"Hunter's Boon" update on Singularity

No ship should be un-probable unless they’re cloaked. Period.

They should use sig radius for probing anyways – never understood how having a good sensor-suite should make you easier to find. Its stupid.

Sig radius, which is supposed to be similar in concept to radar cross-section, makes sense here to use. This is how lock time works for ships.

Why that doesn’t also apply to probe scanning makes absolutely no damned sense at all. They’re the same thing but with stronger and/or more directional sensors so they can ‘see’ much further.

By that logic along with the currently implemented way of scanning, scanner probes would be easier to lock up than ships.

IRL better sensor packages make you able to see the enemy faster/more reliably, while not also causing you to light up their sensors like an xmas tree. This is how AWACS planes don’t immediately get blasted. Hell, most of the time the enemy is barely or not at all aware of them at all.

If we used the very idiotically implemented system in game, AWACS would get shot down well before the rest of the planes are located, invalidating their use to begin with.

2 Likes

can we get some posted stats on the changes to the pacifier and enforcer please?

1 Like

How about ended scarcity so people will login again?

When I’m talking about ‘unprobable’ I mean ‘really really hard to probe down’.

As there is a cap on how unprobable a ship can get, any ship that isn’t cloaked can be probed down with the right equipment.

Sig radius is already used for probing. Sig radius and sensor strength.

Bigger sig means you’re easier to probe, higher sensor strength means you’re harder to probe. Get your sensor strength up to or above sig radius divided by 1.1 and you’re ‘maximum unprobable’. You will still be probable, but only by people with 84 probe strength or more.

4 Likes

Can we please have the reduction in scan resolution penalty from nullifiers on T3Cs using the interdiction nullifier module. Taking 10 seconds to lock a battleship is making hunting in them in null pretty pointless.

1 Like

hey guys we slapped “Community Inspired Update” in the blog title, the game is fixed!

Removed some inappropriate posts.

You mean removing the penalty of nullifiers on T3Cs using the interdiction nullification subsystem?

I agree.

It makes no sense that T3Cs that use a subsystem specialised for nullification get such heavy penalties when having a nullification module equipped, like half the scan res or half the drone bandwidth. That subsystem feels pointless now.

1 Like

T3 skill loss correction for T3C’s is great but it needs more Back to the Future than that.

Can we all get back that SP training time for every single death in our T3C, loosing the skill level, and HAD TO retrain it over and over!? It was like a 2 hour traffic jam commute in life you never got back every time you died in a T3C!

Why not reimburse us players since we’re all going Back to the Future with the skill loss change?

1 Like

Thank god for the removal of SP loss for T3Cs

1 Like

Yes that what I meant. Not sure why it was ever there to be honest

2 Likes

Because they don’t, they didn’t reimburse lost SP when they changed clones

the bastion penalties for ewar resistance should either be rolled back or reduced in severity

I don’t think EWAR vulnerability is the correct answer to the challenges these ships present

Right now I most often see these ships used in PVP in ESS… and I don’t think you’re going to see people deploying dedicated EWAR boats inside of ESS to counter these things…

furthermore its a HUGE wrecking shot to solo/small gangers wanting to use marauders offensively because now locals will just hard counter them with t2 ewar 100% of the time…

meanwhile, blobs will still use them because they have enough numbers and intels to dance around the limitation

IMO I’d rather see bastion siege time extended back to 60 seconds than see these EWAR changes.

The core problem with Marauders is that they solve too many problems with nearly no weaknesses, but EWAR is too binary in outcome… its a bad tool to fix this problem.

I would prefer to see CCP change marauders so that they are less independent on grid in PVP so it takes teamwork to use them properly… like… really anything, reduce their cargo so they have to be resupplied to brawl effectively… reduce application so they need web support… something along those lines.

Removal of ECM resistance

A single Falcon (Falcon | Yule Maulerant | Killmail | zKillboard) would be able to jam a ECM Vulnerable, Bastioned Marauder at 130km. This is far outside of its applicable damage range. Given the Marauder is stationary, it’s now heavily exposed and unable to use its grid punishing damage to engage, pushing pilots of the hull further into conflict avoidance.

Keep the ECM Resistance or allow movement (NSA style) while the Bastion Module is active.

CCP is so nice to us lately. Too bad it’s too late.

1 Like

Nah, I would have to first still play the game. Second would have to actually be kinda nice. OK I am mostly, but not enough to get a talk show or anything.
But thanks LOL

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.