Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 47 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Raukho
Evoke. Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:16:00 -
[121]
1. whines
2. whines
3. whines about high sec missions by 0.0 moonfarmers
|
Myrkala
Minmatar Aurora Acclivitous
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:17:00 -
[122]
1. Projectiles
> They need something, after all indirect changes to them both AC and Artillery, the Large and XL variants in particular. We still want them capless to keep them different. Maybe a big increase in falloff.
2. Minmatar Capitals
> Naglfar the obvious issue with training time and a split weapon system, in effect a highslot is essentially wasted, let the players choose between 4 turrets or 3 launchers and one turret, or get move a high to a low or a mid and let them choose between 3 turrets and 3 launchers.
Also the "two" bonuses are essentially one damage bonus over all, but the Moros gets a (massive) bonus to drone damage and hitpoints, a much more useful bonus resulting in making it much more versatile than other dreads in many situations. (788 dps at 75+30 km optimal with Wardens). In effect the Moros which does more damage than the Naglfar gets a bonus to all its sieged weapons damage PLUS its supporing drone damage, while the Naglfar principally really only gets "one" damage bonus.
If you do decide to change the Naglfar, its second bonus should be actually "useful" not just redundant like it is now. Like a ROF and DMG mod to both Projectiles or Citadels to boost its actual damage output or give it something useful like the Moros has. Maybe you move a high to a mid, give it one damage bonus for all its siege weapons and then a tanking bonus? 7.5% shieldboost per level. One thing I believe is that because of mixed weapon systems it ends up lacking in fittings because of citadel torp launcher cpu usage.
Well that is my opinion.
3. Risk vs Reward.
> Highsec L4's and local.
I want to see a change here !
"Ruppie ain't no puppie." |
Junko Ni'Kan
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:21:00 -
[123]
1. Naglfar - Clearly not on the same level as the other dreads. Needs a major boost.
2. Claw - Locking range 3. Tempest
|
Augeas
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:24:00 -
[124]
1. Scorch. It's too good. Nerf DPS, range or tracking. Or all. 2. Faction ships. Fix their fittings and bonuses pls. 3. 0.0 risk vs. reward. Currently it's far too much reward for far too little risk, thanks to infallible local and massive NAP-blocks.
|
Hellcore
Minmatar Ex-Nihilo Fate Weavers
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:25:00 -
[125]
1) Sovereignty: with all the related mind numbing and tedious related issues (blobs, timezones & titans etc).
2) Active vs EHP/Buffer tanking: this basically comes down to active tanking being poor for PVP in almost every situation (even dreads are mainly buffer tanked these days, see problem 1).
3) Increasing lack of overall focus and goals in game design and balance by *CCP*: ships & modules that do not fit their descriptions, design and balance too driven by public consensus (*cough* vocal minorities). If anything this thread is potentially as harmful as it is beneficial.
--
|
Furb Killer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:30:00 -
[126]
1. ECM drones, those little buggers are way too effective.
2. Large projectile weapons/minnie BS, they just subpar.
3. ISK printing moons ---------------------------------------------
Originally by: Neth'Rae Military experts are calling this a troll.
|
RuriHoshino
Minmatar Stimulus Rote Kapelle
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:31:00 -
[127]
Warp speed bonus for the fourth subsystem??? <guinness> BRILLIANT! </guinness>
Let's see, what else - LOLki (let's all make a HAC that only costs 100 times as much as the real thing!!!), how-the-****-is-it that you still have not swapped the Phoon's ******ed base hitpoints, OPTIMAL FOR WOLF FALLOFF FOR JAG KTHX SWEET SPACECHRIST, Large ACs because we all enjoy shooting Volkswagons off in random directions ineffectually into space :V , Nidhoggur should be the second shield tanking carrier but instead does exactly nothing well, can we just PRETEND that the Naglepuss should only be using capital artillery ohwait dual weapons systems ROCK HARD, umm what else... yeah that's all I got now.
Sum up:
1. Minmatar battleships. For the Typhoon's base hitpoints, there is no conceivable reason that a ship with 7 lows and 4 mids should have more shield hitpoints than armor. Many issues with the Tempest/Maelstrom can be addressed by item 2:
2. Large ACs / Artillery. Falloff used to be cool when agility mattered. Alpha used to be cool when hitpoints mattered. Now everything is slow and ungainly, and high ehp buffers rule the day.
3. Minmatar capitals are a joke. Nidhoggur either needs more lows so it's tank is at least comparable to the Thanny or more mids so it's tank is at least comparable to the Chimmy. Right now it just has the worst capital tank period, with the selfless ability to RR both armor and shield making it an easy call for primary. Dual weapons systems on a dreadnought are just stupid, they are highly specialised ships that should be good at doing exactly one thing, adding fake "versatility" just makes the training for them take much longer without providing any benefit whatsoever.
|
ry ry
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:36:00 -
[128]
Originally by: Junko Ni'Kan 2. Claw - Locking range
this.
at the *very least* it should be able to lock out to the base range of a disruptor 2.
|
Seishi Maru
M. Corp Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:38:00 -
[129]
Originally by: CCP Nozh Good stuff, keep it coming.
I haven't counted or anything but the main issues seem to be:
- ECM - Mainly ECM Drones
- Tech 2 Ammo
- Rockets
- Blasters
- Large Artillery
Remember no discussions here, and try to limit your posts to three items.
You seems to have missed the naglfar that appears every 3 posts....
|
Triest
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:39:00 -
[130]
1. Minmatar battleships. For the Typhoon's base hitpoints, there is no conceivable reason that a ship with 7 lows and 4 mids should have more shield hitpoints than armor. Many issues with the Tempest/Maelstrom exist, some of which are just due to large projectiles being terrible.
2. Large ACs / Artillery. Large artillery does by far the lowest DPS of the various weapon systems, at the shortest range and with the worst tracking. Something needs to be fixed, because not using capacitor is utterly not worth the trade-off. Large autocannons also do less damage than blasters and pulse lasers, without any real compensating benefits in this era of omni tanks and engagements at either long range or point blank. Falloff can't be boosted outside of rigs, and that's just silly, especially when tracking disruptors set the precedent for it to be modulated by optimal modifiers.
3. Fix the Naglfar, period. It's terrible in every way compared with the other dreads. The Nidhoggur is probably fine, but the Hel also is sub-par.
|
|
Marlenus
Caldari Ironfleet Towing And Salvage Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:41:00 -
[131]
1) Heavy Interdictors vs Warp Core Stabilizers
Despised as they rightly are by many, the humble stab has been ground beneath the tank treads of advancing progress, losing most utility in the process. I remember when stab monkeys fit all their lows with stabs, and I remember the big stab nerf that made stabs a pointless fit on most combat vessels. Fine and good. But then came the uncatchable capitals, which in turn brought us the scripted Hictor. Now there's a point that catches anything, and totally ignores warp core stabilizers. And I think that's a balance problem. Who fits stabs now? There's no point, because any camp with a Hictor (which is to say, most serious camps) will grab you anyway. Admittedly advances in slipperiness (blockade runner) make this less important. But I still think the infinipoint on the Hictor should be counterable in *some* way by sub-capitals, and a tweak to the little-used warp core stabiliser seems like the way to do it. There should be *some* situation in the game where fitting a stab is worth the hefty disadvantages.
2) Rigs
I can't believe nobody has mentioned rigs. They are still a rare fit on anything T1 smaller than a battlecruiser, and a great many of them either don't make any sense at all for their price, or are inferior to a competing rig in every situation, and thus unused. There's been talk of putting multiple rig sizes, which would be good; but serious effort needs to go into reconsidering their effects, as well.
3) T2 Destroyers (Interdictors)
These took a hard hit during one of the early speed balances (long before the big nano nerf) when they got their speed cut in half and made identical to the T1 destroyers. Subsequent introduction of the heavy interdictors then somewhat reduced the value of their unique role (with the bubble launcher). Destroyers in general need a boost as mentioned by others in this thread; but when that happens, some love to the existing T2 hulls (and possibly a new T2 destroyer for each race) would be very much in order.
------------------ Ironfleet.com |
Wang Jing
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:42:00 -
[132]
Originally by: CCP Nozh Good stuff, keep it coming.
I haven't counted or anything but the main issues seem to be:
- ECM - Mainly ECM Drones
- Tech 2 Ammo
- Rockets
- Blasters
- Large Artillery
Remember no discussions here, and try to limit your posts to three items.
You missed a lot of requests for 4th Assault Frigate Bonus.
|
Jason Edwards
Internet Tough Guy
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:42:00 -
[133]
1. Black ops? They cant be used in combat... 2. Tech 2 modules which are worse then even meta 2 items. ex. T2 mwds. 3. Dread t2 ammo and t2 guns. Also speed tanking citadels. Sigh. ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded. |
Linas IV
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:48:00 -
[134]
Edited by: Linas IV on 17/04/2009 15:48:58 1. Large Projectile Turrets
-Large Artillery, especialy 1400s need bigger clipsize, and adjustments to Damage and Rate of fire (20% more Alpha maybe even 5% more DPS) to compensate the Low range and the Restrictions on Minmatar BS (low targeting range for example)
-Large Autocannons got a too low damage at ranges bigger than 15-20km, Emp has about 10% less damage than the other closerange Charges (Multyfr. and Antim.) and Hail is basicly unusable because of the harsch tracking and fallof penalties.
A possible fix would be about 15% more Base-fallof or 5-7% more DPS; fixing Hail or simply bringing Emp L and PhasedP. L in line with the other charges
2. The Tempest -Needs a sligh fix to be able to compete with the Typhoon or other tier 2 BS since the both free Highslots and the free Medslot lost their use over the last patches. (Nos-nerf; Ewar-Nerv; Neuts pointless against the Cap-Injected, Plated ships flown everywhere today)
Possibilities: Bigger drone bay (125m¦ maybe), or 7th turret + a bit more powergrid (i would prefer the last)
3. Last but not least, the Naglfar Its Basicly pointless flying one if not fully tanked, because Damage in Gankfittings is not even comparable to other dreads (over 20% less), and the Ehp and Tank is well below average of the other dreads because of the bad slot layout and missing tank bonuses. (Ps: EHP is nowadays more important than ever)
Fix: Either give the Nag the same med+lowslot count as the other dreads (6:6 for example + a bit of CPU) or Raise the damage well above average to compensate for the missing tank-relevant slot.
|
DigitalCommunist
November Corporation
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:49:00 -
[135]
I'm going to assume you're only talking about ships/modules and you want actual problems, instead of a wishlist for boosting treatment.
1. The signature difference between classes is too small because EVE is over bloated with ships. That is, there are too many classes crammed into a tiny space originally meant for just three. See this thread for more info (pictures missing now). Essentially I want you to widen the differences in tracking so we have more class based warfare.
2. Upon reading the thread, I was reminded about T2 ammo. The whole thing should be redone. Although I don't really consider it a huge unbalancing issue like some people, its just easy to overhaul compared to other things. People having easy and cheap access to faction ammo is a bigger problem, because it causes power creep for no reason whatsoever.
3. Rigs. Some general gripes listed here, but like ammo the whole thing could stand to be scrapped and redone.
I also don't agree with people citing blasters or artillery as a problem, but both are severely affected by the broken transverse calculation in the tracking formula. That, and being let down by ships which are supposed to use these guns (Hyperion, Muninn for example). If you start a thread for each of these guns you'll be focusing on the symptoms only.
|
Arkady Sadik
Minmatar Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:50:00 -
[136]
I assume this is about "ship balance" mainly - there are balancing issues related to game mechanics that really need work (primarily high sec profitability and sovereignty), but not sure if this is the thread for those.
1) Capitals
In particular the dreads need work. The Revelation is almost always the best choice, and the Naglfar is almost always the worst choice. Dreads need some balance to make them differently useful in various situations. Especially the Revelation and Naglfar need some work.
Carriers could get some balancing. All of them should get both armor and shield transfer range bonuses, and drop the remote cap bonuses - the current lack of armor RR on the Chimera makes it completely useless in some fleets, which shouldn't happen (likewise for the Archon, but that mostly affects POS repping, as there aren't that many pure shield tanking fleets). Balance the carriers around other factors, and give them distinct roles.
Example: Nidhoggur should be _the_ triage platform. It isn't. Thanks to the better cap and better local rep, the Archon is a superior choice. (Archon is pretty often the "superior choice" over other carriers except for POS shield repping these days, but the unbalance isn't as stark as with dreads)
Supercaps seem to need a pretty complete rework. Motherships do not give a big enough advantage over a normal carrier to justify their cost. They probably need more of a "mobile base" role than they have right now. Titans are hotly debated. The current use of "nano-titans" for "hit-and-run DD" just doesn't feel right, and the on/off switch effect on fleet battles is very annoying. They probably should have more of a "flagship"/"middle of the fight" role.
2) Sniper Battleships
The Apocalypse is pretty strong here with few rivals: Best range, best dps (even taking damage types into account), best tracking. The ships need a rebalancing of their roles and advantages. Artillery in particular (Tempest/Maelstrom) has serious problems due to lowest range and lowest dps.
3) Docking Games
One of the biggest annoyances outside of sovereign space are docking games. An appropriately set up ship in dock range can reduce the risk it puts up with to near zero even when aggressing thanks to the ability to deaggress and dock when things look bad. In high-sec, this can be nicely combined with neutral logistics pilots to form an almost fully secure situation - the neutral logistics pilot can not be aggressed (if it's actually known about among the tons of other neutrals), and as soon as it supports the main target, any dps diverted to the logistics ship will just make it dock and give the primary more time to wait out its timer. In low-sec, capitals playing docking games are most annoying aspect and pretty much impossible to kill.
A similar problem exists with star gates and jumping out, but that can be countered by having other ships on the other side. Station docking can't be countered.
|
Garrakh
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:52:00 -
[137]
Edited by: Garrakh on 17/04/2009 15:51:52 Blasters (Large and Medium) Gallente recons and Dampeners T2 Ammo (apart from scorch)
|
Max Teranous
Reikoku Reloaded KenZoku
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:52:00 -
[138]
Just 2 from me:
1) 0.0 Warfare, POS & Capital ships. This needs a complete rethink and rebuild from the ground up, with roles and objectives for many sized gangs, uses for small ships as well as big ships, Carriers, Titans, DD etc sorted out properly to fit within the scope, POS's for sov being sererated from POS's for industry, Jump Bridges, Cyno Jammers etc etc.
2) Minmatar. A complete look at the Minmatar line of ships. Including but not exaustive list would be the Claw (lol lock range), all the capital ships, Fleet BS or lack of one, the split weapon system concept, projectile "advantage" of different damage types (which does not exist with T2 ammo), Target painters, mismatched armour/shield values to tanking type, etc etc.
Max
|
Djanger
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:56:00 -
[139]
Drones. Players should have an option to reconnect to his drones when player got disconnected.
|
Kazuo Ishiguro
House of Marbles Zzz
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:59:00 -
[140]
1. Too many minerals and meta 0 tech 1 modules coming from missions. Reduce mineral content and remove meta 0 loot drops.
2. Static moon minerals. Almost every system in the game has been systematically scanned and mapped. It would liven things up a bit if the number of moons carrying each type was only fixed within a particular system, constellation, or region. People should have to look for new sources on a regular basis; maybe every few months of constant mining.
3. Destroyers need a stronger role. Perhaps more bonuses to range, so they can avoid enemy fire more effectively?
--- 20:1 mineral compression ISRC Racing, Season 7 - schedule |
|
Garrakh
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:59:00 -
[141]
Edited by: Garrakh on 17/04/2009 15:59:52 .
|
Zhull
Amarr Patagonia Holdings
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 16:06:00 -
[142]
Vexor/Myrm/Eos Amarr Drones Black ops
|
BharkKoum Zeer
Gallente Amarr Empire Research Copr
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 16:07:00 -
[143]
Balance moon minerals !! Please the prices are making it very difficult to build ships for small corporations that do not access to moon supplies!!!
|
Seriously Bored
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 16:07:00 -
[144]
1) Rebalance Artillery. There are a lot of other good suggestions here for improving it, though I'd lean toward higher alpha and boosted falloff.
2) From everything I've read, Blasters need some love.
3) T2 close range ammo needs to be fixed. I know it was God at one point, but it seemed nerfed beyond any proper use as is.
|
fuxinos
Caldari Guys 0f Sarcasm
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 16:08:00 -
[145]
1. Missiles in general: They have no more big use in Pvp and are constantly underperforming since QR, except Torps (because of their extrem DPS).
2. Caldari only long range: The worst concept ever and the nr.1 thing what makes Caldari so unflexibel. Missileboats should be low-med range like Khanid ships, because they just dont fir into the sniper role.
3. Large AC and Large Autocannons: nuff said
|
DigitalCommunist
November Corporation
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 16:10:00 -
[146]
I see some people mentioning supercaps. The reason its not worth suggesting in a ship balance thread is because they shouldn't be ships. As long as you balance them as ships, they are flawed and horrible.
|
Idara
Caldari Failure Corp
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 16:11:00 -
[147]
lol @ everyone BAAAAAAWWWW'ing over L4s. --- Failure Corp [FAILD] - Failing to fail first in EVE - Idara |
Wrayeth
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 16:12:00 -
[148]
Edited by: Wrayeth on 17/04/2009 16:13:56 1.) Shield tanking vs. armor tanking for PvP - shield tanking is massively disadvantaged in most PvP situations due to shield tanking modules occupying the same slots as tackling and EW gear; also, shield buffers have less hitpoints than armor buffers when using extenders/plates and also weaker resists. This has made an entire race, Caldari, largely crap in PvP aside from their EW ships and one or two others.
2.) Minmatar battleships - these ships fare poorly in comparison to their counterparts from other races. Please see this post for my thought on how to fix them.
3.) Web changes - in short, they were too severe. Please consider setting webs back to 70% or 75% max.
If I could add a fourth item, I would add warp scramblers shutting off MWD, as this greatly impairs large ship vs. small ship balance. With even one of these modules, it makes it impossible for the large ship to maneuver against the small ship in an attempt to gain enough range to hit the target with turrets. This is livable in a gang, but it makes solo PvP pretty much impossible; a single opponent with a scram and you're toast if he's in a smaller ship.
I also have another suggestion I thought I'd add here to make mixed shield/armor RR gangs more viable: scripts. Remove the individual remote armor and shield reps and create a module that can do both, but require it to fit a script to choose which functionality it is using. There would be separate scripts for each size of module from small to large to capital, and the skill requirements currently in effect to use these sizes of rep would be attached to the scripts, not the basic module. Make the remote armor and shield skills' cap usage effects function only when the right script is implemented.
I'd elaborate more on all of the above, but I need to get to work. -Wrayeth n00b Extraordinaire "Look, pa! I just contributed absolutely nothing to this thread!" |
fuxinos
Caldari Guys 0f Sarcasm
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 16:14:00 -
[149]
4: Shield mods take to much CPU (shield Transporter for example takes so much CPU, it makes shield RR IMPOSSIBLE)
|
Vir Hellnamin
Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 16:17:00 -
[150]
Edited by: Vir Hellnamin on 17/04/2009 16:17:42
Originally by: Arkady Sadik
1) Capitals 2) Sniper Battleships
3) Docking Games
A similar problem exists with star gates and jumping out, but that can be countered by having other ships on the other side. Station docking can't be countered.
First two were in my first list, but foooooooook! the third is a gem! Who ever put it in first time deserves a win forams today badge.
Q-****ING-TF on "3)"! -- "Entering MH means instant death. It's worse than 0.0. Even the asteroids shoot back." - Alex Harumichi [GRD]
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 47 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |