Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 33 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 29 post(s) |
HerrBert
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
45
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:06:00 -
[151] - Quote
Dear Fozzie,
I think the changes are great and totally endourse your product. Esspecially since the old titans (Vulture and Claymore) are getting new life in them besides being possed up slaves. I think making the EOS the new King of Boosters for Armor-based PvP is kinda wierd, then again it puts it back into its former glory. Back when EOS was a cool ship.
That being said, with the 2% Bonus on the Tech3 Subsystem you could also call that a castration. To be blunt yes you could go for the overpriced Sleipnir Version but you get inferior boost.. so thats bad. Why not scrap boosting Tech3s in total.
I would suggest you replace the "Fleetcommand Subsystem" with a Salvaging Subsystem,
50% Increase for Tractor Beams per Subsystem Level
Racial Modifier: 5% Increase of Yield (Minmatar Hacking / Caldari Analysis / Gallente Salvaging / Amarr Gas Cloud Harvester)
This would get it next to its carebearing marauder brothern... My mind does not reflect my corp ... it just shows you what they care about...
Super serious Wormhole Guy http://www.youtube.com/user/HerrBertism |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
1886
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:08:00 -
[152] - Quote
Quote:"A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step." - Laozi
Quote:There are some serious technical hurdles to adjusting this aspect of the features, which are being worked on as we speak but for which we are not currently ready to announce an ETA.
my interpretation: they can't say when they can force links on grid for technical reasons. So i read the entire post in context of this, they have to make boosting ships useful in combat FIRST, otherwise you would have a kiting brick on grid etc... and thats what they are doing, beside other adjustments and quick fixes (POS rule).
eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW |
Liam Inkuras
Justified Chaos
360
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:11:00 -
[153] - Quote
YEEEEEHAWWWW I wear my goggles at night.
Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone |
Daneel Trevize
Give my 11percent back
386
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:13:00 -
[154] - Quote
Alexander the Great wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:
Loki: Siege, Armored, Skirmish Proteus: Armored, Skirmish, Information Tengu: Siege, Skirmish, Information Legion: Armored, Skirmish, Information Looks like a typo somewhere in here. Proteus and legion are the same. The missing Armour, Siege, Info doesn't fit Amarr or Gal better than the listed combos. Skirmish is too powerful to nerf one of them by not having it, while also giving them siege instead. |
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS
394
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:16:00 -
[155] - Quote
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote:Quote:All defensive (Siege and Armored) links: T1: 4.8% T2: 6% Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 25.9% Former max bonus: 35% This is outrageous. It will hurt small gangs so much. With this T2 small gangs won't stand a chance against T1 blobs. Roll it back ASAP pls. Also mining links out of POS shields! Two comments: All those who think you can't compete without gang links are spoiled little brats. The "blob" can just as easily bring gang links as you can, and generally they are more likely to have them. Also, people were out soloing and partaking in asymetric warfare long before gang links became so ubiquitously used. You just need to learn to employ tactics, learn how to engage, and do so without having stupidly potent enhancements to your ship. As for the "move mining links out of POS shields" too. This would be alright, as long as the rorqual can cloak while sieged. Put it on grid, 200 km's off the mining operation, so it can cloak up the moment a hostile enters system!
Obviously you don't understand how eve works, or you do but your actual small gang experience is close to 0. Not all fleets in EVE are kiting and sniping fleets. In eve u can fight both at range and brawling, you know? If fighting at range you need skirmish links, if brawling you might need defense bonuses. If brawling outnumbered you100% need or huge amount of logis or those defense bonuses.
So if our most often 10-20 T2 or T3 man fleet go out in a roam, we will ofc avoid 30-60 T2-T3 fleets. But we will go at T1 or mixed T1-T2 fleets with those numbers. Because those defense bonuses mean much more for us than for T1 hulls.
Numbers (blobs) these days are just OP. But specialized fleets (T2,T3) or higher tier ships like BS on BC and lower, with the addition of bonuses gives you a chance to fight against blobs even tough their fleets having the bonuses also.
Our 20 man fleet being able to fight against 40-50 man fleets will drop to 30-40. And because of that we ll need to bring + 1 T2 logi to our fleet than we used to and it still might not be enough. BALEX is recruiting -----> tinyurl.com/oscmmlv |
Mole Guy
Xoth Inc Pandorum Invictus
299
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:20:00 -
[156] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:MainDrain wrote:Obviously there won't be a navy version of the mining links, but will there be an Ore version of the mining links with the same increase in bonus as the Navy links? The navy links give the same bonus as the normal mindlinks, but they give it to multiple disciplines at once. We may add an Ore link at some point, if so it will probably give Mining Foreman and Siege Warfare bonuses. WHAT??? holy bat shyt rat man! did you say ore links for the rorqual and orca for shield? kick ass!!!! |
Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
398
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:22:00 -
[157] - Quote
Also curious to know Fozzie .. in the future when OGB is removed what kind of ranges do you have in mind for links? and have you factored that into the CS rebalance? Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
PinkKnife
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
384
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:23:00 -
[158] - Quote
I'm a bit concerned that the legion and Proteus get the same bonuses. Frankly it seems pretty lazy.
Loki: Siege, Armored, Skirmish Proteus: Armored, Skirmish, Information Tengu: Siege, Skirmish, Information Legion: Armored, Skirmish, Information
So each race doesn't get one of the four, okay, so give the Proteus Siege instead of Information or Skirmish, not a bit deal, but making the same seems pretty lazy. If that is because they are optimal than you should change it so that one set isn't inherently the best for a certain type. |
Mara Maken
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:23:00 -
[159] - Quote
I think there should be a little more to differentiate the strategic cruisers from one another. Loki specializes in Skirmish so make the Skirmish boost 3% and the other two leave at 2% and specialize the others as well, Tengu - Siege, etc.
Also, not sure if the current breakdown of the three different bonuses applied to T3s makes much sense. It will require very particular circumstances to choose anything over the Loki. I think if we add a little more incentive like the example I suggested above with the 3% specialization you would see more uses of other ships besides Loki.
|
Mole Guy
Xoth Inc Pandorum Invictus
299
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:25:00 -
[160] - Quote
Kyt Thrace wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: And finally we're making some significant changes to the availability of mindlink implants:
Adding normal mindlinks (including mining mindlinks) to the Concord LP store for 20,000 Concord LP and 20m isk (~60-80m final product sale price). Dear CCP Fozzie, I just bought a Skirmish mindlink for 250 mil & plugged it in. Just want to let you know I love all the changes, but you cost me some isk.. Kyt P.S. The mindlink prices are dropping fast, all you sellers get out while you can! i didnt really need to see this post about losing chump change. i have a t2 mining foreman implant.
now, i have to go buy all the navy ones (i fly all command ships on 2 toons) |
|
Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
398
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:26:00 -
[161] - Quote
Also a little confused the mindlinks are T2 atm and you are adding T1 links what will the difference be? Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
chatgris
Quantum Cats Syndicate Samurai Pizza Cats
571
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:28:00 -
[162] - Quote
Great changes.
Are there any notions of requiring Titans to be outside of POS shields when they bridge? |
Tuxedo Catfish
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
54
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:28:00 -
[163] - Quote
I love these changes. A welcome relief from the HAC thread.
Oh, but kick the mining bonuses out of POSes too. It's only fair. |
MarekCZE
The Chosen 0nes Mildly Sober
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:29:00 -
[164] - Quote
Warfare links (other than mining links) can no longer be activated inside a starbase forcefield People can still orbit just outside the forcefield I know, but they will at least have to keep an eye on that character so it's an improvement.
YEAH lets **** up EVE online totaly its always nice to see something why people quit with eve. Just curious this was born in your blond head or? I just wanna know if u r nerd or somebody else. |
Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
398
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:32:00 -
[165] - Quote
what's with the increasing of lock ranges and scan resolution? do we need to boost all ships lock time and range for some reason? Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Maximus Andendare
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
388
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:33:00 -
[166] - Quote
MarekCZE wrote:Warfare links (other than mining links) can no longer be activated inside a starbase forcefield People can still orbit just outside the forcefield I know, but they will at least have to keep an eye on that character so it's an improvement. YEAH lets **** up EVE online totaly its always nice to see something why people quit with eve. Just curious this was born in your blond head or? I just wanna know if u r nerd or somebody else. Sorry your booster that stays safely inside of a POS forcefield will now have to come out and put his ship at risk in order to provide significant benefits to your "solo" pvp.
