Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Thomas Mickelson
The Ascended Fleet Intrepid Crossing
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 04:06:00 -
[1] - Quote
Ok so I use a Myrmidon for ratting, I got 4 curators and can usually rip stuff up before the rats even get into lock on range. Now all of a sudden they can't hit the broadside of a barn, and at that, Omnidirectional tracking links seem to be activitable now, and I thought they were passive before.
CCP plan to fix this? Or was this intentional? |
djentropy Ovaert
Crazy Bird Inc.
6
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 04:09:00 -
[2] - Quote
Thomas Mickelson wrote:Ok so I use a Myrmidon for ratting, I got 4 curators and can usually rip stuff up before the rats even get into lock on range. Now all of a sudden they can't hit the broadside of a barn, and at that, Omnidirectional tracking links seem to be activitable now, and I thought they were passive before.
CCP plan to fix this? Or was this intentional?
Start by reading the patch notes and reading the 43728947328947312890432432 other threads detailing how you are doing it all wrong. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4492
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 04:10:00 -
[3] - Quote
If only there was somewhere you could get this information before it was released, like some forums or something. This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal & proud member of the popular gay hookup site, somethingawful.com |
Muestereate
Minions LLC
145
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 04:12:00 -
[4] - Quote
scripts will help you. You'll need to overheat to get the old performance |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
988
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 04:15:00 -
[5] - Quote
Muestereate wrote:scripts will help you. You'll need to overheat to get the old performance Even with OH your still well below the old range+tracking. Even with OH and a range script you are way down on range and have no tracking bonus. Tracking script on the other had is better than before without OH, but again, no range of course. |
Meyr
SiN Corp Black Core Alliance
294
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 04:17:00 -
[6] - Quote
Because Goon Tears.
Go read the Features & Ideas section of the forums every now and then, and you won't be surprised when changes like this occur. |
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University Minmatar Republic
231
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 04:17:00 -
[7] - Quote
Bouncers are the least effected by the range change because more of their range is falloff. |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1531
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 04:20:00 -
[8] - Quote
Range is for girls... improved tracking is nice. But opposite of what was required. Ironically the ability to assign drones is still untouched. |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
2152
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 04:21:00 -
[9] - Quote
Thomas Mickelson wrote:Ok so I use a Myrmidon for ratting, I got 4 curators and can usually rip stuff up before the rats even get into lock on range. Now all of a sudden they can't hit the broadside of a barn, and at that, Omnidirectional tracking links seem to be activitable now, and I thought they were passive before.
CCP plan to fix this? Or was this intentional?
Expect your income generation to be about half of what it was with drones. Oh, and don't forget the nerf to the shield regen of the sentries.
Of course, the dev in question who is responsible for this, states, and I quote, "I think you'll find that your drones are still quite effective after this change, and remain very competitive with other weapon systems."
Of course, I think the weapon systems he is talking about are rockets and frigate pulse lasers, but I could be wrong.
Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |
Erotica 1
Krypteia Operations CODE.
3345
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 04:24:00 -
[10] - Quote
I would like a weapon that makes a missioner's drones attack himself. See Bio for isk doubling rules. If you didn't read bio, chances are you funded those who did. |
|
Batelle
Komm susser Tod
1428
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 04:27:00 -
[11] - Quote
Meyr wrote:Because Goon Tears.
Go read the Features & Ideas section of the forums every now and then, and you won't be surprised when changes like this occur.
The existense of good tears does not preclude the possibility that sentry drones have been rather OP for a while. Its when stuff becomes a FOTM pvp meta that its first up for nerfbatting. "CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"
Never forget. |
Meyr
SiN Corp Black Core Alliance
294
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 04:39:00 -
[12] - Quote
Batelle wrote:Meyr wrote:Because Goon Tears.
Go read the Features & Ideas section of the forums every now and then, and you won't be surprised when changes like this occur. The existense of goon (fixed that for you) tears does not preclude the possibility that sentry drones have been rather OP for a while. Its when stuff becomes a FOTM pvp meta that its first up for nerfbatting.
It was a way to reduce the power of drone fleets without OBVIOUSLY caving to Goon demands that Drone Assist be changed [expect to see a future patch limiting the number of drones that can be assigned to a single pilot very SOON!(tm)] |
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
3777
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 05:16:00 -
[13] - Quote
Sentries are so last year.
It's all about light combat drones now. Trust me.
Mr Epeen There are 86,400 seconds in a day. You just saved one of them by typing 'u' instead of 'you'.-á Congratulations, dumbass! |
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
667
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 05:23:00 -
[14] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Thomas Mickelson wrote:Ok so I use a Myrmidon for ratting, I got 4 curators and can usually rip stuff up before the rats even get into lock on range. Now all of a sudden they can't hit the broadside of a barn, and at that, Omnidirectional tracking links seem to be activitable now, and I thought they were passive before.
CCP plan to fix this? Or was this intentional? Expect your income generation to be about half of what it was with drones. Oh, and don't forget the nerf to the shield regen of the sentries. Of course, the dev in question who is responsible for this, states, and I quote, "I think you'll find that your drones are still quite effective after this change, and remain very competitive with other weapon systems." Of course, I think the weapon systems he is talking about are rockets and frigate pulse lasers, but I could be wrong.
It won't halve income generation. The pilot needs to get 2x optimal range scripts, and 2x tracking scripts, and switch between them as the NPCs get closer, which can be done without interrupting the fire of the sentries.
I tried that last night with a single fed navy omni fitted ishtar and it was more than workable (I believe optimal was around 54 based on missing prior to patch, and around 51 after patch). I shot normal enough ticks bearing in mind the minor flexibility loss and the 5% nerf due to ESS anyway.
Yes it costs you some optimal, no the sky didn't fall. |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
2154
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 05:40:00 -
[15] - Quote
Tauranon wrote:Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Thomas Mickelson wrote:Ok so I use a Myrmidon for ratting, I got 4 curators and can usually rip stuff up before the rats even get into lock on range. Now all of a sudden they can't hit the broadside of a barn, and at that, Omnidirectional tracking links seem to be activitable now, and I thought they were passive before.
CCP plan to fix this? Or was this intentional? Expect your income generation to be about half of what it was with drones. Oh, and don't forget the nerf to the shield regen of the sentries. Of course, the dev in question who is responsible for this, states, and I quote, "I think you'll find that your drones are still quite effective after this change, and remain very competitive with other weapon systems." Of course, I think the weapon systems he is talking about are rockets and frigate pulse lasers, but I could be wrong. It won't halve income generation. The pilot needs to get 2x optimal range scripts, and 2x tracking scripts, and switch between them as the NPCs get closer, which can be done without interrupting the fire of the sentries. I tried that last night with a single fed navy omni fitted ishtar and it was more than workable (I believe optimal was around 54 based on missing prior to patch, and around 51 after patch). I shot normal enough ticks bearing in mind the minor flexibility loss and the 5% nerf due to ESS anyway. Yes it costs you some optimal, no the sky didn't fall.
Yup, and the thread owner was in a Myrm, that has no hull bonus. Want to take a crack at that using only useless Omni's now?
Of course, I am conversing with a goon, so what is the point.
Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |
MaligoLibens
Bath Salt Abusers
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 05:58:00 -
[16] - Quote
don't use a myrmidon. it is not a viable ship anymore. |
Katran Luftschreck
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
2263
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 06:09:00 -
[17] - Quote
I suppose asking for a refund on all my sentry drone SP so I can put it into basic gunnery is out of the question? Nullsec in a Nutshell: http://nedroid.com/comics/2006-08-24-2155-arrrdino.gif |
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University Minmatar Republic
231
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 06:10:00 -
[18] - Quote
MaligoLibens wrote:don't use a myrmidon. it is not a viable ship anymore.
so what is viable ? Domi and Ishtar are now more optimal than ever. Perhaps the Prophecy ? Not much else really.
Part of the issue is nerfing an always on module more than necessary because it could feasibly be overheated (but in reality rarely will be) . |
Katran Luftschreck
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
2264
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 06:33:00 -
[19] - Quote
MaligoLibens wrote:don't use a myrmidon. it is not a viable ship anymore.
This is sad but true. I used to run L4s in a Myrmidon. Did it for over a year, loved every moment of it. Then came the first "drone hate" patch. Heavy drones became the laughing stock of EvE and your lights & mediums draw so much aggro that actually tanking your ship became pointless, because the rats never actually fired at you, just your drones.
Traded up to a Gila, then a Rattlesnake, basically as an excuse to switch to sentries. At least those I know I can recall in time when twenty rats decide to alpha my drones one second after launch.
But that wasn't good enough, obviously, because now they've nerfed all the sentries as well. Which comes as a total surprise to exactly no drone boat user ever.
Good thing I still have mining to fall back on for my EvE excitement, eh? Nullsec in a Nutshell: http://nedroid.com/comics/2006-08-24-2155-arrrdino.gif |
Moneta Curran
Lunar Industries Ltd
266
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 07:15:00 -
[20] - Quote
Thomas Mickelson wrote:Ok so I use a Myrmidon for ratting, I got 4 curators and can usually rip stuff up before the rats even get into lock on range. Now all of a sudden they can't hit the broadside of a barn, and at that, Omnidirectional tracking links seem to be activitable now, and I thought they were passive before.
CCP plan to fix this? Or was this intentional?
Nice way of showing you have been living under a rock for the last couple of months. Are you familiar with the concept of patch notes?
|
|
Moneta Curran
Lunar Industries Ltd
266
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 07:16:00 -
[21] - Quote
Katran Luftschreck wrote:
Good thing I still have mining to fall back on for my EvE excitement, eh?
Because in eve, all you ever have to train is one weapon system and then you're done, right? Cry more.
|
Sola Mercury
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
64
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 07:20:00 -
[22] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Range is for girls... improved tracking is nice. But opposite of what was required. Ironically the ability to assign drones is still untouched.
Assign drones is not a problem. Drone Assist is the problem.
|
Allaera
Oh Bugga League 0f Grumpy 0ld Farts
21
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 07:35:00 -
[23] - Quote
I'm getting the feeling the OP doesn't read owner's manuals or safety warning labels |
Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
550
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 07:43:00 -
[24] - Quote
Katran Luftschreck wrote: But that wasn't good enough, obviously, because now they've nerfed all the sentries as well. Which comes as a total surprise to exactly no drone boat user ever.
Good thing I still have mining to fall back on for my EvE excitement, eh?
So you now have to make choices when you fit your ship, like us turret and missile users.
|
Vald Tegor
Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team
128
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 07:59:00 -
[25] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Tauranon wrote:Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Thomas Mickelson wrote:Ok so I use a Myrmidon for ratting, I got 4 curators and can usually rip stuff up before the rats even get into lock on range. Now all of a sudden they can't hit the broadside of a barn, and at that, Omnidirectional tracking links seem to be activitable now, and I thought they were passive before.
CCP plan to fix this? Or was this intentional? Expect your income generation to be about half of what it was with drones. Oh, and don't forget the nerf to the shield regen of the sentries. Of course, the dev in question who is responsible for this, states, and I quote, "I think you'll find that your drones are still quite effective after this change, and remain very competitive with other weapon systems." Of course, I think the weapon systems he is talking about are rockets and frigate pulse lasers, but I could be wrong. It won't halve income generation. The pilot needs to get 2x optimal range scripts, and 2x tracking scripts, and switch between them as the NPCs get closer, which can be done without interrupting the fire of the sentries. I tried that last night with a single fed navy omni fitted ishtar and it was more than workable (I believe optimal was around 54 based on missing prior to patch, and around 51 after patch). I shot normal enough ticks bearing in mind the minor flexibility loss and the 5% nerf due to ESS anyway. Yes it costs you some optimal, no the sky didn't fall. Yup, and the thread owner was in a Myrm, that has no hull bonus. Want to take a crack at that using only useless Omni's now? Of course, I am conversing with a goon, so what is the point. Pre patch Garde with two omnis 45.6 Optimal + 12k falloff ~ 50 k effective range, half dmg at ~ 58k, 0 dmg at 70k
Post patch Garde with two omnis range scripted 39K Optimal + 19.7 falloff ~46 k effective range, half dmg at ~ 58k, 0 dmg at 78k
No, the sky didn't fall range wise on "unbonused" boats.
What the patch did hurt, is your ability to actually track small, high transversal targets maintaining that 50km range. Which was part of the problem with drone boats overperforming, particularly the range and tracking bonused hulls. When it comes to tracking a target at a more reasonable range, switching to tracking scripts nets you a 9.35% buff before overheating.
Care to elaborate what PvE content features small signature hostiles orbiting at 50+km, making unbonused ships with the new Omni useless? Furthermore, why should battleship class guns be used to fire at them, instead of switching to a more reasonable anti-frigate drone choice or using the high slots? After all, the sentry Myrm is little more than the drone version of a 6 gun Talos. Would you expect a blaster Talos to track sig tanking frigates at 50+km? |
Vamprina Maximus
Equity Nuclear
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 08:19:00 -
[26] - Quote
My problem isn't with the change, my problem is the tracking links deactivate after one cycle now.. Is this the way they are supposed to work? I was under the assumption they would work like sensor boosters and remain active and running even without scripts loaded. |
Treborr MintingtonJr
Quantum Reality R n D Spaceship Samurai
153
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 08:22:00 -
[27] - Quote
Face palmed when I read OP
Its definitely made it more challenging having to switch between range and tracking. My Domi drone boat actually needs ammo now. |
Treborr MintingtonJr
Quantum Reality R n D Spaceship Samurai
153
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 08:23:00 -
[28] - Quote
Vamprina Maximus wrote:My problem isn't with the change, my problem is the tracking links deactivate after one cycle now.. Is this the way they are supposed to work? I was under the assumption they would work like sensor boosters and remain active and running even without scripts loaded. Set Auto-Repeat to ON :-) |
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
668
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 08:39:00 -
[29] - Quote
Vald Tegor wrote:Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Tauranon wrote:
It won't halve income generation. The pilot needs to get 2x optimal range scripts, and 2x tracking scripts, and switch between them as the NPCs get closer, which can be done without interrupting the fire of the sentries.
I tried that last night with a single fed navy omni fitted ishtar and it was more than workable (I believe optimal was around 54 based on missing prior to patch, and around 51 after patch). I shot normal enough ticks bearing in mind the minor flexibility loss and the 5% nerf due to ESS anyway.
Yes it costs you some optimal, no the sky didn't fall.
Yup, and the thread owner was in a Myrm, that has no hull bonus. Want to take a crack at that using only useless Omni's now? Of course, I am conversing with a goon, so what is the point. Pre patch Garde with two omnis 45.6 Optimal + 12k falloff ~ 50 k effective range, half dmg at ~ 58k, 0 dmg at 70k Post patch Garde with two omnis range scripted 39K Optimal + 19.7 falloff ~46 k effective range, half dmg at ~ 58k, 0 dmg at 78k No, the sky didn't fall range wise on "unbonused" boats. What the patch did hurt, is your ability to actually track small, high transversal targets maintaining that 50km range. Which was part of the problem with drone boats overperforming, particularly the range and tracking bonused hulls. When it comes to tracking a target at a more reasonable range, switching to tracking scripts nets you a 9.35% buff before overheating. Care to elaborate what PvE content features small signature hostiles orbiting at 50+km, making unbonused ships with the new Omni useless? Furthermore, why should battleship class guns be used to fire at them, instead of switching to a more reasonable anti-frigate drone choice or using the high slots? After all, the sentry Myrm is little more than the drone version of a 6 gun Talos. Would you expect a blaster Talos to track sig tanking frigates at 50+km?
Thankyou!
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8846
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 08:45:00 -
[30] - Quote
The omni change wasn't bad. I really doubt this will really make much of a difference to many PVP drone doctrines though. The real change is going to come when drone assist gets removed. My EVE Videos 59-15 |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
9965
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 09:43:00 -
[31] - Quote
Katran Luftschreck wrote:I suppose asking for a refund on all my sentry drone SP so I can put it into basic gunnery is out of the question?
This is what happens when you chase the FOTM. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Ruskarn Andedare
Lion Investments
409
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 09:58:00 -
[32] - Quote
Katran Luftschreck wrote:I suppose asking for a refund on all my sentry drone SP so I can put it into basic gunnery is out of the question?
Ah, so you were using drones for 'efficiency' rather than simply for the love of the little rascals
Remember, a drone is for life, not just for one mission. |
Yarda Black
Epidemic. Spaceship Samurai
18
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 10:06:00 -
[33] - Quote
Ofcourse a good nullsec grunt like me bought Dommi's, Ishtars and Prophecies to bring to fleets. Due to some "unforeseen" events I've decided to try a new doctrine. Preferably one that makes use of my primary (and only) EVE skill; pressing F1.
Fleetfitted Droneboats for sale!!!! Special price for you my friend... |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8846
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 10:08:00 -
[34] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Katran Luftschreck wrote:I suppose asking for a refund on all my sentry drone SP so I can put it into basic gunnery is out of the question? This is what happens when you chase the FOTM. Chase the FOTM long enough and you'll have everything anyway. My EVE Videos 59-15 |
Zappity
Kurved Space
781
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 10:08:00 -
[35] - Quote
Erotica 1 wrote:I would like a weapon that makes a missioner's drones attack himself. How about a drone hacking mini game? You can hack the missioner's drones to reverse their aggression. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec. |
Layla Firoue
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
49
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 10:32:00 -
[36] - Quote
Erotica 1 wrote:I would like a weapon that makes a missioner's drones attack himself.
Don-¦t you have to smother yourself in mayonnaise or something? |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
9965
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 10:34:00 -
[37] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote: Chase the FOTM long enough and you'll have everything anyway.
Or in my case, stubbornly fly the same thing until it becomes the FOTM. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8847
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 10:40:00 -
[38] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote: Chase the FOTM long enough and you'll have everything anyway.
Or in my case, stubbornly fly the same thing until it becomes the FOTM. Peacetime reimbursement certainly helps. My EVE Videos 59-15 |
Signal11th
Amarr Empire
1250
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 10:44:00 -
[39] - Quote
Moneta Curran wrote:Katran Luftschreck wrote:
Good thing I still have mining to fall back on for my EvE excitement, eh?
Because in eve, all you ever have to train is one weapon system and then you're done, right? Cry more.
It probably due to the fact that like myself people continually train up skills so that can do things faster/more dps/more of this that and the other and CCP continually seem to then change it so it actually takes you longer/less dps
Personally I'm just getting tired of training things up to get that extra 5% and then CCP basically taking it off you because someone is crying or complaining because they don't have the extra 5%.
CCP may as well just offer one ship per race with one weapon system per ship and get rid of this obviously outdated notion of choice and skills. Powered by-áreaTh-áFilter V1.23 "All posts by this pilot are personal held views and not representitive of-áany-ácorp or alliance I am currently a member of. Like I'd give a-ásh*t anyway. God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!" I came fifth and won a toaster. |
Kalb777
The Scope Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 10:57:00 -
[40] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:Sentries are so last year. It's all about light combat drones now. Trust me. Mr Epeen
Wrong......It is all about TP's now
My sales thread.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4148866#post4148866 |
|
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
670
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 11:04:00 -
[41] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote: Chase the FOTM long enough and you'll have everything anyway.
Or in my case, stubbornly fly the same thing until it becomes the FOTM.
Pretty much the story of the dominix. The NOS domi was pretty much the solo wtfpwnboat of choice at the time which required them to nerf NOS to uselessness, and I've been flying it ever since waiting for it to be awesome again (which pretty much happened the moment the bonus was changed, on the back of the drone damage amps being added). |
Icarus Able
Revenant Tactical
333
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 11:04:00 -
[42] - Quote
Signal11th wrote:Moneta Curran wrote:Katran Luftschreck wrote:
Good thing I still have mining to fall back on for my EvE excitement, eh?
Because in eve, all you ever have to train is one weapon system and then you're done, right? Cry more. It probably due to the fact that like myself people continually train up skills so that can do things faster/more dps/more of this that and the other and CCP continually seem to then change it so it actually takes you longer/less dps Personally I'm just getting tired of training things up to get that extra 5% and then CCP basically taking it off you because someone is crying or complaining because they don't have the extra 5%. Not everyone plays in 1000+ fleets where the numbers are so screwed with certain weapon systems that the weapon system becomes over the top but when the change is forced by these numbers it obviously effects everyone not just the target intended. CCP may as well just offer one ship per race with one weapon system per ship and get rid of this obviously outdated notion of choice and skills.
So you deliberatly train the most overpowered thing in the game and then cry when it gets hit with the nerf bat. Seriously Cod players are more intelligent than eve players when it comes to overpowered things being nerfed. |
Signal11th
Amarr Empire
1250
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 11:06:00 -
[43] - Quote
Icarus Able wrote:Signal11th wrote:Moneta Curran wrote:Katran Luftschreck wrote:
Good thing I still have mining to fall back on for my EvE excitement, eh?
Because in eve, all you ever have to train is one weapon system and then you're done, right? Cry more. It probably due to the fact that like myself people continually train up skills so that can do things faster/more dps/more of this that and the other and CCP continually seem to then change it so it actually takes you longer/less dps Personally I'm just getting tired of training things up to get that extra 5% and then CCP basically taking it off you because someone is crying or complaining because they don't have the extra 5%. Not everyone plays in 1000+ fleets where the numbers are so screwed with certain weapon systems that the weapon system becomes over the top but when the change is forced by these numbers it obviously effects everyone not just the target intended. CCP may as well just offer one ship per race with one weapon system per ship and get rid of this obviously outdated notion of choice and skills. So you deliberatly train the most overpowered thing in the game and then cry when it gets hit with the nerf bat. Seriously Cod players are more intelligent than eve players when it comes to overpowered things being nerfed.
As mentioned before it latest thing in a long list, plus try and understand a post before you attempt some sort of reply. I didn't deliberately train it because it's op I trained it because its one of the last offensive things I can train, bit like heavy missles as well. Powered by-áreaTh-áFilter V1.23 "All posts by this pilot are personal held views and not representitive of-áany-ácorp or alliance I am currently a member of. Like I'd give a-ásh*t anyway. God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!" I came fifth and won a toaster. |
Icarus Able
Revenant Tactical
333
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 11:06:00 -
[44] - Quote
double post derp |
Signal11th
Amarr Empire
1250
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 11:11:00 -
[45] - Quote
Icarus Able wrote:double post derp
That really the best argument you can come up with?
Powered by-áreaTh-áFilter V1.23 "All posts by this pilot are personal held views and not representitive of-áany-ácorp or alliance I am currently a member of. Like I'd give a-ásh*t anyway. God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!" I came fifth and won a toaster. |
Roparzh Greek
Yanomami's Space Pilots WHY so Seri0Us
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 11:22:00 -
[46] - Quote
So everytime someone cry stuff get nerfed and usually is the same people over and over again. I was full missile, got nerfed, change to hibrid weapon got nerfed, change to sentry and got nerfed to? please, give the game to them, ohhh, forgot half of CSM is being run by the same people year after year....so what is the point? no wonder high sector traffic has increase over null. CCP, just hand everything in null to the faction you like already, place line and send everyone else to live in empire.... |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8856
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 11:25:00 -
[47] - Quote
It's not some great conspiracy. These are after all the people who understand not only the game mechanics but also how players are using and abusing them. My EVE Videos 59-15 |
Diamond Zerg
Taking Solo Away.
46
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 11:40:00 -
[48] - Quote
Use a Vexor navy issue or Ishtar. |
Angelica Dreamstar
Epic Boo Bees
379
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 13:29:00 -
[49] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Tauranon wrote:Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Thomas Mickelson wrote:Ok so I use a Myrmidon for ratting, I got 4 curators and can usually rip stuff up before the rats even get into lock on range. Now all of a sudden they can't hit the broadside of a barn, and at that, Omnidirectional tracking links seem to be activitable now, and I thought they were passive before.
CCP plan to fix this? Or was this intentional? Expect your income generation to be about half of what it was with drones. Oh, and don't forget the nerf to the shield regen of the sentries. Of course, the dev in question who is responsible for this, states, and I quote, "I think you'll find that your drones are still quite effective after this change, and remain very competitive with other weapon systems." Of course, I think the weapon systems he is talking about are rockets and frigate pulse lasers, but I could be wrong. It won't halve income generation. The pilot needs to get 2x optimal range scripts, and 2x tracking scripts, and switch between them as the NPCs get closer, which can be done without interrupting the fire of the sentries. I tried that last night with a single fed navy omni fitted ishtar and it was more than workable (I believe optimal was around 54 based on missing prior to patch, and around 51 after patch). I shot normal enough ticks bearing in mind the minor flexibility loss and the 5% nerf due to ESS anyway. Yes it costs you some optimal, no the sky didn't fall. Yup, and the thread owner was in a Myrm, that has no hull bonus. Want to take a crack at that using only useless Omni's now? Of course, I am conversing with a goon, so what is the point. While she is talking with an egocentric, decadent, spoiled, close minded, wannabe proud and important child who can't accept reality as it happens.
Child, because of your inability to see yourself and thus realize how stupidly you behave. EVE ONLINE: The universe is ours!- Join the Epic Boo Bees! (RP,PvE/PvP,wardecs,new players!)You're at it from day 0! |
Lloyd Roses
Blue-Fire
491
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 14:03:00 -
[50] - Quote
Heavy Drones (Ogres and Serkers) are pretty quickass now with that falloff-buff. "I honestly thought I was in lowsec"
Moving pictures: The Enyo |
|
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Academy The ROC
2227
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 15:59:00 -
[51] - Quote
Sorry you didn't see it coming.
Personally, even though my computer has been toast for more than a week now, I have been checking this stuff out at work and on my phone even, that way I don't get caught napping. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á |
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
3475
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 16:30:00 -
[52] - Quote
Thomas Mickelson wrote:Ok so I use a Myrmidon for ratting, I got 4 curators and can usually rip stuff up before the rats even get into lock on range. Now all of a sudden they can't hit the broadside of a barn, and at that, Omnidirectional tracking links seem to be activitable now, and I thought they were passive before.
CCP plan to fix this? Or was this intentional?
If only there was a F&I forum thread, started by a Dev, discussing the changes and asking for feedback: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=313116&find=unread
If only there were patch notes, where these changes (and many others) are stated clearly. http://community.eveonline.com/news/patch-notes/patch-notes-for-rubicon-1.1
Oh well, I guess CCP works in mysterious and unknowable ways.
|
stoicfaux
3974
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 17:37:00 -
[53] - Quote
Or people who posted a spreadsheet comparing the changes.
Or a version of pyfa that included a Rubicon 1.1 Preview.
Seriously, the first thing I check on the EVE forums is Features & Ideas. It's where all of CCP's ideas plus the resulting emo-player-rage can be found.
WASABI: Warp Acceleration System Ancillary Boost Injected(Gäó)
|
Vald Tegor
Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team
132
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 17:39:00 -
[54] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Seriously, the first thing I check on the EVE forums is Features & Ideas. It's where all of CCP's ideas plus the resulting emo-player-rage can be found. Except for the ESS. They hid that one and it still got over 100 pages. |
Vald Tegor
Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team
134
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 18:52:00 -
[55] - Quote
Signal11th wrote:
It probably due to the fact that like myself people continually train up skills so that can do things faster/more dps/more of this that and the other and CCP continually seem to then change it so it actually takes you longer/less dps
Personally I'm just getting tired of training things up to get that extra 5% and then CCP basically taking it off you because someone is crying or complaining because they don't have the extra 5%. Not everyone plays in 1000+ fleets where the numbers are so screwed with certain weapon systems that the weapon system becomes over the top but when the change is forced by these numbers it obviously effects everyone not just the target intended.
CCP may as well just offer one ship per race with one weapon system per ship and get rid of this obviously outdated notion of choice and skills.
You don't so much train skills to be more effective than yesterday, as to be more effective than the pilot next to you that didn't. If it was too effective yesterday, it will get fixed "soon". But you still keep your edge vs other pilots when using it.
Not everyone plays in 1000 man fleets. I saw a wing of dominixes for example, blapping signature bonused destroyers with high transversal at ~100k. They were likewise out of line in even smaller engagements. In the grand scheme of things, it is the solo PvE player that is the edge case - not the 1000 man battles. And lets face it, afk PvE drone boats are still broken as hell.
As for choice, everyone is flying sentry boats now for a reason. It's about time we got some choice back. |
Ruskarn Andedare
Lion Investments
414
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 19:04:00 -
[56] - Quote
Vald Tegor wrote:Signal11th wrote:
It probably due to the fact that like myself people continually train up skills so that can do things faster/more dps/more of this that and the other and CCP continually seem to then change it so it actually takes you longer/less dps
Personally I'm just getting tired of training things up to get that extra 5% and then CCP basically taking it off you because someone is crying or complaining because they don't have the extra 5%. Not everyone plays in 1000+ fleets where the numbers are so screwed with certain weapon systems that the weapon system becomes over the top but when the change is forced by these numbers it obviously effects everyone not just the target intended.
CCP may as well just offer one ship per race with one weapon system per ship and get rid of this obviously outdated notion of choice and skills.
You don't so much train skills to be more effective than yesterday, as to be more effective than the pilot next to you that didn't. If it was too effective yesterday, it will get fixed "soon". But you still keep your edge vs other pilots when using it. Not everyone plays in 1000 man fleets. I saw a wing of dominixes for example, blapping signature bonused destroyers with high transversal at ~100k. They were likewise out of line in even smaller engagements. In the grand scheme of things, it is the solo PvE player that is the edge case - not the 1000 man battles. And lets face it, afk PvE drone boats are still broken as hell. As for choice, everyone is flying sentry boats now for a reason. It's about time we got some choice back.
Not everyone, I fly drone boats because I like them (especially the Vexor & Domi shaped ships, still confused why the Myrm is so off-track) and they've been my favourites, long before the DDA buffed them, possibly a little more than was required at the time. |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1535
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 19:29:00 -
[57] - Quote
Signal11th wrote:Moneta Curran wrote:Katran Luftschreck wrote:
Good thing I still have mining to fall back on for my EvE excitement, eh?
Because in eve, all you ever have to train is one weapon system and then you're done, right? Cry more. It probably due to the fact that like myself people continually train up skills so that can do things faster/more dps/more of this that and the other and CCP continually seem to then change it so it actually takes you longer/less dps Personally I'm just getting tired of training things up to get that extra 5% and then CCP basically taking it off you because someone is crying or complaining because they don't have the extra 5%. Not everyone plays in 1000+ fleets where the numbers are so screwed with certain weapon systems that the weapon system becomes over the top but when the change is forced by these numbers it obviously effects everyone not just the target intended. CCP may as well just offer one ship per race with one weapon system per ship and get rid of this obviously outdated notion of choice and skills. Yeah this.
CCP have little ability at self control. When you create a product for a customer and you offer them choices which are not reimbursable then you should do your best when reassessing your products to have as little impact on those choices as possible.
We pay a subscription, in real dollars, for that money we're given a finite number of skillpoints that we earn per recurring subscription. We can take those skill-points and apply them to a skill, there is no option to have those skill points back.
Then CCP comes along and reinvents the game, not small adjustments, but huge sweeping adjustments, sometimes they invalidate an entire line of ships / modules / skills without any regard for the customers who were unfortunate enough to have put their skills into those areas.
When CCP does this they should a) refund the money we paid for those skillpoints or better b) reimburse the skillpoints. That they do neither is disrespectful and dishonest to their customer base.
IMO |
Katran Luftschreck
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
2273
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 20:24:00 -
[58] - Quote
Moneta Curran wrote:Nice way of showing you have been living under a rock for the last couple of months. Are you familiar with the concept of patch notes?
Ok oh-smug-one, but here's the thing: Patch notes tend to come out after the fact, or just a day before release. When you go to the main EvE pages where they're trying to upsell the glory of Rubicon 1.1 you see adverts for new ship art (cool), mobile deployables that maybe 10% of the playerbase actually gives a crap about, and exactly nothing mentioning the latest drone nerf.
In other words, the sentry is nerf is what the US Congress would call "pork." It was something slipped in under the radar because they knew no one would like it, and they didn't want to hear us complaining about unit after it was already shoved down our throats. Like usual.
This drone nerf was not advertised, which is why people are so up in arms about it. Again, they advertised ship art, they advertised deployables (whooptie do) but there was no mention of yet another drone nerf until the patch notes came out.
After the fact.
So yeah, we're mad and we're justifiably mad. Nullsec in a Nutshell: http://nedroid.com/comics/2006-08-24-2155-arrrdino.gif |
Batelle
Komm susser Tod
1444
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 21:21:00 -
[59] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote: When you create a product for a customer and you offer them choices which are not reimbursable then you should do your best when reassessing your products to have as little impact on those choices as possible.
If the metagame in Eve was a static thing, I think we all would have gotten bored and left years ago.
Infinity Ziona wrote: Then CCP comes along and reinvents the game, not small adjustments, but huge sweeping adjustments, sometimes they invalidate an entire line of ships / modules / skills without any regard for the customers who were unfortunate enough to have put their skills into those areas.
When CCP does this they should a) refund the money we paid for those skillpoints or better b) reimburse the skillpoints. That they do neither is disrespectful and dishonest to their customer base.
This is hyperbole and whining. CCP reimburses skills when they are removed. Demanding SP reimbursement because of balance changes is childish. This is a balance change.
Katran Luftschreck wrote: This drone nerf was not advertised, which is why people are so up in arms about it. Again, they advertised ship art, they advertised deployables (whooptie do) but there was no mention of yet another drone nerf until the patch notes came out.
After the fact.
So yeah, we're mad and we're justifiably mad.
While I was well aware of it, the nerf is significant enough to have gotten a dev blog (it should have gotten one, but it didn't). We got a thread from Fozzie stating that it was intended to be a nerf, with a few brief questions answered, but no metrics or justification about why CCP feels it was necessary. I've been of two minds about the appropriateness of the nerf. On one hand I feel some kind of change is justified, and I'm pleased that the result seems to mostly affect gardes, the worst offenders. On the other hand it extends further the performance gap between the ishtar/domi and other sentry boats and trivializes faction omnilinks for anyone that have sharpshooting 5 and can fit t2. I want a devblog. "CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"
Never forget. |
Jill Chastot
Oath of the Forsaken
185
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 21:58:00 -
[60] - Quote
Ruskarn Andedare wrote:Katran Luftschreck wrote:I suppose asking for a refund on all my sentry drone SP so I can put it into basic gunnery is out of the question? Ah, so you were using drones for 'efficiency' rather than simply for the love of the little rascals Remember, a drone is for life, not just for one mission.
Spoken like a true Gallente <3 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=298596&find=unreadOATHS wants you. Come to the WH |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19041
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 21:59:00 -
[61] - Quote
Katran Luftschreck wrote:In other words, the sentry is nerf is what the US Congress would call "pork." It was something slipped in under the radar because they knew no one would like it, and they didn't want to hear us complaining about unit after it was already shoved down our throats. GǪwhich they did by having a very long, actively monitored, official thread on the topic where they informed anyone who wanted to listen about the changes and received both complaints and suggestions.
Just because you didn't turn your radar on doesn't mean they tried to slip anything in under it.
Quote:there was no mention of yet another drone nerf until the patch notes came out. GǪexcept for in the usual channels. Long before the fact. As usual.
Infinity Ziona wrote:Then CCP comes along and reinvents the game, not small adjustments, but huge sweeping adjustments, sometimes they invalidate an entire line of ships / modules / skills without any regard for the customers who were unfortunate enough to have put their skills into those areas. When did this ever happen? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
ashley Eoner
248
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 22:07:00 -
[62] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Katran Luftschreck wrote:In other words, the sentry is nerf is what the US Congress would call "pork." It was something slipped in under the radar because they knew no one would like it, and they didn't want to hear us complaining about unit after it was already shoved down our throats. GǪwhich they did by having a very long, actively monitored, official thread on the topic where they informed anyone who wanted to listen about the changes and received both complaints and suggestions. Just because you didn't turn your radar on doesn't mean they tried to slip anything in under it. Quote:there was no mention of yet another drone nerf until the patch notes came out. GǪexcept for in the usual channels. Long before the fact. As usual. Infinity Ziona wrote:Then CCP comes along and reinvents the game, not small adjustments, but huge sweeping adjustments, sometimes they invalidate an entire line of ships / modules / skills without any regard for the customers who were unfortunate enough to have put their skills into those areas. When did this ever happen? Are you talking about the thread where Fozzie stated the changes and then refused to respond to the reasonable concerns that were expressed? |
Vald Tegor
Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team
135
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 22:09:00 -
[63] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote: Chase the FOTM long enough and you'll have everything anyway.
Or in my case, stubbornly fly the same thing until it becomes the FOTM. That's how I ended up shooting lasers at Angels and Guristas for a while
Infinity Ziona wrote:[quote=Signal11th] Yeah this.
CCP have little ability at self control. When you create a product for a customer and you offer them choices which are not reimbursable then you should do your best when reassessing your products to have as little impact on those choices as possible.
We pay a subscription, in real dollars, for that money we're given a finite number of skillpoints that we earn per recurring subscription. We can take those skill-points and apply them to a skill, there is no option to have those skill points back.
Then CCP comes along and reinvents the game, not small adjustments, but huge sweeping adjustments, sometimes they invalidate an entire line of ships / modules / skills without any regard for the customers who were unfortunate enough to have put their skills into those areas.
When CCP does this they should a) refund the money we paid for those skillpoints or better b) reimburse the skillpoints. That they do neither is disrespectful and dishonest to their customer base.
IMO So by your logic, I should have been reimbursed for all my laser and Amarr training when the Domi and Ishtar were ridiculously buffed. I could then put those skillpoints into drones and Gallente hulls. Now that they are being nerfed to bring them in line, I should be reimbursed all those skill points again, so that I can put them towards flying a Minmatar Dreadnaught.
c/d? |
Josef Djugashvilis
Acme Mining Corporation
1994
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 22:27:00 -
[64] - Quote
Kalb777 wrote:Mr Epeen wrote:Sentries are so last year. It's all about light combat drones now. Trust me. Mr Epeen Wrong......It is all about TP's now
Shhhh, CCP wil hear you and nerf TPs.
CCP have made a complete hash of drones over the past 14 months or so.
They changed the AI to target drones before making any real attempt to improve the drone UI - cart before horse.
Medium and light drones got targeted and smashed far too easily, heavies just became a joke, so folk moved to sentry drones.
So CCP have now nerfed sentry drones as well.
CCP gave the Dominix a 10% tracking bonus, changed to 7.50% shortly thereafter.
That drones have been meddled with so much over the past year or so, shows that CCP (in some cases) tends to act first and think later - cart before horse.
Oh well, adapt or die.
Or both. This is not a signature. |
Arthur Aihaken
State Protectorate Caldari State
2851
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 22:40:00 -
[65] - Quote
Death to all drones! I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Ruskarn Andedare
Lion Investments
415
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 23:14:00 -
[66] - Quote
Jill Chastot wrote:Ruskarn Andedare wrote:Katran Luftschreck wrote:I suppose asking for a refund on all my sentry drone SP so I can put it into basic gunnery is out of the question? Ah, so you were using drones for 'efficiency' rather than simply for the love of the little rascals Remember, a drone is for life, not just for one mission. Spoken like a true Gallente <3
I spend a few hours each week scanning for poor, cold, lost drones that uncaring people have left out in the depths of space and taking them into the warmth for maintenance and cleaning. You should see them happily frolicking when they realise they're going to be useful once more.
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Death to all drones!
Sinner! |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1536
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 23:23:00 -
[67] - Quote
Vald Tegor wrote:baltec1 wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote: Chase the FOTM long enough and you'll have everything anyway.
Or in my case, stubbornly fly the same thing until it becomes the FOTM. That's how I ended up shooting lasers at Angels and Guristas for a while Infinity Ziona wrote:[quote=Signal11th] Yeah this.
CCP have little ability at self control. When you create a product for a customer and you offer them choices which are not reimbursable then you should do your best when reassessing your products to have as little impact on those choices as possible.
We pay a subscription, in real dollars, for that money we're given a finite number of skillpoints that we earn per recurring subscription. We can take those skill-points and apply them to a skill, there is no option to have those skill points back.
Then CCP comes along and reinvents the game, not small adjustments, but huge sweeping adjustments, sometimes they invalidate an entire line of ships / modules / skills without any regard for the customers who were unfortunate enough to have put their skills into those areas.
When CCP does this they should a) refund the money we paid for those skillpoints or better b) reimburse the skillpoints. That they do neither is disrespectful and dishonest to their customer base.
IMO So by your logic, I should have been reimbursed for all my laser and Amarr training when the Domi and Ishtar were ridiculously buffed. I could then put those skillpoints into drones and Gallente hulls. Now that they are being nerfed to bring them in line, I should be reimbursed all those skill points again, so that I can put them towards flying a Minmatar Dreadnaught. c/d? No. They should not be ridiculously nerfed, or ridiculously buffed in the first place.
You make a game, you set rules, half way through you don't reinvent everything, over and over and over. Sure, add something to the game, leave the other stuff the hell alone if its not broken.
Its pretty basic customer service. I likely have paid CCP thousands of dollars for Infinity Ziona and her skillpoints and a large % of those skillpoints I paid for are useless.
Idiots will come here and argue that you pay for play, however that's not true, you pay for the subscription, along with that subscription you receive a % of skillpoints that you can allocate, there is no requirement to play, many subscribers only log in to set skills, they don't log in to play and that is part of the agreement between CCP and the subscriber.
If I spend 20 dollars per month over 12 months to train up a character that is great at stealth-bombers and then suddenly stealth bombers suck because CCP dramatically changed the code so stealth bombers are no longer useful then yes they should refund the skillpoints or they've just pretty much ripped me off 240 dollars since I gave them the cash for something that I didn't receive - the stealth bomber with the skillpoints and the performance that I was to get when I invested those skillpoints.
In your example this doesn't apply - something is buffed and made awesome, whereas your skillpoints were invested elsewhere since you paid for those skillpoints, they are where you chose to put them and you have what you intended to have at the end of the period of subscription.
For a real world example consider the following:
I buy a car but I have to pay it off over 12 months before I can take it. Its a V6, Twin Turbo, Can do 8 second Qtr mile. At the end of the 12 months after having paid the payments I get my car, its now a 4 cylinder, single turbo and does 13 seconds.
Is that fair?
EVE is about planning, and its about investing skillpoints (and real money) into a long term plan. These ad hoc bullcrap changes without any reimbursements are very poor customer service and a ripoff.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
9972
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 23:26:00 -
[68] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:
EVE is about planning, and its about investing skillpoints (and real money) into a long term plan. These ad hoc bullcrap changes without any reimbursements are very poor customer service and a ripoff.
Dont chase the FOTM and you wont get burned. Those SP you have in sentries are still good to have. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8867
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 23:29:00 -
[69] - Quote
The omni nerf isn't bad at all. I say this as someone who JUST finished training an alt for a sentry Archon. My EVE Videos 59-15 |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1536
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 23:30:00 -
[70] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:
EVE is about planning, and its about investing skillpoints (and real money) into a long term plan. These ad hoc bullcrap changes without any reimbursements are very poor customer service and a ripoff.
Dont chase the FOTM and you wont get burned. Those SP you have in sentries are still good to have. I don't specifically for that reason. It still does not make what CCP does right. |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
9972
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 23:38:00 -
[71] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote: I don't specifically for that reason. It still does not make what CCP does right.
CCP fixing balance issues is always right. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Angelica Dreamstar
Epic Boo Bees
398
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 23:48:00 -
[72] - Quote
IZ at what she does best again.
Nothing. ^_^
EVE ONLINE: The universe is ours!- Join the Epic Boo Bees! (RP,PvE/PvP,wardecs,new players!)You're at it from day 0! |
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
672
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 23:49:00 -
[73] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:baltec1 wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:
EVE is about planning, and its about investing skillpoints (and real money) into a long term plan. These ad hoc bullcrap changes without any reimbursements are very poor customer service and a ripoff.
Dont chase the FOTM and you wont get burned. Those SP you have in sentries are still good to have. I don't specifically for that reason. It still does not make what CCP does right.
No - because in 2009, droneboats were terrible. 2 sentry rigs and 2 magstabs was the domi fit. The ishtar was full passive with heavies. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19041
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 23:50:00 -
[74] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote: You make a game, you set rules, half way through you don't reinvent everything, over and over and over. Sure, add something to the game, leave the other stuff the hell alone if its not broken.
GǪand again, when has that ever happened? Aside from sov, which was (and remains) broken, and exploration that offered little to no actual gameplay in the earlier versions, what has been reinvented (especially Gǣover and over and overGǥ)?
Quote:EVE is about planning, and its about investing skillpoints (and real money) into a long term plan. GǪand short of the stuff being outright removed from the game, that planning pays off. In fact, even if the stuff gets outright removed, the planning pays off since they're reimburse your SP if that happens. If your plan does not take into account CCP's explicit policy of constant and revolving balancing in order to maintain a persistent dynamic in fittings and doctrines, then that just means your couldn't plan for crap to begin with.
Quote:It still does not make what CCP does right. How so? Why is it wrong to balance content? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1537
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 00:50:00 -
[75] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: You make a game, you set rules, half way through you don't reinvent everything, over and over and over. Sure, add something to the game, leave the other stuff the hell alone if its not broken.
GǪand again, when has that ever happened? Aside from sov, which was (and remains) broken, and exploration that offered little to no actual gameplay in the earlier versions, what has been reinvented (especially Gǣover and over and overGǥ)? Quote:EVE is about planning, and its about investing skillpoints (and real money) into a long term plan. GǪand short of the stuff being outright removed from the game, that planning pays off. In fact, even if the stuff gets outright removed, the planning pays off since they're reimburse your SP if that happens. If your plan does not take into account CCP's explicit policy of constant and revolving balancing in order to maintain a persistent dynamic in fittings and doctrines, then that just means your couldn't plan for crap to begin with. Quote:It still does not make what CCP does right. How so? Why is it wrong to balance content? You're obviously trolling I guess. Just a few examples of people training for things that are now useless.
Titan doomsday... Solo battleships (solo anything bigger than cruiser really) Torpedo's OGB (soon to be nerfed) Shield compensation skills HLML
There is nothing wrong with balancing content however CCP does not balance content they change it dramatically and that imbalances something else which then becomes FotM. In time that FotM will catch the attention of CCP and they'll make some absurd change that invalidates the skillpoints people have invested making something else FotM.
Its been going on for 10 years. Ridiculous changes (like the 40 sec reload of HLML).
Take a look at the history of weapons lol. The age of missiles, the age of hybrids, the age of lazers, the age of projectiles... at each point instead of balance they screwed up 3 systems to make one system overpowered to the extend they were mandatory to train as a FotM wep.
A contemporary issue is of course armor over shields in fleet fights atm. When the hell will we have a balanced system where each module, doctrine, type of play is remotely balanced, its been 10 years....
|
Paranoid Loyd
356
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 00:55:00 -
[76] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote: Just a few examples of people training for things that are now useless.
Solo battleships (solo anything bigger than cruiser really)
How does one train for solo battleships, is this a skill I am unaware of? "PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |
Frostys Virpio
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
990
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 01:02:00 -
[77] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Tippia wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: You make a game, you set rules, half way through you don't reinvent everything, over and over and over. Sure, add something to the game, leave the other stuff the hell alone if its not broken.
GǪand again, when has that ever happened? Aside from sov, which was (and remains) broken, and exploration that offered little to no actual gameplay in the earlier versions, what has been reinvented (especially Gǣover and over and overGǥ)? Quote:EVE is about planning, and its about investing skillpoints (and real money) into a long term plan. GǪand short of the stuff being outright removed from the game, that planning pays off. In fact, even if the stuff gets outright removed, the planning pays off since they're reimburse your SP if that happens. If your plan does not take into account CCP's explicit policy of constant and revolving balancing in order to maintain a persistent dynamic in fittings and doctrines, then that just means your couldn't plan for crap to begin with. Quote:It still does not make what CCP does right. How so? Why is it wrong to balance content? You're obviously trolling I guess. Just a few examples of people training for things that are now useless. Titan doomsday... Solo battleships (solo anything bigger than cruiser really) Torpedo's OGB (soon to be nerfed) Shield compensation skills HLML There is nothing wrong with balancing content however CCP does not balance content they change it dramatically and that imbalances something else which then becomes FotM. In time that FotM will catch the attention of CCP and they'll make some absurd change that invalidates the skillpoints people have invested making something else FotM. Its been going on for 10 years. Ridiculous changes (like the 40 sec reload of HLML). Take a look at the history of weapons lol. The age of missiles, the age of hybrids, the age of lazers, the age of projectiles... at each point instead of balance they screwed up 3 systems to make one system overpowered to the extend they were mandatory to train as a FotM wep. A contemporary issue is of course armor over shields in fleet fights atm. When the hell will we have a balanced system where each module, doctrine, type of play is remotely balanced, its been 10 years....
Change happened in a MMO. News at 11.
|
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1537
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 01:04:00 -
[78] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: Just a few examples of people training for things that are now useless.
Solo battleships (solo anything bigger than cruiser really)
How does one train for solo battleships, is this a skill I am unaware of? One decides they will solo in battleships and then trains the skills required to use battleships. Its not rocket science, battleships don't use rockets. |
Paranoid Loyd
357
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 01:06:00 -
[79] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: Just a few examples of people training for things that are now useless.
Solo battleships (solo anything bigger than cruiser really)
How does one train for solo battleships, is this a skill I am unaware of? One decides they will solo in battleships and then trains the skills required to use battleships. Its not rocket science, battleships don't use rockets.
So your battleship skills are completely useless because you can't solo in your battleship? "PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1537
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 01:13:00 -
[80] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: Just a few examples of people training for things that are now useless.
Solo battleships (solo anything bigger than cruiser really)
How does one train for solo battleships, is this a skill I am unaware of? One decides they will solo in battleships and then trains the skills required to use battleships. Its not rocket science, battleships don't use rockets. So your battleship skills are completely useless because you can't solo in your battleship? Exactly. |
|
Paranoid Loyd
357
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 01:16:00 -
[81] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: Just a few examples of people training for things that are now useless.
Solo battleships (solo anything bigger than cruiser really)
How does one train for solo battleships, is this a skill I am unaware of? One decides they will solo in battleships and then trains the skills required to use battleships. Its not rocket science, battleships don't use rockets. So your battleship skills are completely useless because you can't solo in your battleship? Exactly.
That is hilarious, bitter vet status 10/10
You are aware this is an MMO right? "PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |
Frostys Virpio
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
990
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 01:19:00 -
[82] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: Just a few examples of people training for things that are now useless.
Solo battleships (solo anything bigger than cruiser really)
How does one train for solo battleships, is this a skill I am unaware of? One decides they will solo in battleships and then trains the skills required to use battleships. Its not rocket science, battleships don't use rockets. Frostys Virpio wrote: Change happened in a MMO. News at 11.
Change is fine. Reinvention on top of reinvention negatively affecting customers unnecessarily is not.
You should of planned around the fact CCP change stuff with sledgehammers instead of scalpels. It's not like it's a new behavior so there was time to plan around stuff like that. If it's so damn bad to ave your dear favorite ship (whatever it might be) nerfed, then just contract it to me i'll find a use for it even after it got nerfed. |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1537
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 01:23:00 -
[83] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote: That is hilarious, bitter vet status 10/10
You're just under thinking.
As a soloer interested in solo pvp I looked around and saw that solo battleship pvp was possible. I then invested my skillpoints (purchased with real life money) from my subscription into battleships. Had CCP warned us that battleships would be nerfed so they would be useless in solo PvP I wouldn't have done that.
Therefore I gave CCP my money, in return CCP gave me skillpoints to be spent on a number of skills, one of which was battleships. Then instead of changing the game so that battleships would still be relevent for soloers they screwed us over by nerfing them to uselessness except for fleet fighting and PvE.
They could have compensated by offering reimbursement but they don't have enough respect for their players to do that.
|
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
1008
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 01:28:00 -
[84] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote: That is hilarious, bitter vet status 10/10
... Therefore I gave CCP my money, in return CCP gave me skillpoints to be spent on a number of skills, one of which was battleships. Then instead of changing the game so that battleships would still be relevent for soloers they screwed us over by nerfing them to uselessness except for fleet fighting and PvE. They could have compensated by offering reimbursement but they don't have enough respect for their players to do that. Read the EULA. |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
4235
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 01:31:00 -
[85] - Quote
WTF? My sentry drones don't move. Blast they nerfed sentry drones!
|
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
2345
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 01:32:00 -
[86] - Quote
PotatoOverdose wrote:Read the EULA. can't see through the tears to read |
Paranoid Loyd
357
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 01:32:00 -
[87] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote: That is hilarious, bitter vet status 10/10
You're just under thinking. As a soloer interested in solo pvp I looked around and saw that solo battleship pvp was possible. I then invested my skillpoints (purchased with real life money) from my subscription into battleships. Had CCP warned us that battleships would be nerfed so they would be useless in solo PvP I wouldn't have done that. Therefore I gave CCP my money, in return CCP gave me skillpoints to be spent on a number of skills, one of which was battleships. Then instead of changing the game so that battleships would still be relevent for soloers they screwed us over by nerfing them to uselessness except for fleet fighting and PvE. They could have compensated by offering reimbursement but they don't have enough respect for their players to do that.
I am simply trying to point out the skills are not useless.
They may be useless for the role you want them to fill but they are not useless.
Why should a slow lumbering ship be useful in a solo role, does that really make any sense?
Just because you have pigeon holed yourself as a self pro-claimed soloist, does not mean you have a valid argument for SP reimbursement or to even claim the skills are useless. They are used by thousands on a daily basis.
This game is not made for soloist, it is made for groups of people to work together. "PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1537
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 01:38:00 -
[88] - Quote
PotatoOverdose wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote: That is hilarious, bitter vet status 10/10
... Therefore I gave CCP my money, in return CCP gave me skillpoints to be spent on a number of skills, one of which was battleships. Then instead of changing the game so that battleships would still be relevent for soloers they screwed us over by nerfing them to uselessness except for fleet fighting and PvE. They could have compensated by offering reimbursement but they don't have enough respect for their players to do that. Read the EULA. EULA is irrelevant.
From a customer service point of view its bad.
From a legal point of view it really depends on the countries tort law but generally if an EULA says something and any legislative or common law says otherwise the EULA is voided at least in respect of that clause.
In general when you offer something (12 months of training for ability to use x ship with x ability) and that offer is accepted then you must give what was offered or offfer compensation if its not possible. An EULA clause that says "we can do what we like and you have no recourse" means nothing as a civil contract (EULA) is overridden by higher law which says otherwise.
This is why some EULA's say "X takes no responsiblity for injury and death arising from the use of X's product even if that death and injury is a direct result of X's negligence...". Totally voided by most consumer, common and legislation but still put in just in case. |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
2346
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 01:38:00 -
[89] - Quote
i didn't expect that these slow vulnerable ships with poor tracking guns and near inability to force or deny engagement were intended as suboptimal for solo work |
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
672
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 01:39:00 -
[90] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote: That is hilarious, bitter vet status 10/10
You're just under thinking. As a soloer interested in solo pvp I looked around and saw that solo battleship pvp was possible. I then invested my skillpoints (purchased with real life money) from my subscription into battleships. Had CCP warned us that battleships would be nerfed so they would be useless in solo PvP I wouldn't have done that. Therefore I gave CCP my money, in return CCP gave me skillpoints to be spent on a number of skills, one of which was battleships. Then instead of changing the game so that battleships would still be relevent for soloers they screwed us over by nerfing them to uselessness except for fleet fighting and PvE. They could have compensated by offering reimbursement but they don't have enough respect for their players to do that.
I have an alliance intel channel that tells me the hull types of things moving along pipes.
If I really, really, really felt the need to get a Raven killmail with a solo unboosted hyperion, I'd probably be looking at a week tops, where I wouldn't have to do anything other than sit in my system making isk until the relevent pipe that I can intercept in 2 jumps told me there was one 4 jumps out, or there was one moving in such a way that I could intercept them via the alliance jump bridges.
Note that in the meantime I can intercept other things with other well chosen counters, ie there not being a valid target for the hyperion doesn't stop me either getting intel for others, or intercepting other things with other ships (the usual modus is to scan signatures ahead of some form of signature consumer and then arrive with a counter when they are in the sig).
GENTS asked for movement intel on a "known composition" gang the other day, and I grabbed a helios, jumped 2 jumps, 1 jump bridge based on a guess as to which direction they might go, found the gang and put GENTS in contact with it, and later they bagged a deimos. Whlist its not clear that I changed the ultimate outcome, I certainly made it easy for them (they knew they had to step forward 1 jump to get contact).
MMOs let you do more stuff with cooperation. who would have thought that.
|
|
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1537
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 01:44:00 -
[91] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:i didn't expect that these slow vulnerable ships with poor tracking guns and near inability to force or deny engagement were intended as suboptimal for solo work Who would have thought that BS would end up slow vulnerable ships with poor tracking guns and inability to force or deny engagement.
You're putting the cart before the horse as an argument.
|
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
2346
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 01:48:00 -
[92] - Quote
i was upset when they changed the punisher from an autocannon ship to a laser ship, too
cried my eyes out. what was i going to do with all that frigate sp |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
9972
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 01:51:00 -
[93] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:i didn't expect that these slow vulnerable ships with poor tracking guns and near inability to force or deny engagement were intended as suboptimal for solo work
Intended? No.
But that sure as hell has not stopped me. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1538
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 01:54:00 -
[94] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:i was upset when they changed the punisher from an autocannon ship to a laser ship, too
cried my eyes out. what was i going to do with all that frigate sp That makes no sense since there are plenty of other frigates which are viable with autocannon. However if they had changed your frigates so that they were so slow you could make a coffee before one aligned, make dinner while one warps, made them only able to reliably hit other frigates and capitals, gave them a scan res which meant they were unable to lock anything except titans before the next downtime and fitting alll T2 rigs cost 200 million + you would be crying. |
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
1008
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 01:54:00 -
[95] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:(12 months of training for ability to use x ship with x ability) The offer was 12 months of training. Not 12 months of training for 'X'. The 'X' bit has always been subject to change and player choice. This has always been known. Ignorance is not an excuse, or a reason for reimbursement. |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1538
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 01:58:00 -
[96] - Quote
PotatoOverdose wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:(12 months of training for ability to use x ship with x ability) The offer was 12 months of training. Not 12 months of training for 'X'. The 'X' bit has always been subject to change and player choice. This has always been known. Ignorance is not an excuse, or a reason for reimbursement. Not true since SP has to be directly deposited into skills. If you could accrue SP unspent that would be correct but its not. If at the time the SP is being added there is a specific goal such as BS with T2 guns and T2 fittings, and those fittings, guns and battleship have known attributes then when you spend them you should get what you spent them on. Not something arbitrarily different without any recourse for refund.
I'm not a lawyer but I have studied tort law, I have certificates in law and am training to be a lawyer, bachelor of laws I do know roughly what I am talking about. |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
2347
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 02:00:00 -
[97] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:i was upset when they changed the punisher from an autocannon ship to a laser ship, too
cried my eyes out. what was i going to do with all that frigate sp That makes no sense since there are plenty of other frigates which are viable with autocannon. However if they had changed your frigates so that they were so slow you could make a coffee before one aligned, make dinner while one warps, made them only able to reliably hit other frigates and capitals, gave them a scan res which meant they were unable to lock anything except titans before the next downtime and fitting alll T2 rigs cost 200 million + you would be crying. but my punisher sp is wasted
punisher, which was flown with autocannons, was obviously intended for autocannons and i am disgusted at this customer service that my punisher sp was not refunded
there are plenty of other ships that can solo |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
2347
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 02:02:00 -
[98] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:i didn't expect that these slow vulnerable ships with poor tracking guns and near inability to force or deny engagement were intended as suboptimal for solo work Intended? No. But that sure as hell has not stopped me. There are BS that can be utter monsters solo. perhaps some people are more competent than others vOv |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1538
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 02:04:00 -
[99] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:i was upset when they changed the punisher from an autocannon ship to a laser ship, too
cried my eyes out. what was i going to do with all that frigate sp That makes no sense since there are plenty of other frigates which are viable with autocannon. However if they had changed your frigates so that they were so slow you could make a coffee before one aligned, make dinner while one warps, made them only able to reliably hit other frigates and capitals, gave them a scan res which meant they were unable to lock anything except titans before the next downtime and fitting alll T2 rigs cost 200 million + you would be crying. but my punisher sp is wasted punisher, which was flown with autocannons, was obviously intended for autocannons and i am disgusted at this customer service that my punisher sp was not refunded there are plenty of other ships that can solo The analogy doesn't work at all. Battleships are hulls, large guns are battleship specific weapons. A punisher (apart from being Amarrian? and not using proj) is only one hull of a large array of the same hull. |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
2347
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 02:06:00 -
[100] - Quote
what analogy i am simply expressing my sincere outrage that rebalancing efforts are made in an online computer game |
|
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1538
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 02:06:00 -
[101] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:baltec1 wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:i didn't expect that these slow vulnerable ships with poor tracking guns and near inability to force or deny engagement were intended as suboptimal for solo work Intended? No. But that sure as hell has not stopped me. There are BS that can be utter monsters solo. perhaps some people are more competent than others vOv If he was competent at solo battleships he wouldn't have refused to take me up on my offer of a free fitted mega to get 5 solo kills in null and win 5 billion isk....
Talk is cheap. |
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
1009
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 02:10:00 -
[102] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote: Not true since SP has to be directly deposited into skills.
And you make the choice of which skill gets the SP. CCP's only job is to provide you that choice. What you make of it (or fail to) is your business, and yours alone.
Infinity Ziona wrote:I'm not a lawyer but I have studied tort law, I have certificates in law and am training to be a lawyer, bachelor of laws I do know roughly what I am talking about. Everyone on the internet is a lawyer or legal expert and knows what they're talking about. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
9972
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 02:11:00 -
[103] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote: If he was competent at solo battleships he wouldn't have refused to take me up on my offer of a free fitted mega to get 5 solo kills in null and win 5 billion isk....
Talk is cheap.
Gimmy a kronos, thats a much better suited mega hull for solo work. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1538
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 02:16:00 -
[104] - Quote
PotatoOverdose wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: Not true since SP has to be directly deposited into skills.
And you make the choice of which skill gets the SP. CCP's only job is to provide you that choice. What you make of it (or fail to) is your business, and yours alone. Infinity Ziona wrote:I'm not a lawyer but I have studied tort law, I have certificates in law and am training to be a lawyer, bachelor of laws I do know roughly what I am talking about. Everyone on the internet is a lawyer or legal expert and knows what they're talking about. I'm not a lawyer, I'm studying for my bachelor of laws though so yes I know a bit more than most.baltec1 wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: If he was competent at solo battleships he wouldn't have refused to take me up on my offer of a free fitted mega to get 5 solo kills in null and win 5 billion isk....
Talk is cheap.
Gimmy a kronos, thats a much better suited mega hull for solo work. The best BS in my eyes is the raven line, they are the most adaptable BS going. Whats wrong with a mega?
Also you're wrong, the Kronos is not better at solo. The Kronos will attract a crapload of attention, while it might be better at active tanking, you'll end up stuck in place with a bunch of idiots nueting you and you dying faster than if you used a 6 gun 1 nuet plated mega. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
9972
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 02:25:00 -
[105] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote: Whats wrong with a mega?
Also you're wrong, the Kronos is not better at solo. The Kronos will attract a crapload of attention, while it might be better at active tanking, you'll end up stuck in place with a bunch of idiots nueting you and you dying faster than if you used a 6 gun 1 nuet plated mega.
Mega is best in a small gang and up, its not a solo boat. The kronos is much better for solo work thanks to its bonuses, slots and warp speed. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
2348
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 02:33:00 -
[106] - Quote
any battleship, baltec, any one you want. anything, you're just too cowardly to meet my challenge. go on, pick. no not that one. why won't you accept the challenge. |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1539
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 02:50:00 -
[107] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: Whats wrong with a mega?
Also you're wrong, the Kronos is not better at solo. The Kronos will attract a crapload of attention, while it might be better at active tanking, you'll end up stuck in place with a bunch of idiots nueting you and you dying faster than if you used a 6 gun 1 nuet plated mega.
