Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[kalaratiri]

http://youtu.be/SVSe0MX6qOY

Circadian sleepers confirmed to pod by a very excitable man. Not confirmed if this is a bug or a feature.



Also, their damage to pods is so low, you'd have to be literally asleep to get podded.

Counting down to your killmail

Ahahahaha.

[Jennifer Starfall]

Don't get me wrong. I love recons, and combat recons are kind of red-headed stepchildren.

But, there's no downside to this ability. The tradeoff of a cloak is that you can't have it running and do things (except run probes).

All this is doing is creating an escalation. Park a combat recon in a complex, and the only way to find him is with another combat recon; send in anything else, and they warp off. It becomes very one-dimensional.

Sure, combat recons need something to set them apart, but what they went with is really kinda "meh."

[Havohej]

All it's doing is putting in an arms race/escalation.

I disagree - because if they can already Falcon then they can already Rook.  As with the Force Recons, if the enemy/target has direct eyes on a jump-in/undock (i.e.: seeing the Force Recon before/after it cloaks/decloaks), they'll see the Combat Recon and choose whether to engage or not.  This allows combat recons to be hidden from everything except direct eyes*.  There's no further escalation - unlike with, say, T3, which became a race to train the skills and amass the ISK to afford the opening prices of the hulls/subsystems - because everyone can already fly them.

*Except probes, obviously - which, presumably, nobody is going to drop probes to look for random Curses and Rooks that may or may not be there.

I can't see the Combat Recon - any of the four - being well-tanked enough or having enough DPS, let alone both, to run w-space sites (or any other high-value pve sites) either solo or in small groups.  Certainly not without Logistics cruisers, which negate the d-scan immunity by their very presence.  To see two or three Guardians on dscan at a site, with no other ships in evidence, would basically announce the presence of a Combat Recon fleet, I think.

Further, the Force Recons will remain the preferred ship for tackling PvE players in sites because you cannot know where you're going to land in relation to the target(s).  You might warp to a site at 100km and find yourself right on top of them, or you might warp to 100km and find the target 300km away from you.  In either case, this is not a desirable situation to be in for an expensive cruiser with a mediocre tank (at best).  The covops cloak of the Force Recon (and the Stratios and Astero hulls) affords the hunter/tackler the ability to examine the situation, possibly bookmark an object/wreck for a better warp-in and initiate contact under more favorable circumstances, while the uncloaked Combat Recon landing blindly instantly alerts the target to the threat, more often than not allowing them plenty of time to align and warp.

[Morwen Lagann]

the only way

Probes are a thing, so no.

A cloaked force recon is immune to probing and d-scan. A combat recon is immune only to dscan.

[Lyn Farel]

Don't get me wrong. I love recons, and combat recons are kind of red-headed stepchildren.

But, there's no downside to this ability. The tradeoff of a cloak is that you can't have it running and do things (except run probes).

All this is doing is creating an escalation. Park a combat recon in a complex, and the only way to find him is with another combat recon; send in anything else, and they warp off. It becomes very one-dimensional.

Sure, combat recons need something to set them apart, but what they went with is really kinda "meh."

Please note that I do not have any actual opinion on this matter, coupled with the fact that I don't agree or disagree with you.

Just wanted to point out that Eve has always been about one-dimensional engagement most of the time. Either the enemy following the meta is the scissor and you are the rock, he will flee, either the other way around, unless you meet another rock...

[Elmund Egivand]

My interest in Huginns are rekindled.

[Merdaneth]

The unscannability introduces a new form of gameplay. EVE already has a sad lack of gameplay options, especially in comparison with the large number of hulls. In that sense this is a good development.

I'm for introducing more external gameplay options though. The equivalent of space terrain, space weather, space day/night.

[Ashley]

You know, how come no one got huffy about the other kind of d-scan immunity that those other recons have always had? Cloaks. Now there's a d-scan immunity you can't even spot with scouts. They're hardly gamebreaking and are common everywhere.

I just don't see what the problem with this d-scan immunity is. I don't fly combat recons so I'm not gaining anything from this, so I don't have a horse in the "must have" race. I'm just not seeing any problem with this being used against me. If I sit in a plex I'm going to need a scout or be ready and aligned if I want to be "safe", and frankly why would I want that if I'm in a plex?

Could someone explain exactly why this is a bad change?

Well, it depends on your opinion on awareness and should it be rewarded or not.

About covops cloak vs new d-scan immunity it's all about the drawbacks imo. Starting from requiring a slot; mobility drawbacks; hefty grid/cpu requirements in some cases; targeting delay; recloaking delay; and after all that you can still be decloaked by your own derpy piloting or other people.
In other words with covops cloaks you need to do some sacrifices and there is room for errors so you can lose your "immunity", with new d-scan immunity there are none - it's just there.

[Havohej]

You know, how come no one got huffy about the other kind of d-scan immunity that those other recons have always had? Cloaks. Now there's a d-scan immunity you can't even spot with scouts. They're hardly gamebreaking and are common everywhere.

I just don't see what the problem with this d-scan immunity is. I don't fly combat recons so I'm not gaining anything from this, so I don't have a horse in the "must have" race. I'm just not seeing any problem with this being used against me. If I sit in a plex I'm going to need a scout or be ready and aligned if I want to be "safe", and frankly why would I want that if I'm in a plex?

Could someone explain exactly why this is a bad change?

Well, it depends on your opinion on awareness and should it be rewarded or not.

About covops cloak vs new d-scan immunity it's all about the drawbacks imo. Starting from requiring a slot; mobility drawbacks; hefty grid/cpu requirements in some cases; targeting delay; recloaking delay; and after all that you can still be decloaked by your own derpy piloting or other people.
In other words with covops cloaks you need to do some sacrifices and there is room for errors so you can lose your "immunity", with new d-scan immunity there are none - it's just there.

With the Force Recon's role bonus, all you sacrifice is ~1 month of training for Recon V - Covops Cloak = free to fit.  Bonus you get in return for this month of training = Warp under cloak.

The new Combat Recon bonus offers (finally!!!) a return for DPS ranging from poor to mediocre and tank ranging from "honor" to "hopes and dreams".

[Saede Riordan]

I think while I have no issues with the actual changes to recons, as a whole, its taking stealth in the wrong direction for EVE.

The stealth in EVE is entirely binary, either you see something on d-scan, or you do not. There is no d-scan falloff, no 'I see a ship but can't tell what it is' none of that. This recent change just reinforces that. I'd ideally like to see a totally revamped directional scanning system that autoscans and has diminishing accuracy with distance, then you could use narrow angles or shorter ranges to give more accurate scan results. You could have ships that spoof looking like other ships, you could have passive camo that makes you harder to see on scans clearly, active camo that does that further, all the way up to cloaking. There's no variance right now in d-scan, its just on or off, I see it or I don't.

[Elmund Egivand]

I think while I have no issues with the actual changes to recons, as a whole, its taking stealth in the wrong direction for EVE.

The stealth in EVE is entirely binary, either you see something on d-scan, or you do not. There is no d-scan falloff, no 'I see a ship but can't tell what it is' none of that. This recent change just reinforces that. I'd ideally like to see a totally revamped directional scanning system that autoscans and has diminishing accuracy with distance, then you could use narrow angles or shorter ranges to give more accurate scan results. You could have ships that spoof looking like other ships, you could have passive camo that makes you harder to see on scans clearly, active camo that does that further, all the way up to cloaking. There's no variance right now in d-scan, its just on or off, I see it or I don't.

That sounds interesting, just like the days of Submarine Combat. Maybe bring it up to CCP?

[Saede Riordan]

Many people have before. Its an oft talked about subject on the Features and Ideas forum, no idea if CCP has plans to revamp d-scan, but based on these changes, I think they assume its fine as is.