CCP Rattari already spoke about removal of permanent cloak capabilities BUT this is to counter constant cloak camping not restrict travel. Cloaks for BR and covops running system to system would not be impacted I doubt.
Still does not change the fact that industry and pve in Eve is mostly there to provide content for others not mindless crafting with zero risk. There is already virtually no risk if you have a brain. But checking the Safety mouthbreathing killboards you can clearly see very few have brains.
Since we know nothing about this yet I’m reserving judgement, but what I see does not give me encouragement. I’ll be the first to jump for joy if they made such a measured approach to such a change, but they’re 0/3 since the last good changes (the indy/mining changes). Things like this need to done carefully and with nuance, and what I’m seeing is pandering to one crowd at the expense of everyone else.
I WANT TO BE WRONG about that. In the last 6 weeks I’ve seen no evidence that I am.
While I can see the gist of your post, it is unfair to say CCP has added no benefit to HS. For example, the recent Marauder buff (finally) is almost a HS exclusive improvement, although there are some pilots willing to risk them in more lawless space.
The Marauder changes were merely a balance pass to a class of ship. Personally, I loved the changes, and they convinced me try them out. I don’t think a balance change to ship class is comparable to changes that effect entire regions or multiple ship classes. Even still, you could also argue the balance pass was also good for pvpers, since it got more juicy targets out into space. Ganking groups can and do hunt marauders in high sec. Personally I think this is a good thing, such an expensive and powerful tool should have some thought go into its use.
Funny that you mention BR’s. I can’t think of a ship more likely to be impacted by adverse changes to WCS’s than a blockade runner like an Occator, except maybe a freighter, but only an idiot takes a non-JF freighter into low/null anyway. Occator’s can’t use a CovOps cloak, and being able to stack a few WCS’s is about the only thing that saves their bacon if/when they hit a camp. With the right fit, 2 people can overcome the BR’s natural +2 WC bonus if they don’t have WCS’s installed, and with the fast cycle and lock times on something like an inty, I hardly see how a ‘cycled’ WCS serves as a compromise to just eliminating them. You could still run a Viator, but with significantly less room for cargo. So, I stand by what I said earlier. It’s another sacrifice of the viability of industrial production to appease the whiners who moan about not being able to get more KM’s, and to get them easier. And indys are also not there ‘mostly’ to provide you content. They build the shiny stuff that you go out and grief other people with. Making that job harder than it already is impacts everyone who eventually needs replacements. High-sec builders shouldn’t have to die on the pvp/KM altar. But, whatever. You have your opinion, and I have mine. I’ll just have to be OK with the idea that you consider the rest of us indy types to be window-lickers who only exist to serve as easy targets for you.
WCS don’t make a shred of difference against camps. The campers already account for stacked WCS usage by stacking their own +3 scrambers or using multiple tacklers with multiple long points. Have you ever actually been caught by a camp? You aren’t going to coast by while the campers cry “hurdurrr, we dun gone and tackled him but he went and did warped away!” The notion that using those modules makes you immune, and that CCP is taking away that immunity, is nothing but your imagination.
If you’re going to quote me, do it right. First of all, I never claimed it was an ‘immunity’. I said it was many times the only thing that might save a BR’s bacon, and I will allow that reasoning holds up better in lowsec then it does in null. Viator’s have an easier time of it, but at the cost of essentially only being able to haul 13k and change m3 of freight, vs. about 58k. If WCS’s don’t mean a hill of beans against a camp, then why the push to change the way they function to begin with? That’s essentially saying CCP is trying to fix something that isn’t broken. Frankly, with the scan res penalty a pilot incurs by equipping them, you’d think camps would want everyone to have one or two.
Sorry meant scan res there, and that isn’t relevant to the discussion, except that a BR trying to shoot back with it’s one lonely gun will have to do so at point blank range…lol
You can stack 6 WCS’s on an Occator and with the +2 bonus it already gets you can overcome 8 points of tackle, unless I’m missing some relevant point about diminishing returns that isn’t being presented to me as a fit notice in the fitting window. So, it’s not just effective against a guy sitting solo at a gate. Most certainly, it’s not foolproof. But it does provide a margin of safety against a smaller group, or a 5-6 man camp only fitting a single point each. And as I said, it’s a more dependable strategy against low-sec gate camps. I don’t test the theory in null, I’m sure it’d end badly.
Once again, this is not how properly-organized camps function.
Also, looking at the currently-proposed changes, WCS functionality doesn’t seem to be modified except for becoming an active ability. Am I misreading something? Are they limiting WCS in any practical manner of which I’m not aware?
It’s important to remember that not every camp is properly set up or manned. You run into fail camps all the time. Now it will only take two in a row, where before the camper had to set up their camp right to be inescapable. This is clearly what they’re talking about, and they’re right.