TBH, the boosts shouldn't be able to be activated within 2,000m of a POS forcefield. Step onto the battlefield, and you're already dead, born again at the end of the battle to live on and fight another day. |
Hatsumi Kobayashi
V0LTA Verge of Collapse
257
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:33:00 -
[167] - Quote
MarekCZE wrote:Warfare links (other than mining links) can no longer be activated inside a starbase forcefield People can still orbit just outside the forcefield I know, but they will at least have to keep an eye on that character so it's an improvement. YEAH lets **** up EVE online totaly its always nice to see something why people quit with eve. Just curious this was born in your blond head or? I just wanna know if u r nerd or somebody else.
what is wrong with you STANDING ON THE VERGE OF PROLAPSE |
Kozlack
Ordo Drakonis Nulli Secunda
4
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:34:00 -
[168] - Quote
Are you going to give capitals a static bonus to links? There are those of us that toss links on our cap alts while our mains do things btw. On vaction from hawk-eyeing local..... in empire |
Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
398
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:35:00 -
[169] - Quote
Also could you rename siege warfare to shield warfare please? like armoured warfare... Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Elendar
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
58
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:36:00 -
[170] - Quote
Armour hacs lose speed from the rapid deployment nerf but this isn't matched by a nerf to electronic superiority for painters meaning ahacs are going to be taking more damage as a result of this change.
Add the defence nerfs on top of that and it makes a fleet comp that is already very much on the edge of glory most of the time somewhat weaker against blobs.
Also IWAR is now far easier to run links for meaning more bonused painters which results in an effective further damage boost vs ahacs for a long of gangs (iwar strength often being run as 4th link).
Please don't nerf the ahac ;( |
|
HazeInADaze
L'Avant Garde
58
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:37:00 -
[171] - Quote
Interdiction nerf is heavy. Will there be any changes to recons and EAF's to compensate? Or are these ships being nerfed on purpose? All that encouragement to build snipe HACs with the long range gun and HAC changes; counter pointed by forcing the lach and huggin out in front of the fleet. |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1236
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:38:00 -
[172] - Quote
HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW
SUCK IT LINKFAGS
Now that; thats out of the way.
This isn't enough on the skirmish ones imo. Maximum achievable effectiveness of all skirmish/Siege and Armor links should have been reduced by 33-50%. Also you should make them give a sig bloom.
But this is still great.
CCP, Please go a bit further! BYDI recruitment closed-ish |
Yankunytjatjara
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
71
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:44:00 -
[173] - Quote
Please, consider the aggro issue: links help other ships in the same way logis did before the aggro mechanics changes. Neutral links are basically unfightable in empire. They should draw aggro in the same way as logi ships do now. Let us fight them!
Currently, even if you went to the length of developing whatever is needed to make them work on grid only, nothing would change in highsec apart from the fact of being able to see the link ship on grid for a little while - until its work is done and it cloaks... Let us fight it as soon as it draws aggro and there will be MOAR explosions, MOAR t3 stuff needed from wormspace, MOAR tears from pathetic "soloers", all Very Good Things! My solo pvp video: Yankunytjude... That attitude! Solo/small gang proposal: Ship Velocity Vectors |
Doddy
Dark-Rising
865
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:45:00 -
[174] - Quote
Zloco Crendraven wrote:Gizznitt Malikite wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote:Quote:All defensive (Siege and Armored) links: T1: 4.8% T2: 6% Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 25.9% Former max bonus: 35% This is outrageous. It will hurt small gangs so much. With this T2 small gangs won't stand a chance against T1 blobs. Roll it back ASAP pls. Also mining links out of POS shields! Two comments: All those who think you can't compete without gang links are spoiled little brats. The "blob" can just as easily bring gang links as you can, and generally they are more likely to have them. Also, people were out soloing and partaking in asymetric warfare long before gang links became so ubiquitously used. You just need to learn to employ tactics, learn how to engage, and do so without having stupidly potent enhancements to your ship. As for the "move mining links out of POS shields" too. This would be alright, as long as the rorqual can cloak while sieged. Put it on grid, 200 km's off the mining operation, so it can cloak up the moment a hostile enters system! Obviously you don't understand how eve works, or you do but your actual small gang experience is close to 0. Not all fleets in EVE are kiting and sniping fleets. In eve u can fight both at range and brawling, you know? If fighting at range you need skirmish links, if brawling you might need defense bonuses. If brawling outnumbered you100% need or huge amount of logis or those defense bonuses. So if our most often 10-20 T2 or T3 man fleet go out in a roam, we will ofc avoid 30-60 T2-T3 fleets. But we will go at T1 or mixed T1-T2 fleets with those numbers. Because those defense bonuses mean much more for us than for T1 hulls. Numbers (blobs) these days are just OP. But specialized fleets (T2,T3) or higher tier ships like BS on BC and lower, with the addition of bonuses gives you a chance to fight against blobs even tough their fleets having the bonuses also. Our 20 man fleet being able to fight against 40-50 man fleets will drop to 30-40. And because of that we ll need to bring + 1 T2 logi to our fleet than we used to and it still might not be enough.
Those bonuses don't mean any more to you than them..... In fact given you have the lower dps and will usually have better mitigation (depending what ships you fly) you will probably benefit with more breakable tanks facing you.
|
Mole Guy
Xoth Inc Pandorum Invictus
299
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:49:00 -
[175] - Quote
Lord Peetri wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:"...for years one of the most hotly discussed issues..." Not that i really care, cos i don't do Command Ships, but hotly discussed among whom? I don't know anyone, who knows someone, who has discussed this matter... Caracal pilots are not getting PvP cos the other guys have a loki or a legion in safespot? Or you expect command ship pilots to start doing pvp? This is like sending some random guy to iraq and telling him that he's father was Chuck Norris. There's a reason why these ships are called Command Ships - they should be better than anything else out there... in commanding the fleet, not joining the fight. I don't understand what is the deeper meaning behind the bonus changes? i have been in several discussiong about it ranging from new destroyer SubCommand ships to the effects of moving rorquals and orcas into the field as they are. tons of posts out there if u search it.
command can orbit the pos and be protected by the guns or orbit stations. myself, i will be ongrid busting things up. some of the new changes are wicked, especially the reduction in cost for links. its not the same losing a harby with a t1 implant vs a rorqual with a t2 mining implant. theres about a 4 bill difference.
once everything else gets balanced (rorquals and orcas), we will see how they work. but for only forcing the rorqual to be in seige mode to boost and not forcing all other command ships is wrong, so, as of now, they can still boost in pos.
these command ships run electronics. these modules interface with each other. they help with fire control solutions or whatever. we have them now in the navy. our ships link up to help from being jammed, help guild missiles if one of the ships becomes jammed and so forth. example: ship 1 is jammed ship 2 is not, but out of missiles ship 3 is a target and its radar is broke.
ship 1 can fire a missile, ship 2 control it to intercept the missile flying at ship 3. this is modern technology (not internet spaceships).
to do this though, they have to be within a certain range. the grid in eve is MUCH larger than the actual size of or the area needed to be occupied in rl. great...they have actually advanced over time.
the orca and rorqual are much larger and have far more power t put forth to control the mining fleets. these are cap ships not bc.
until we get other things changed, this is actually a great solution.
so sorry, no rorqual km for j00 today. this miner/pvper will collect YOUR tears today...
|
Nark Nalemir
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:49:00 -
[176] - Quote
Why dont you set Links to have stronger effects the less pilots in the gang. Enforcing small gangs negating blobs. |
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
2403
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:49:00 -
[177] - Quote
Zloco Crendraven wrote:Gizznitt Malikite wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote:Quote:All defensive (Siege and Armored) links: T1: 4.8% T2: 6% Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 25.9% Former max bonus: 35% This is outrageous. It will hurt small gangs so much. With this T2 small gangs won't stand a chance against T1 blobs. Roll it back ASAP pls. Also mining links out of POS shields! Two comments: All those who think you can't compete without gang links are spoiled little brats. The "blob" can just as easily bring gang links as you can, and generally they are more likely to have them. Also, people were out soloing and partaking in asymetric warfare long before gang links became so ubiquitously used. You just need to learn to employ tactics, learn how to engage, and do so without having stupidly potent enhancements to your ship. As for the "move mining links out of POS shields" too. This would be alright, as long as the rorqual can cloak while sieged. Put it on grid, 200 km's off the mining operation, so it can cloak up the moment a hostile enters system! Obviously you don't understand how eve works, or you do but your actual small gang experience is close to 0. Not all fleets in EVE are kiting and sniping fleets. In eve u can fight both at range and brawling, you know? If fighting at range you need skirmish links, if brawling you might need defense bonuses. If brawling outnumbered you100% need or huge amount of logis or those defense bonuses. So if our most often 10-20 T2 or T3 man fleet go out in a roam, we will ofc avoid 30-60 T2-T3 fleets. But we will go at T1 or mixed T1-T2 fleets with those numbers. Because those defense bonuses mean much more for us than for T1 hulls. Numbers (blobs) these days are just OP. But specialized fleets (T2,T3) or higher tier ships like BS on BC and lower, with the addition of bonuses gives you a chance to fight against blobs even tough their fleets having the bonuses also. Our 20 man fleet being able to fight against 40-50 man fleets will drop to 30-40. And because of that we ll need to bring + 1 T2 logi to our fleet than we used to and it still might not be enough.
We could compare killboards, show off our epeens, and the like, but I don't think that's necessary. I have a lot of small gang and solo experience, and am familiar with "how eve works". When taking on "larger numbers", force multiplication becomes extremely important: Logistics improve your ability to tank the enemy dps; EWAR reduces their effective DPS, increases your own, or removes ships from the fight; and boosters give significant boosts to your ship attributes to further reduce their dps, improve your own repping abilities, and give you some serious tactical advantages.
The truth is, a booster is far more potent than that +1 log, or +1 falcon. The bonuses it gives to everyone in fleet are simply way over the top, and are quite often pragmatically uncounterable! Add to that, your opponent is more likely to "discount' the extra benefits they give you, so the risk adverse PvPBears are more likely to engage as they think they have the upper hand. Unfortunately, that doesn't mean that fleet boosters are in a balanced position. This is especially prevalent in FW space, where OGB'ing is so ubiquitious people think proper soloing involves a dps ship + a loki alt + a tengu/legion alt. At the small gang (<7) and solo level it becomes very difficult to compete without bringing your own boosts, because a single boosting ship essentially adds the equivalent of 10 free rigs (4x hardener rigs, 3x speed rigs, 4x rep rigs, and partridge in a pear tree), to every ship in the fleet. That is why it is boosts need nerfed, as you can't possibly justify that level of boosting without pissing the face of game balance!
A falcon, a Logi, or even a +1 dps on grid is counterable, attackable, and vulnerable. And while those are fare less subtle force multipliers (or additions), especially since real threats are likely to be primaried, they are very much within the scope of game balance. OGBers are NOT!!!!!
|
Random Woman
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
52
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 16:54:00 -
[178] - Quote
So when can i fit all these at the same time? Or insta clone change? Because the most anying thing about em is you have to know one day in advance which one you will need. Well or your internet space ship rich and live on a pile of the implants. |
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
12
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 17:02:00 -
[179] - Quote
And now i came... |
Dunk Dinkle
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
6
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 17:02:00 -
[180] - Quote
The changes look good.
Please consider the following:
- Allow Battlecruisers to fit two Gang Links without a Command Processor
- Allow T3 cruisers to fit no more than two Gang Links.
This would encourage wider use of Gang Links outside of cloaked T3s, which has become the norm, and provide BCs as a better stepping stone to flying Command Ships.
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 33 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |