![]() ![]() Your suggestion means that any of the smaller ships has no chance to get away anymore even if they have a warp core stabilizer, because all the tackle ships are expected to already bring +4 point/scram strength anyway. This means all tackle will now be sacrificing multiple mid slots, or simply upgrade to ships with much stronger scramblers like heavy interdictors or maulus navy issues. ![]() If you give all bigger ships like Freighters and Battleships an innate +3 warp core stabilization, most of the tackle will be expected to always bring +4 warp scramble disrupt strength by default, or they wouldn't be able to hold the majority of juicy targets down. Right now warp core strength is rather simple:Ī single point or scram can hold someone down, so people usually only bring a single point or scram expecting it to hold someone down.Īs a counterplay, you can prepare your fit and bring a warp core stabilizer to ignore a scram or ignore two points.Īs counterplay for that counterplay, the tackler could make sacrifices to their fit and bring multiple points and scrams, or upgrade to a more expensive faction scram to get +3 warp disrupt strength, which they might do in case they expect their target to have a warp core stabilizer.Īs you can see, there's a back-and-forth of counterplay options. What are your thoughts? I’m driving CCP into bankruptcy with this idea? Or is this some plain bull for a player who doesn’t understand the mechanics of the game? If CCP wants, make it level based as well by introducing a new skill named Warp Core Mechanics or something, adding 0.2 warp core strength for every level until it multiplies by 2 at level 5. Therefore, I think it’s best if the warp core stabilizer module should multiply the warp core strength by 2. I also heard that capsuleers were once able to fit multiple warp core stabilizers but now that’s not the case. If you disagree, please explain to me what kind of logic is there to be able to interfere in a ship’s warp core without taking down its shields. In other words, only a heavy warp disruptor/scramble should be able to bypass the shields of sub-capitals. If the above is not possible, then it is ridiculous for most Electronic warfares to work unless the shield is down or the module is of bigger size, able to bypass the shields. In essence, to scramble a frigate fitted with a warp core stabilizer, you need to have two warp disrupt modules. ![]() When you have navy disruptors and scramblers giving a max of +1 and +3 warp scramble strength for no reason when subcaps don’t require much to scramble, I think this is valid. For example, frigate, adding 0.1 warp core strength in every level to attain 0.5 warp core strength at level 5. I would like the same for other ships to have, increasing from level 1 to level 5. Titan - 50 base warp core strength, already exists upon reaching level 5 titan, so… Supercarrier - 25 base warp core strength, already exists upon reaching level 5 carrier Besides, it probably doesn’t have enough CPU to fit a warp core stabilizer. After all, you can use only one warp core stabilizer module per ship.Ĭruisers and Battlecruisers - 2 base warp core strengthįreighters - 3 base warp core strength - debatable because CCP and gankers gonna cry if Freighters are difficult to be scrammed. I still think warp core stabilizer shouldn't be adding 2 warp core strength but multiplying warp core strength to base warp core strength with ships like the supercarriers and titans have. I’m talking about escapability, the warp engine that is not explored or used to its fullest capability. I’m not talking about defense or offense. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |