Please don’t go add this on the live server. The warp stabs and nullification works fine as it is, no need to mess it up .
2 Likes
It doesn’t make it clear in this post but it seems that on sisi the change has made it so you can only fit 1 warp core stabilizer. This is a huge nerf to survivability. It fits CCP’s current “more destruction is good” mentality but I hate it. It will make ganking and gate camping easier and more profitable because 3 points of scram strength can now catch 100% of targets, whether they have a wcs or not. There was very little counterplay to that before, but now there is no counterplay to it. It’s also worth noting that CCP didn’t even consider the effect this would have on the bonuses of the Maulus Navy Issue. There’s no point to a scram focused ship anymore. Pretty much any instalocker can now scram every ship except a super. I’m honestly surprised CCP didn’t just remove warp core stabilizers entirely. That’ll probably be next patch.
I thought the pochven grind was bad as it is, now its gonna be a real dev ■■■■■.
Those changes are stupid and will further make people avoid lowsec at any cost.
Adding penalties for stabs to combat, I completely understand, but why make them useless by making them active modules you can use only every 150 sec ? Why limit them to one only ? What happens to DST now ?
I don’t use nullification all that often but on top of my head, what happens if both side of a gate are bubbled ? screw that nullification module I guess
So sounds like there is a little problem with nullification and needs to be looked at, why dont we give it to more ships them.
The only good thing to this update is the shuttle change for alpha players, all the other changes i would say are a bad idea and will only make things worse
So plz CCP if you really want to fix it keep travelceptor as is and make this nullification modules only be usable if you dont have a cloaking device.
another T3C nerf , it’s about time ccp remove the skill loss penalty, no more excuses about how special T3C’s are, they’re not any more. one small advantage was left and now it’s gone
7 Likes
As a long time casual player with limited and sporadic playtime owing to RL, I have long depended upon nullification to allow me to explore and access content in areas of the game (empty nullsec, WH space to some extent) without breaking the ISK cost / risk equation. This change will hit my play style hard. If this is combined with major nerfs to covert ops cloaking (which I understand are in the pipeline) then a huge proportion of the way I engage with the game content will be pretty much done for.
How about a dedicated ‘science vessel’ TIII subsystem that retains nullification as is (or reduces nullification module cooldown to < 60 seconds so that you can hold cloak on a gate until reactivating), but removes turret and launcher hardpoints? I was astonished to see the change to interceptors that makes them bubble immune. It doesn’t make sense to me that combat ships should be able to avoid combat so easily, but the engineers in the EVE universe would surely be able to figure something out for peaceful explorers…
4 Likes
It the 50% reduction to bandwidth is not changed, then at least add an rig module that reduces the effort. So the hit isn’t as bad on the high bandwidth shipslike the Domi and Armo.
As it is any battleships using a stab will on average be reduced from 4 heavy drones to 2.
And I’m sure CCP will not change npc rats.
Good, more unnecessary changes by CCP that kills gameplay. Even more reason not to bother with nullsec…zzz
5 Likes
They actually stealth nerfed smartbombers by adding the belt rats to the gates in null. When you are wasting 90% of your time trying to clear rats you can’t focus on bombing anyone.
The covert cloak and nullification are two different subsystems so you already were using a subsystem just for the cloak LOL.
GET THE ■■■■ OFF MY T3’s You have done enough to ■■■■ us!
4 Likes
Well said. I agree. Leave it as is.
Another nerf for T3 and following blackopsing in general. It will make Nullsec safer again.
Holy ■■■■!
is this a test how capable of suffering Eve players are?
2 Likes
Another win for the ganking crowd. Why don’t you go ahead and just nerf everything that isn’t PVP, b/c that’s where your headed. I haven’t been playing that long, but every change makes it easier for the gankers and harder on the cannon fodder ( i.e. everyone else in eve). I’m sure that your resident psych folks are telling you that this is the way to go: “…it’ll make the game more exciting and dangerous…” That’s just my opinion, but every time I think I’ve found the groove you change something else that wasn’t broken.
4 Likes
So, the market in second hand t3c’s is going to tank - not only do you lose a full skill level if you die in one - you now are going to die in one. will save many holers and null fliers a heap of money long term not having to waste time buying inties or t3c’s because the ships have been nerfed steadily over the last few years, and now they found another nail for the coffin. This is NOT about making the game more interesting. It is all about finding ways to make the gullible throw extra money into a game that is not even a shadow of it’s former self, but is now a place for “winners” (pronounced weiners…)
3 Likes
CCP, You make ANY changes to T3’s nullification I will stop playing EVE! After 14 years, I’m done with your stupid ass ■■■■■■■■! Leave it the ■■■■ alone!!!
2 Likes
I don’t post much in here cause I’m the kind of player that adapts and gets over it but this makes me angry.
YOU LITERALLY HAVE 1000 MORE PROBLEMS RIGHT NOW AND YOU JUST WALK ON THE EDGE OF THE CLIFF BLIND FOLDED!!!
What is wrong with you people? Did you literally forgot to make this game fun? Do you really want to destroy literally EVERYTHING in it?
WTF?!?!?!?!!?
6 Likes
Doesn’t this change make NS less desirable to be in generally?
On a plus note it makes WHs more desirable to map out and route instead. Just wish there was an element of player agency to WHs exit/entry holes generally
1 Like
To be honest, most of their changes have been making NS less desirable to be in.
1 Like