It’s the only kind of changes they know how to make.
1 Like
This conversation is just about an issue that CCP created. Just like any other issue that CCP created by saying something and then “forgetting” about it. Just like they “forgot” about how bad it would be to give bombers nullification even though people have been complaining about the strength of bombers for the better part of a decade. Just forgotten. The only thing this conversation shows is that you will excuse literally anything CCP does or doesn’t do despite what they said.
That’s literally not an issue if you could EDIT your posts, but SM prevents editing. So people have to post several responses just because they didn’t see an aspect or had another thought about an aspect of a post they replied to. Or they do not post at all because it’s not worth the effort to deal with this crap and CCP.
You don’t know that. Fleebix has posted in the past that he didn’t know how to use discourse well at that point in time. You just excuse bad communication behavior from the company for no reason whatsoever besides groveling before them in the dust.
I tested my Stiletto on the test server and I need an implant for CPU costing well over 200m just to make a crappy version of my existing ships.
2 Likes
And Fleebix is the whole of CCP right?
Also, literally a google search away if he doesn’t want to read the docs, its easily swapped if they actually wanted to, but for the most part there isn’t any need to
Leave my god damn Luxury Yacht alone, it was fine and dandy as it was. Also leave Fleet Ceptors and Strat Cruisers alone.
2 Likes
Then they ought to do that. Or change the forum moderation bot message. It tells me that I am able to edit my post in this topic when in fact I cannot because of SM. Does the manual you found has something on that, too?
Thats down to the forums developers to deal with, CCP just uses it
Removing nullification from existing hulls: great
Adding nullification to shuttle: OK, not a bad move
Reintroducing nullification as a module that goes on even more types of ship than the nullification attribute ever did: NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!
I don’t mind having a travel ship in the game that’s difficult to kill. The fact that the default travel ship right now is an interceptor-- and therefore can also perform essential combat functions (what could be more important than providing initial tackle?) is a problem. Nullified travel-shuttle is a perfect compromise: it allows people to get around the map with relative ease, while still exposing them to death and destruction if they do it lazily (shuttles can be smartbombed easily, where interceptors with a proper travel fit required 3-4 smartbomb battleships to neutralize reliably). Nullified travel shuttle also can’t tackle, which means when I see one I know immediately that it’s not a threat, whereas “travel” interceptors were always very ambiguous (is this Malediction pilot traveling solo, or is he about to tackle me for his ten friends that are lagging one jump behind him? I don’t know!).
But really? Making nullification a module that goes on so many ships now? No! You’re taking the travel-ceptor problem and making it a thousand times more cancerous! Right now my only options for idiot-proof travel are: taxiceptor or taxi-T3C. Taxiceptor is cheap, but can’t carry any meaningful cargo. Taxi-T3C is expensive, and still pretty limited on cargo capacity. But nullification module on blockade runner? Seriously? Invisible, un-bubbleable, and aligns for warp in just a few seconds? That’s going to be completely impossible to tackle, like a taxi-fit T3C, only it can carry thousands of m3 of cargo. Nullifier on DST? Really? It’s got warp core stab bonuses already, and now it’s going to be bubble immune? So the only way to tackle it solo is to bump tackle it? Really?
The game is already FULL of tackle-immune ships even with nullification restricted to a handful of ships. The last thing EVE needs is the cancer of bubble immunity spreading to 3x as many hull classes. Nullified stealth bomber? ??? Are you kidding me? What, are you trying to remove literally every element of skill from bombing runs?
The penalties for fitting this module are straight-up irrelevant. Let’s look at the list of hulls and see which ones give a flying you-know-what about their targeting range and scan resolution:
- Bombers: sit cloaked, decloak only to bomb and insta-warp off. Does not care about targeting.
- Interceptors: have bonus to mitigate penalties, and have extremely high base scan-res. Will not care about penalties.
- Blockade runner: always cloaked, doesn’t fight-- definitely does not care about nullifier penalties.
- Covops frigate: almost-always cloaked, doesn’t fight-- doesn’t care about nullifier penalties.
- DST: always trying to evade combat-- does not care about nullifier penalties.
- Luxury yacht: pure travel ship-- does not care about nullifier penalties,
- T3C: probably the only ship on this list that actually has to make some kind of trade-off, but also: these pilots are already accustomed to carrying alternate fittings and re-fitting in space to swap from travel-fit to combat-fit. Won’t really care about nullifier penalties unless carrying a nullifier in cargo still penalizes the ship.
- Tech 1 and faction frigates: high mobility, short weapon range, high base scan-res: will not care about nullifier penalties.
Also, interdiction nullification on T1 frigates??? Are you literally kidding me?
Playerbase: complains for years about 30M isk taxiceptors that we can only kill by bringing 3-4 smartbombing battleships.
CCP: “So our new expansion, where an uncatchable taxi-frigate now costs 1M isk instead of 30…”
The nullifier module idea is toxic waste. Get it the **** away from my game. Stick with parts 1 and 2: remove nullification attribute from existing hulls, add nullification attribute to shuttle. FINISHED: push to TQ.
3 Likes
They want to encourage diverse gameplay. The CSM is in agreement as @Brisc_Rubal pointed out ‘The idea that you can’t make changes because they may impact negatively a playstyle is a recipe for stagnation’
For a minute, I thought the CSM was just a dog and pony show but apparently not.
In October, I hear Tengu’s are the next mining ship because why not?
It’s not diverse when it’s all so one sided. The large warp disruptor aren’t getting activation timers and cool downs. All the work is on the evaders. Industry is getting harder. The strong reaction to this isn’t in isolation, it’s because it’s the straw that broke the camel’s back. CCP’s war on everything that’s not gank or fleet has been going on for a long time now. They contradict themselves in that very same sentence you quoted. Diverse gameplay can’t happen if other play styles are not respected, and all becomes subject to the constant CCP obsession of getting on BBC News with the latest destruction of real world wealth.
5 Likes
Ceptors already have a counter. Smartbombs.
Just because no one can be bothered to do it isn’t a fault of the game, it’s the fault of the players.
CCP’s obsession for being on the BBC is it creates new players. No one wants to write about some guy who’s run his 1000th pre-scripted bad mission in highsec.
3 Likes
I actually don’t know why ccp haven’t employed this guy yet.
At least he’s actually thought about the problem with which we apparently have a solution for.
1 Like
You’ll never get diverse gameplay, EVE is a competitive game there will always be a meta, there will always be a strategy or ship that is the go-to, it will always stagnate, the issue is CCP wants to ruin everything else just because some CSM idiots think it might be a good idea, take a look at the CSM and see who they are and what space they are trying to “protect”
Their interests lay squarely with protecting their bot renters who pay them a small fortune, all this change actually does is make it even safer for the bots to farm, double bubbles all the way to slow the hunters down, gives the botters more than ample notice to GTFO
All this does is screw hunters, explorers and the people who might want to look at messing around in null without dying to the first gate camp that appears, i remember when null used to be full of bubbles, because its going to be a repeat of that if this change gets through, especially when the new jump bridges allow people to easily circumvent all their own bubble camps and now even show up on autopilot routes
The fact that neither CCP nor the CSM can see this is telling me that neither of them know what is going on and that none of the current CSM are actually cut out for the job
This change reeks of Pearl Abyss sorry
4 Likes
This is a totally stupid idea. Who is the idiot who proposed these changes?
Does the idea bring anything positive to the game? Absolutely not.
2 Likes
Was concerned about WCS changes effect on Mining barges & Exhumers I tested skiffs and procs on the test server and I kinda like the way WCS works now. You have to pay attention and practice a bit but basically you get pointed just align activate your WCS module and hit warp and off you go. Pretty slick. It works well with skiffs and procs. The problem I see is with the drones reduced bandwidth on the proc. Just having the WCS module fitted and online limits the Procurer to two drones out of 5. You really cant do much with two drones. Anomaly and belt rats in null require a full set of 5 . Specifically on the procurer you should rethink the bandwidth thing to allow 5 drones with the WCS mod.
The skiff has no issues using WCS and 5 drones because it has a 100mb bandwidth . Anyhow I like the changes to WCS and would only mod the drone bandwidth to allow 5 drones on the Procurer.
Good Job CCP
1 Like
Just buble both sides of gate.
1 Like
ETA of those changes? I don’t want to lose expensive t3c because I lose nullification in deep null.
Hi everyone,
Here are the latest revisions to the nullification update:
- Interdiction Nullifier modules are now a High-Slot module.
- Tech I Frigates have been removed from the list of ships that can fit nullifiers.
- Fixed an issue with ECM burst jams not correctly disabling nullification when using the modules.
16 Likes
So the Venture is nerfed now? It has one slot. So there goes the mining upgrade. Was a good choice for low sec mining. CCP did move ore around. Now why do it?
1 Like
Getting closer to what needs to happen, but you missed the mark yet again. This change should be put in the garbage, but yet CCP continues to show that they don’t care that this change will continue the game’s march into the dumpster.
2 Likes