make this change = an observatory needs a 24 hour timer, not the current one.
Generally 1 mobile observatory is enough. 99 out of 100 chance you only need one Observatory to decloak an AFK cloaky.
With a lifetime of 1:40, pings every 10 minutes after deployment it has 9 pings each with 40% decloak chance. (1-0.4)^9 = 0.01, in other words, there’s only a 1% chance they are still cloaked once the Observatory is done.
That is correct. If your willing to wait a long time. Most times when you want the system clear oe to see if camper is active you use more than one. It is not about Odds. It is about getting it done. Using less than three = you really don’t care about the camper right now.
Pretty much this. Removing the skill point loss from T3s is probably overdue simply to get people flying them again. HACs are still better in many respects as fleet ships, because as Zam rightly points out, the ADC is a much better way of making sure people survive to get reps/apply damage.
1 Like
the t3c rework and other nerfs to t3cs over the years have reduced the “reward” part of this balance already
reducing the loss is bringing it back to where the balance should be
4 Likes
they did say
The price will be high to ensure that any observatory costs from defenders are more than equaled
sounds to me like the price could totally end up being more than multiple observatories, and it just makes the point I was making about them not likely to be used by campers even stronger
So you will implement skill loss on titans?
2 Likes
Yes. I just anticipate that they will base that off the cost of a single one. That’s just how the thinking normally goes by the DEV’s not taking into consideration some teams put out 5 at a time, my team generally put out three so OK, make the change but allow the observatory to live longer, if your going to triple the timer for the cloaker we need at least more time on the devices and more pings as well.
What a bunch of fools you devs are.
1 Like
If you are fixing things, may I suggest something: Remove the drone bandwidth penalty from the Nullifier. It was never announced anywhere that the Nullifier should have this penalty and it makes no sense to have it in the first place.
Would be nice if you elaborated on that a bit. Why are you happy with which effects? Which effects materialized in the first place?
Except the drone bandwidth pen was stated when it was on SiSi…
That’s not the same. It was never mentioned in the dev blog, it is not in the patch notes, it is not listed in the patch announcement. Drone Bandwidth penalty is only listed explicitly for the WCS.
1 Like
you had me there
Any chance spread scrams in wormhole sites might be one of the things not mentioned yet?
Not when I can out-tank them with a battlecruiser, it won’t.
The world is not ready for 9 high slots.
1 Like
That should have been considered when making the nullification module a high slot module.
I know folks who ran solo hunting fits who out right refuse to play due the interdiction nullification update.
1 Like
You’re not wrong, having to lose 2 slots on top of the less good bonuses of equipping the nullifier sub isn’t cool. I’m just spitballing, but maybe a big “Nullify” button where the Mode Switch buttons are on a T3 Destroyer would be better, where the module is built into the subsystem like it used to be.
2 Likes