@Brisc_Rubal testing what exactly? This idea is bad from the start. Read my previous posts. Whole T3C balance from few years ago went to trash. Nullified T3C already has really bad align. Removing low for nullified subsystem and adding new module already make them worse (armor ones).
What about SP loss?
What about stats nerf with nullified module?
Why not high slot module?
Why so many ships get nullification? They don’t need it in the first place (Asteros will be nightmare).
Why you didn’t persuade them this is bad idea? Now you passing some obvious feedback you as csm should talk about with them first time you hear this feature? Come on!
Read my post about gate camping. Nothing will go through that setup. Not with current proposition. Four gates, all bubbled and you have perfectly safe NS apart from whs.
Thats fair, Brisc. I did not think this was the CSM’s over-arching vision for the changes. I have confidence that you will at least try to separate the “ree” from the actual “Wtf”,
First, I’ll say fair play for contributing here it’s more than other CSM members are doing. Are you actually in it to improve the game rather than to get the inside scoop for your alliance?! Amazing!
If this is the cause of concern that prompted this change why were so many things destroyed along the way? The solution to this is simple: remove their weapons. The interceptor, by definition of the word, should be able to intercept, tackle. How can it possibly fulfill this purpose if it takes forever to travel from system to system?
If you have a Rorqual just starting a fresh seige at the end of a sufficiently bubbled pipe, an interceptor won’t get there before he packs up his toys and warps out. You come from an alliance that used to regularly form hundred-man kiki gangs to kill rorquals you of all people should be able to stress to the devs the importance of being able to land tackle quickly.
Having said that there are only a fraction of the number of big toys out and about since CCP killed industry, then introduced ESS.
Why not just add nullification to shuttles remove interceptor’s weapons and leave it at that?
Testing these changes as they stand, obviously. As for T3Cs, I can’t think of a single ship type that has been nerfed and buffed and nerfed and buffed as often as the T3C. You’ll also be happy to know that I brought up removing skill loss on T3Cs just last week with Team Talos. It’s #46 on my list.
This, as I understand it, is designed to make players choose between better combat capabilities or nullification.
I don’t know - this is what I suggested when they showed us the original design.
I have no idea, and I don’t like how many ship classes are included. As I noted before, I wanted fewer combat ships with nullification, not more. I really wanted it restricted to T3Cs, honestly, or tackle interceptors without guns.
I know that I appear to be the absolute most persuasive human on the planet, but there are times when even my abilities aren’t perfect. And yes, almost everything that has been raised here was raised by us when this was first discussed with us, and we told them how we expected people to react (which is basically how folks have reacted).
Frankly, the fact that this is on the Test Server first with this kind of roll out for comments, tells me that they listened and are trying to take into account player feedback before they make any changes. They could have just dumped this in the game, and they have certainly done that before with other changes.
It’s fair to say that there are valid concerns and feedback here that might not align to your own views. Ca we trust that you’ll bring them up, too? Or is it only
Remove nullification from shuttle. Why would you buff a 10k ship like that ? Shuttle are now better than a travel ceptor… or at least make them more expensive
T1 haulers don’t need nullification, remove that, T2 haulers were meant to fit this role
T1 and Faction frigate shouldn’t have it either
Add a low slot for the ships that were meant to be nullified or make better bonus
The bonus for ship that could previously have nullification are a joke, change them
The reactivation delay on the nullification is way too long. With 150 seconds, you can’t escape if both side of the gate are camped
We could have WCS modules that give more point in function of the tier level, for example factions module giving 4 or 5 points. 3 point isn’t enough
Remove the SP loss from T3C ffs, those ship got the most nerf ever seen in the game
Warp core stab changes hit haulers and miners very hard - You need to exempt Industrial ships, miners, haulers from the changes - Seems like your discouraging mining and resource transport altogether - whats up with the drone bandwidth penalty and the increased cpu/power for barges and exhumers - Covetors and Retrievers won’t be able to use the stabs at all anymore .
Not to burst a bubble (kek) but if people can’t get past a gate camp, and can’t get around a gate camp, they just log off. This is not a positive change to “the meta”.
