My only carebear demand is that my hat stops making me go bald.
It’s pissing me off.
1 Like
A travel 'ceptor that is flown correctly will be just as uncatchable as they are now. Additionally now Shuttles are basically now all travel ceptors that are alpha accessible, a wonderful QoL change for nullsec I am not sure why people aren’t talking about.
What they lost is the special nature of their role, now most T1 frigates can get out of rudimentary gate camps and more importantly potentially help you escape from a frigate escape bay.
The gatecampers don’t get to kill you for free just because they have a bubble, and you don’t escape for free just because you have interdiction nullification and if you can’t keep yourself alive with 30 second of nullification with sub 1 min cooldown then maybe you were relying on that passive trait a bit too much.
I do agree the CPU usage should be looked at, and am very happy SB’s got removed. I would be happy if the bonus removed all the penalties of the mod. As it stands here is the Interdiction Nullifier II on an Interceptor on Sisi
Again, if you cannot work with a 30 second cooldown timer then you probably had a piloting error.
I explained both how the systems were chosen and how if a system could go was selected. In addition to that I noted that had we had behaved as Serenity had then there would be 0 Final Liminalities right now. So that was a possibility, however remote, and to suggest otherwise is to make unfounded accusations that contradict what CCP has said on the matter, which would be saying they are lying. Which is a separate issue.
I am not sure what you mean by this but I will take a stab at it. EVE Online does well if it is healthy. The game was “doing alright” but growing into increasing numbers of alt farms and multiboxed solutions to problems. What we have seen is a dramatic change in focus, spurred on both in newfound financial stability by being purchased, as well as increased metrics based understanding of the EVE playerbase since around that time.
Overall the trends have shown that what they are doing is working and is bringing back a lot of older players, increasing retention of newer players, and developing a playerbase that is more engaged in the Universe rather than thing that afk ratting and/or hunting afk ratters is peek gameplay.
Additionally people who are into things like events, changes, and a universe you can impact are more likely to invest in micro transactions like SKINs and PLEX,
Some of the issue is the loss of a low slot which is typically used to reduce your align time thus making it more likely for insta lockers to catch you or in the case of T3C it adds in some cases 2.5 seconds or more to align time and with a fast frigate burning towards you they can possibly decloak and point you quick enough.
I understand and agree with the lowslot issue (trust me, as a long proud Gallente FW member, and born Amarr, I get you), and to a lesser extent the CPU issue. I take this as an indication that CCP saw interdiction nulified interceptors being fully effective in their own right something they wanted to bring down a bit. Still not sure why myself, but I am not that big of a null guy most of the time.
There are very much thing we should be giving CCP feedback about this module, but hyperbolic missreprentations like “CCP is DESTROYING stabs and nullification” is both misleading and unhelpful for either side of the feedback loop. My biggest fear is that the discussion will always be about strawman issues and thus the real elegant balance solution never gets discussed or the real problems identified because OMG NERF T3C!!!
Saying “Hope dies” because CCP made interceptors with nullification nerfed while at the same time also giving nullification to all shuttles is somewhere between not helpful and not true.
The lowslot makes these interdiction immune ceptors a bit weaker in their own right, but it 100% does not stop you from getting around gate camps basically just as easily as before. Any gap is just excuses of bad of lazy piloting.
EEEEEK, I wish you had refreshed! My original version of this point had a typo in it that merged the interceptor issue with the new gates issue, which was not intended.
That being said the response you did write here was pretty good. The numbers I’m seeing on SiSi are a bit more encouraging then the state they were in when I first made this thread. I am not yet ready to come off my original prediction, BUT I will admit that it is a lot less stark then before. I’m still playing around with it. I may end up revising this concern, but I’m not there yet.
The shuttle thing is just baffling to me, since it steps on the stated goals of the changes in the first place.
You are misunderstanding the distinction here. You gave a wonderful explanation for how the particulars of the event, IE which systems were eligible to fall and which players made fall, but this is not the core distinction I’ve been talking about this whole time.
What you characterize as the parameters of the event, I call predetermination, and here is where we are running into trouble. If the event was truly not predetermined then the release of Pochven would not have been functionally inevitable. There was always going to be a Pochven because the way the event was designed and the way the server architecture worked.
What I’m trying to get at here is I reject this assertion as evidence against predetermination, because it isn’t realistic, and CCP would have known this when designing the event. Think about what you’re asserting here: everyone on both clusters doing exactly the same thing for a prolonged enough period and in an organized fashion across their respective clusters. Even just practically, what does this look like? Sure, it’s not physically impossible that this could happen, but it IS functionally impossible.
The event surrounding the new gates cannot be predetermined in the same way.
You are characterizing here and you should stop because it is extremely disrespectful. It’s this attitude, more then anything else, that isn’t helpful. Whether you disagree with my conclusions and how I arrived at them or not I am not going out of my way to call you a liar, even if I describe some of your individual points as ill considered or dishonest (read: blind to difference and bias in favor of your opinion).
Take issue with my language if you like. That doesn’t change the fact that there are people who play this game differently then you, and there are people who see things differently then you. The silent majority is a real thing, and the reaction statistics to this thread demonstrate that in microcosm. Those people may and very likely will be impacted disproportionately by this change, and the goal this is in service to seems to be ‘let gate camps kill more interceptors.’ I do not see this as an worthwhile trade.
Again, you are characterizing, and in this case you’re even further off the mark then the last one. This refers specifically to the hope for a balanced approach to game development, one that isn’t only about giving pvp players and block entities what they want. I have argued already why I believe this, and as an authority on my thoughts and feelings, I am perfectly entitled to say this on behalf of myself and those like me who see these concerning trends in the thinking. Those players have value. A universe with lots of different kinds of players has value.
There is literally zero skill involved in making people wait an additional minute between each jump. It’s just tedium. What is involved though is a design philosophy that keeps stacking the deck.
a bear
who cares
the care is the most important part , he accumulate isk and care a LOT about it and his ships
to the point of having emotional tantrums wen he lose one
to the point of paranoia , he cant allow himself to have fun
he also come here and say he will quit eve, call some people psychopaths etc, to get some comfort
he never does nothing with the isk he farms … one day inevitably the carebear will quit eve
out of boredom or because of the feeling he is a victim , all the money that he cared so much will go with him , for ever unused
but the carebear will never give his stuff to someone , because he fears , if one day he came back , he will have nothing
Wouldn’t hoarding their stuff if they do quit the game be the opposite of caring? 
no,
the carebear doesn’t realize he will quit
but he will
its called the carebear isk sink
the best in eve
1 Like
You will fall on deaf ears here. Even blizzard has the people who defend GCD. for non wow types BFA introduced a new CD. global CD (GCD). Its only real function is to slow down combat. It forces a few extra cycles of weak as hell autoattacks and lesser damage casts.
A time gate. If it has you take an added 5 minutes over pre gcd days…its done its job. it got 25 people per raid instance (there can be many of them at once) to play 5 minutes longer. For a prettier stat to put on powerpoint slide for a brieifing. Sub numbers are nice numbers. So are time played metrics. Its looks better when numbers show your game is actually being played longer.
Since stuff like WCS was weak already, imo…this screams time gate to me. It will remover what I call gate drag racing. If your new friends had only one tackle and you cleared with 1 WCS…tackle might follow you on the outbound. Okay…1 tackle, not enough power to overcome the WCS…lets drag race to next outbound. And the next. Either they give up or they get a second tackle on a predicted inbound.
This removes that. If they stay 1 tackle only…its bounce celestials to burn CD. tehn gate. You are still zooming after you CD burn off. and its now added 5 minutes to your played metric. Look shareholders…we are up 50% on time played. People like to play our game.
Not necesssarily…time gate just made a 10 minute task 15. It wasn’t enjoyed. It was you have to deal with the time gate even if not liked.
1 Like
Hey man first off I apologize if I became snarky in reflex, you have provide honest and open discourse on the matter and that is pretty awesome.
I don’t feel I miss characterized what you said, which was
So I rearranged the words, and did add emphasis however that emphasis was on the word that you used that I originally took exception with.
Likewise the name of the thread is “when hope dies” and so I was commenting on the melodrama of the messaging and how it doesn’t actually achieve the goal of making a better EVE, and risks either having you simply come across as another “I’m quitting because of X change” thread or at worse this kind of reductionist discussion about the actual changes and what they mean prevents us from getting the good feedback that CCP asked for when they put something out even earlier in testing than they sometimes do. In order to get good quality feedback. So I am very into discussion about what exactly needs to be done, and an attempt to understand what CCP is trying to do. Very VERY frequently changes happen that impact behavior CCP is trying to reign in, and so the complaints come across as “job well done”. If CCP DOES believe that interdiction nullification is “too strong” than simply disagreeing with them isn’t going to change anything, but identifying the actual problematic areas of the design (like Stealth Bombers) can be addressed.
One final note. You say it is predetermined then you say it could have not happened. Yes it was very unlikely but earlier it was sited that Serenity was evidence it was “predetermined” when in fact it actually showed the possible universe in which we weren’t assholes that betrayed the universe to the first triangle with a taste for suns.
Was it expected yes. But CCP didn’t make Pochven, we did. To suggest otherwise is belittling an immense amount of work. The thousands of players who fought for the Trig don’t like being told that Pochven would have just “happened” without their effort. It isn’t true and it is harmful to spread.
1 Like
cooldown as currently implemented is too generous and easy to abuse. it should be more like 5 minutes.
You should probably just ask them to remove nullification in that case.
This makes sense to me. Ironically they did end up throwing out most of those GCD changes from BFA in SL. I don’t think the situations are exactly comparable but I do think it shows some room for design on either side.
It’s okay, passion is like this! I am hardly innocent.
As I was passing out last night I had the realization that a lot of this, especially whether or not I’ll be able to weather the change, will hinge on how these changes interact with the forthcoming cloaking changes.
I have a LOT more free time today then I did the past two days. I’m hoping to really put different combinations through the paces on SiSi to have an update to my original thoughts regarding the nullification issue this evening.
Of course in the spirit of fairness if my thoughts significant change, and that looks a lot more realistically possible then before, I will update the OP to reflect that.
1 Like
Then a cloak in utility slot becomes the norm. For the small percentage who haven’t worked that out yet on travel fits.
then the tedium of time gate is not tin foil…its real. Campers should have brought the couple of tackles for the camp to start off with. It be like realizing after 5 got away with mwd spank claok…oh crap, we are supposed to drone guard the frigate who is dredging the area for contact hit.
A camp that can’t do the basic stuff before prey arrives…needs to lose targets for those oversights.
They don’t need to be fed 5 minutes extra for their lack of planning to recover and scare up another tackle.
1 Like
singing in Letterkenny
To be fair the WCS hard counter of more tackle does not apply to Interceptors…or at least a properly fitted one.
I was working on an update to this thread and a revision to my predictions concerning the nullification change and softening it somewhat based on my experience on SiSi, and I made the mistake of listening to the CCP interview on TIS (link: CCP on Foundations Quadrant - YouTube).
I’m not going to continue updating this thread, because I’ve become very overloaded and very overwhelmed by the reinforcement of my worst fears. This interview caused me to swing hard back into the direction of my original post, especially as it applies to nullification, the new gates, and the influence of CSM. I also have new concerns about the forthcoming but as yet unannounced cloaking changes. The short of it is I don’t think CCP is taking their game in the direction that drew me to it in the first place, and I’m just going to admit defeat on the matter. I’m in an extremely jaded mood at the moment, and I don’t know what that means for me in the long term.
I’d like to thank those who participated constructively on either side of the debate during this discussion. Fly safe.
3 Likes
Is this a reference or do you really just live the other side of the Border from me?
Yeah, remember that time when we speculated about how CCP was going to throw more gas on the Indy dumpster fire?
Also, to the people who cry “REEE dey haet pVe”, do you realize industry is not PVE but rather PVP? You are actually competing with other players rather than the environment. Abyssal running is PVE. Flying though a gate in a indy ship so you can sell your goods at Jita to compete on the market? PVP. You don’t actually represent PVE players.
But wait, there’s more. If you haven’t noticed, over the last few years CCP has been adding a significant amount of new content specifically catering to PVE players. They even added new NPC factions and even new star systems for PVE players. They clearly care enough about PVE players to want to spend time and money on them.