I get that it should never be 100% safe, but even in an interceptor, it’s not 100% safe. Smartbombs exist, server lag exists and instalockers exist. All are easy ways to loose your 'ceptor. But, if your aim is to make the shuttle the default taxi via giving it nullification, that’s cool with me. Just not sure if this is the right way to do it. Change to stabs is most welcome, will make moving stuff harder (is that a bad thing?) and will stop the meta of uncatchable drive-by stab’d ESS pinging, structure bashing people (also not a bad thing).
Change to nullification via nerfing interceptors and T3C’s (again…) is not welcome by almost everyone, it seems.
IMHO cloaky camping is probably more of a problem than any nullification module. I’m guessing the Goons are getting sick of TAPI 'ceptor gangs moonwalking their way out of 1DQ…?
I wholeheartedly agree. Too often, explorers or carebears are made to feel like the path they choose, that gives them the most pleasure is somehow lesser than big alliance life or hunting. The fact that we call PvE players care bears is a perfect example. They pay their subscription like everyone else, but they can’t mobilise their vote like a big alliance can. So the will of the player base gets distorted with strange denial mechanisms…apparently massing on a gate in huge numbers and picking off lone travellers is somehow brave and daring, and we should all be trying to make their lives just a little bit easier. If you’re trying to murder people you outnumber, you’re brave. If you dictate the terms of the engagement, so that you only attack those who can’t escape or win, you’re brave. If you miscalculate and get a bloody nose, the game is broken. But if THEY try to change the terms, or use tactics or equipment to level the playing field, that’s unacceptable. They MUST sacrifice themselves once you’ve decided you want their loot, or they’re scaredy cats and they’ve got cooties.
It takes much bigger stones to fly around null alone when you don’t live there, than it ever will sitting at a gate and moaning about the one that got away.
I wish I could claim credit for that, but I didn’t. I do think it’s not a bad idea - nullification on non-combat ships isn’t an issue for me. I’m generally okay with that.
That sound you’re hearing is me sighing in frustrated exasperation, because that is literally, almost word for word, what I’ve been asking for regards to nullification. That was what I and the CSMs who care about this issue the most, have been asking for. That’s not what we got, and this is indicative of how the CSM/CCP relationship works - we tell them there’s a problem, we explain how we think it should be fixed, they either accept or reject the idea that there’s a problem, and if they accept it, they usually do their own design that doesn’t look much like what we proposed.
I pass on feedback I don’t agree with all the time. The good thing here is that, for the most part, I agree with the feedback so that makes it easier for me as I am simply using the feedback presented to reinforce what I’ve already said.
Depends. Sometimes folks will try to run it anyway. Sometimes folks will call their friends to go bust it up. I gate camp all the time - we get forced off all the time. I bust through gates camps, too. It’s pretty easy, pretty common social content in EVE. I don’t think the only solution to it is to log off, but that is certainly one, and I agree that it’s not a positive one if that becomes the meta.
I really don’t know what the folks who want to “potter about the galaxy looking at interesting stuff” are complaining about. They are getting a super cheap ship that has no training requirements that is nullified and instawarp. That’s the benefit of nullification on shuttles. Even Alphas will be able to go exploring now. This type of player has just gotten a massive aid to their playstyle with that change alone.
Will intercepters get an extra slot to fit this module, since it is being taken away from the ship? Or will this mean giving up another module that we had before?
But I am kind of excited that I might be able to put a nullification module on a T2 transport ship. This is a good think I think, as it makes hauling through low sec a bit easier maybe? I mean I am all for PVP stuff but just ganking a hauler that has no defence I fail to see as any kind of fun for anyone.
They are not listening. Do you even read your own words? You said repeatedly that you and many other people want less, not more nullification, and now CCP introduces more nullification. They are not listening because they do not understand this concept.
If they were listening, they would not even think out loud about giving bombers nullification, or faction frigates or any other additional frigate. You are contradicting yourself yet again. Please at least try to be consistent with your CCP creaming. If they were listening, they would not have put that crap on the test server already where it is just ONE step away from getting on TQ. They would have posted a suggestion first and changed the suggestion based on the feedback and then offered it for the test to see if the suggestion works.
Yes, because back then the people who screamed are those that wanted to keep their safety. And as the Claw Menace showed, they were right. Ceptor nullification made space a whole lot less safe for ratting. Then CCP listened and neutered the Claw.
Now people are complaining that CCP wants to introduce more safety in null sec again. It is not the same people complaining and the reasons why they complain now are diametrically different from back then. You have to be obtuse to say otherwise.