Mega is best in a small gang and up, its not a solo boat. The kronos is much better for solo work thanks to its bonuses, slots and warp speed. Its not a solo boat but if you're suicidal its not bad. You will lose it but you'll take a lot of people with you. If you're going to solo the Mega is by far the best ship to use other than the Dominix but that's purely because of its ability to use drones and cost.
The Kronos is better for all solo, far better than Golem. Buffer armor fit, it gets +170k ehp , electron II's, duel web and neuts it can kill everything from inties to other battleships easily but its far too expensive because no matter what battleship you use, you will die.
The Kronos is not a battleship, its a 1 billion isk marauder. |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
2348
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 02:58:00 -
[108] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:The Kronos is not a battleship, its a 1 billion isk battleship based marauder.
well your ridiculous copout aside (noone's buying it, coward), this means that your battleship skills are not useless because they go towards marauders-aren't-battleship skills
enjoy |
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
672
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 03:00:00 -
[109] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Also you're wrong, the Kronos is not better at solo. The Kronos will attract a crapload of attention, while it might be better at active tanking, you'll end up stuck in place with a bunch of idiots nueting you and you dying faster than if you used a 6 gun 1 nuet plated mega.
Marauder huge cargo bay + navy cap 800 + heavy cap booster = pretty damn resistant to small gang neuting.
Unless someone brings up a geddon or domi or refits in station to have a full rack of neuts, it isn't going to neut out particularly quickly, and it can even unbastion and mwd to chase stuff eat some buffer loss then bastion up again to fix the buffer because it has a fairly extravagant total cap budget.
and then when you finally run out of boosters, like any good solo, you undock the cyno alt and drop the carrier to save it.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
9974
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 03:01:00 -
[110] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:
The Kronos is not a battleship, its a 1 billion isk battleship based marauder.
So its a battleship.
Incidentally, the golem is the best solo BS going as it is the most adaptable. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1539
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 03:08:00 -
[111] - Quote
Tauranon wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:
Also you're wrong, the Kronos is not better at solo. The Kronos will attract a crapload of attention, while it might be better at active tanking, you'll end up stuck in place with a bunch of idiots nueting you and you dying faster than if you used a 6 gun 1 nuet plated mega.
Marauder huge cargo bay + navy cap 800 + heavy cap booster = pretty damn resistant to small gang neuting. Unless someone brings up a geddon or domi or refits in station to have a full rack of neuts, it isn't going to neut out particularly quickly, and it can even unbastion and mwd to chase stuff eat some buffer loss then bastion up again to fix the buffer because it has a fairly extravagant total cap budget. and then when you finally run out of boosters, like any good solo, you undock the cyno alt and drop the carrier to save it. You can't MWD when you're scrammed and even with lows full of expanders you'll never do enough damage to pop anything prepared before cap runs out. The existence of RR means any damage you do will be absorbed easily. Soloing doesn't involve cyno alts and carriers. Marauders might take a few members of a unprepared gang you run into but it won't take out a gang prepared to take you on and as soon as people hear you're around soloing in Marauder you're going to get prepared gangs on you.
Its suicide. |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1539
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 03:09:00 -
[112] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:
The Kronos is not a battleship, its a 1 billion isk battleship based marauder.
So its a battleship. Incidentally, the golem is the best solo BS going as it is the most adaptable. No its not. Missiles and speed tanking make it mediocre. |
Terraniel Aurelius
Sons Of Alexander AL3XAND3R.
3
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 03:13:00 -
[113] - Quote
I don't know what the hell marauders and megas have to do with sentry drones being completely useless now, but goddamnit ccp. You couldn't think of a different way of dealing with the goons complaining about slowcats? Do you hate the rattlesnake? Are gallente boats your red-headed step child? There must be a reason why a garde II with three fed navy omnis, using optimal range scripts can barely shoot far enough to avoid hitting itself in the balls.
I'm assuming your morals are compromised, or you are making decisions based purely on emotional responses, not anything rational, as that is the only reason I can come up with that you keep nerfing things instead of giving us newer, shinier toys to play with. STOP F-ING UP OUR SHIPS. If you want everything to be the same, delete everything except the drake, paint it 4 different colors and pretend like they are different ships. Is that your ideal solution? Because that's what all this "gameplay leveling" is amounting to. Then we can all quit, because it'll be real damn hard to pretend that you're actually trying to make things better.
/rant |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
9974
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 03:14:00 -
[114] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote: No its not. Missiles and speed tanking make it mediocre.
Use the correct missiles for the job at hand. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19043
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 03:37:00 -
[115] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:You're obviously trolling I guess. You're confusing me with you.
Quote:Just a few examples of people training for things that are now useless.
Titan doomsday... Solo battleships (solo anything bigger than cruiser really) Torpedo's OGB (soon to be nerfed) Shield compensation skills HLML None of those are useless, no, and people who have trained for them still have full use of their skills. So again, when have this ever happened? The only two reinventions I can think of are Sov (not skill-based) and exploration (actually making skills worth more). Can you think of anything else where they've completely reinvented the game to the extent you're claiming?
Hint: if you try not using utterly hilarious hyperbole that is in every way completely disconnected from reality, you might stand a microscopic chance of having a pointGǪ but you can't and you won't so you don't.
Quote:There is nothing wrong with balancing content however CCP does not balance content they change it dramatically and that imbalances something else which then becomes FotM. In time that FotM will catch the attention of CCP and they'll make some absurd change that invalidates the skillpoints people have invested making something else FotM. Except that at no point is SP ever invalidated. If it is, it is reimbursed. Also, the only really GǣdramaticGǥ change they've ever made as far as balance goes is tiercideGǪ and it was hellagood because in that case, dramatic change was exactly what was called for.
Quote:Take a look at the history of weapons lol. The age of missiles, the age of hybrids, the age of lazers, the age of projectiles... at each point instead of balance they screwed up 3 systems to make one system overpowered to the extend they were mandatory to train as a FotM wep. Yes (actually, no, but I'll get to that in a bit)? And? Not only is complete balance impossible, it's undesirable and CCP have explicitly said that they strive towards constant imbalances to keep the playing field dynamic. So you plan for it. Luckily, doing so isn't particularly hard and if you plan correctly, you are unaffected by the FOTM because your skill set is never rendered useless.
Still, no, what you described has never actually happened. At each point, they've strived for a semblance of balance, often leaving most systems alone and buffing one to make it not abysmal any more. This has given it the very slight edge needed for something to become FotM. At no point has anything been GÇ£mandatoryGÇ¥. This is just more ignorant hyperbole on your part that only serves to completely discredit your own claims.
Quote:EULA is irrelevant. From a customer service point of view its bad. Nope and nope, in roughly that order. The EULA explains to you what your relationship is with the devs. If you can't stand that, don't play. From a customer service point of view, this is good since the relationship is made quite clear. As it happens, that relationship offers no promises or guarantees for what you'll be able to do in x amount of time because that's entirely up to you and so far beyond the scope of what the EULA can ever decide.
From the same point of view, the constant changes are even better since they keep the game fresh. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1539
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 04:29:00 -
[116] - Quote
Tippia wrote:]Nope and nope, in roughly that order. The EULA explains to you what your relationship is with the devs. If you can't stand that, don't play. From a customer service point of view, this is good since the relationship is made quite clear. As it happens, that relationship offers no promises or guarantees for what you'll be able to do in x amount of time because that's entirely up to you and so far beyond the scope of what the EULA can ever decide.
From the same point of view, the constant changes are even better since they keep the game fresh. There is so much wrong with everything you've said here its really not worthwhile to me to try to untangle all the fail and explain it. Mostly because it just won't sink in at all anyway. From experience you're the antithesis of logic or discussion. You believe you're own rubbish and that's basically what it is.
EULA's are as good as a post it note you stick on your fridge saying, anyone who opens this fridge gives me the right to kill them. They mean nothing as long as law prohibits the conduct or lack of conduct detailed for breaching an EULA clause.
They are the equivalent of rules that are only enforcable if no other law supercedes, where most laws do take precedence and make clauses in EULA's invalid.
That's about as much I'm going to teach you today. I suggest google EULA's and the law. Have a read. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19043
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 04:38:00 -
[117] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:There is so much wrong with everything you've said here its really not worthwhile to me to try to untangle all the fail and explain it. In other words, you can't really respond to it. That's ok. Reality is kind of harsh that way.
Could you at least come up with one instance where they've completely reinvented the game GÇö preferably one where it was a bad thing that it happened?
Quote:From experience you're the antithesis of logic or discussion. You believe you're own rubbish and that's basically what it is. You're confusing me with you again.
Quote:EULA's are as good as a post it note you stick on your fridge saying, anyone who opens this fridge gives me the right to kill them. They mean nothing as long as law prohibits the conduct or lack of conduct detailed for breaching an EULA clause.
They are the equivalent of rules that are only enforcable if no other law supercedes, where most laws do take precedence and make clauses in EULA's invalid. GǪand the fact remains that it explains what you can expect from the devs. If you want more or something else, you should look elsewhere. No matter how much you try to claim otherwise, none of the promises you're presenting are actually made anywhere for the simple reason that they can't be made because the game simply doesn't work that way.
You're not really telling me anything I don't know already, so you failed on that part as well. The problem is that what you're telling me is nothing but meaningless and vapid platitudes. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
992
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 04:47:00 -
[118] - Quote
Since we're completely on topic here, I just wanted to mention it's cold outside of the building I am in, but not cold enough for me to want to remain inside.
Also I sort of want waffles. |
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
672
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 04:48:00 -
[119] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Tauranon wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:
Also you're wrong, the Kronos is not better at solo. The Kronos will attract a crapload of attention, while it might be better at active tanking, you'll end up stuck in place with a bunch of idiots nueting you and you dying faster than if you used a 6 gun 1 nuet plated mega.
Marauder huge cargo bay + navy cap 800 + heavy cap booster = pretty damn resistant to small gang neuting. Unless someone brings up a geddon or domi or refits in station to have a full rack of neuts, it isn't going to neut out particularly quickly, and it can even unbastion and mwd to chase stuff eat some buffer loss then bastion up again to fix the buffer because it has a fairly extravagant total cap budget. and then when you finally run out of boosters, like any good solo, you undock the cyno alt and drop the carrier to save it. You can't MWD when you're scrammed and even with lows full of expanders you'll never do enough damage to pop anything prepared before cap runs out. The existence of RR means any damage you do will be absorbed easily. Soloing doesn't involve cyno alts and carriers. Marauders might take a few members of a unprepared gang you run into but it won't take out a gang prepared to take you on and as soon as people hear you're around soloing in Marauder you're going to get prepared gangs on you. Its suicide.
its got 1275m3 of cargo space. For reference a dominix has 600, a proteus has 300 or something. ie the raw cap endurance it has is huge relative to targets. You don't need expanders, its got huge endurance without them.
If you are scrammed then something is close. ergo blasters are in play.
If there is RR, it does 1000 dps bastioned at sufficient range to reach the RR. if you are facing more than 1 RR, you deagress (which you can do because of huge cargo and huge tank), and you gate or dock, which are things that are going the *there* with blasterboats, because that is where they fight.
and surely, surely, surely with 4 utility highslots, and 3 of them not having the bastion in them, you can both neut out scram range targets, and have a NOS for trying to cheese some cap too.
yes legitimately it can take on multiple opponents and win sufficiently often, and it can legitimately escape multiple targets that have aggressed, through its ability to endure whilst deaggressing.
|
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1539
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 04:58:00 -
[120] - Quote
Tauranon wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Tauranon wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:
Also you're wrong, the Kronos is not better at solo. The Kronos will attract a crapload of attention, while it might be better at active tanking, you'll end up stuck in place with a bunch of idiots nueting you and you dying faster than if you used a 6 gun 1 nuet plated mega.
Marauder huge cargo bay + navy cap 800 + heavy cap booster = pretty damn resistant to small gang neuting. Unless someone brings up a geddon or domi or refits in station to have a full rack of neuts, it isn't going to neut out particularly quickly, and it can even unbastion and mwd to chase stuff eat some buffer loss then bastion up again to fix the buffer because it has a fairly extravagant total cap budget. and then when you finally run out of boosters, like any good solo, you undock the cyno alt and drop the carrier to save it. You can't MWD when you're scrammed and even with lows full of expanders you'll never do enough damage to pop anything prepared before cap runs out. The existence of RR means any damage you do will be absorbed easily. Soloing doesn't involve cyno alts and carriers. Marauders might take a few members of a unprepared gang you run into but it won't take out a gang prepared to take you on and as soon as people hear you're around soloing in Marauder you're going to get prepared gangs on you. Its suicide. its got 1275m3 of cargo space. For reference a dominix has 600, a proteus has 300 or something. ie the raw cap endurance it has is huge relative to targets. You don't need expanders, its got huge endurance without them. If you are scrammed then something is close. ergo blasters are in play. If there is RR, it does 1000 dps bastioned at sufficient range to reach the RR. if you are facing more than 1 RR, you deagress (which you can do because of huge cargo and huge tank), and you gate or dock, which are things that are going the *there* with blasterboats, because that is where they fight. and surely, surely, surely with 4 utility highslots, and 3 of them not having the bastion in them, you can both neut out scram range targets, and have a NOS for trying to cheese some cap too. yes legitimately it can take on multiple opponents and win sufficiently often, and it can legitimately escape multiple targets that have aggressed, through its ability to endure whilst deaggressing. You've obviously not fought competent fleets with a Marauder. I have in a Golem and against people who know what they're doing your 1k dps will not do anything and your tank being active based is reliant purely on cargo hold. I had Oracles, SB, T3's, BC, legions with neut subs and had they not derped on the wormhole not realising I was a war target I would have died.
That was a 22k tank, 2900m3 cargo, duel XLASB setup doing 1100 dps. It was no where near sufficient to beat their local RR / nuets and EHP. |
|
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
672
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 05:42:00 -
[121] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:
You've obviously not fought competent fleets with a Marauder. I have in a Golem and against people who know what they're doing your 1k dps will not do anything and your tank being active based is reliant purely on cargo hold. I had Oracles, SB, T3's, BC, legions with neut subs and had they not derped on the wormhole not realising I was a war target I would have died.
That was a 22k tank, 2900m3 cargo, duel XLASB setup doing 1100 dps. It was no where near sufficient to beat their local RR / nuets and EHP.
I don't need to say anything to that. I think that even attempting that engagement is a sign of pretty serious overpoweredness.
I would be very happy if I engaged a bait, had a falcon uncloak and a warp in hammer arrive, bastion to prevent the falcon doing anything and kill both the dps boats, and have the falcon escape, ie kill 2 and force one of the field. That to me is overpowered.
Had you won the engagement you described, I wouldn't see that as overpowered, I'd see that ridiculous and broken. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8868
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 07:06:00 -
[122] - Quote
"You've obviously not fought 100mn Tengus with your Caracal. There's just no way you can win. Caracals are useless." My EVE Videos 59-15 |
Paranoid Loyd
357
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 08:48:00 -
[123] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote: You've obviously not fought competent fleets with a Marauder. I have in a Golem and against people who know what they're doing your 1k dps will not do anything and your tank being active based is reliant purely on cargo hold. I had Oracles, SB, T3's, BC, legions with neut subs and had they not derped on the wormhole not realising I was a war target I would have died.
That was a 22k tank, 2900m3 cargo, duel XLASB setup doing 1100 dps. It was no where near sufficient to beat their local RR / nuets and EHP.
How could you possibly argue that you should be able to win this engagement?
This is just sad now.
"PvE in EVE is a trap to turn you into PvP content, don't confuse it for actual gameplay." Lipbite |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1541
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 10:58:00 -
[124] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: You've obviously not fought competent fleets with a Marauder. I have in a Golem and against people who know what they're doing your 1k dps will not do anything and your tank being active based is reliant purely on cargo hold. I had Oracles, SB, T3's, BC, legions with neut subs and had they not derped on the wormhole not realising I was a war target I would have died.
That was a 22k tank, 2900m3 cargo, duel XLASB setup doing 1100 dps. It was no where near sufficient to beat their local RR / nuets and EHP.
How could you possibly argue that you should be able to win this engagement? This is just sad now. Whats sad is the I Win Button of bringing more people. Its why PvP in EvE is so mediocre. You take a look at Afghanistan or Iraq, where technology > bunch of dweebs with 1950's designed AK47's.
EVE PvP is about as intelligent as 100 low tech insurgents beating 50 high tech first world soldiers. Shouldn't happen simply because they bring more numbers of crappy ships. Just like in Iraq or Afghanistan, high tech should give similiar casualty results, 200 insurgents corpses for 20 coalition deaths. Instead, one of the newest, highest tech, super expensive machines quite literally fails to kill even one crappy 20 mill cruiser due to lame RR mechanics. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
9977
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 11:05:00 -
[125] - Quote
This is simply down to you picking fights you cannot win. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Moneta Curran
Lunar Industries Ltd
270
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 11:22:00 -
[126] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:
TL;DR:
This change doesn't suit me so it must be wrong.
Please...
|
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
672
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 11:54:00 -
[127] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: You've obviously not fought competent fleets with a Marauder. I have in a Golem and against people who know what they're doing your 1k dps will not do anything and your tank being active based is reliant purely on cargo hold. I had Oracles, SB, T3's, BC, legions with neut subs and had they not derped on the wormhole not realising I was a war target I would have died.
That was a 22k tank, 2900m3 cargo, duel XLASB setup doing 1100 dps. It was no where near sufficient to beat their local RR / nuets and EHP.
How could you possibly argue that you should be able to win this engagement? This is just sad now. Whats sad is the I Win Button of bringing more people. Its why PvP in EvE is so mediocre. You take a look at Afghanistan or Iraq, where technology > bunch of dweebs with 1950's designed AK47's. EVE PvP is about as intelligent as 100 low tech insurgents beating 50 high tech first world soldiers. Shouldn't happen simply because they bring more numbers of crappy ships. Just like in Iraq or Afghanistan, high tech should give similiar casualty results, 200 insurgents corpses for 20 coalition deaths. Instead, one of the newest, highest tech, super expensive machines quite literally fails to kill even one crappy 20 mill cruiser due to lame RR mechanics.
Except that this is a naval simulator, and cruisers engaging beyond their class is a common theme in naval history. The Graf Spee, Scharnhorst and Bismark all had very specific issues with being unable to deal with British cruisers, that either lead directly to their loss, or directly to them not completing their objective and then subsequently being lost.
If you visit London, you can actually go see the Belfast, which was part of a 3 cruiser force protecting a convoy that engaged and drove off the nominally superior and supposedly largely invulnerable to 8in gunfire Scharnhorst (after the Norfolk poked it squarely in its one good eye). ie there is a bit of cruiser history you might even be able to board on a tour.
|
Layla Firoue
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
51
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 13:58:00 -
[128] - Quote
Tauranon wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: You've obviously not fought competent fleets with a Marauder. I have in a Golem and against people who know what they're doing your 1k dps will not do anything and your tank being active based is reliant purely on cargo hold. I had Oracles, SB, T3's, BC, legions with neut subs and had they not derped on the wormhole not realising I was a war target I would have died.
That was a 22k tank, 2900m3 cargo, duel XLASB setup doing 1100 dps. It was no where near sufficient to beat their local RR / nuets and EHP.
How could you possibly argue that you should be able to win this engagement? This is just sad now. Whats sad is the I Win Button of bringing more people. Its why PvP in EvE is so mediocre. You take a look at Afghanistan or Iraq, where technology > bunch of dweebs with 1950's designed AK47's. EVE PvP is about as intelligent as 100 low tech insurgents beating 50 high tech first world soldiers. Shouldn't happen simply because they bring more numbers of crappy ships. Just like in Iraq or Afghanistan, high tech should give similiar casualty results, 200 insurgents corpses for 20 coalition deaths. Instead, one of the newest, highest tech, super expensive machines quite literally fails to kill even one crappy 20 mill cruiser due to lame RR mechanics. Except that this is a naval simulator, and cruisers engaging beyond their class is a common theme in naval history. The Graf Spee, Scharnhorst and Bismark all had very specific issues with being unable to deal with British cruisers, that either lead directly to their loss, or directly to them not completing their objective and then subsequently being lost. If you visit London, you can actually go see the Belfast, which was part of a 3 cruiser force protecting a convoy that engaged and drove off the nominally superior and supposedly largely invulnerable to 8in gunfire Scharnhorst (after the Norfolk poked it squarely in its one good eye). ie there is a bit of cruiser history you might even be able to board on a tour.
I too compare internet SPACE ships with WW2 SEA ships. And to lump in the Graf Spee with Scharnhorst and Bismark One was a cruiser class ship herself, the other was a battlecruiser and the third a fast battleship and circumstances were quite different with superior british forces always close by in all 3 cases as well as bad weather conditions for the Scharnhorst engagement and the cruisers shadowing the Bismark. Graf Spee was outnumbered.
But hey leave out the important parts.
|
Arsine Mayhem
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
111
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 14:08:00 -
[129] - Quote
Thomas Mickelson wrote:Ok so I use a Myrmidon for ratting, I got 4 curators and can usually rip stuff up before the rats even get into lock on range. Now all of a sudden they can't hit the broadside of a barn, and at that, Omnidirectional tracking links seem to be activitable now, and I thought they were passive before.
CCP plan to fix this? Or was this intentional?
My Vexor Navy is the same.
Pretty much any ship that doesn't have tracking and range bonuses are useless with sentrys.
Even with scripts, I miss half of the time.
But when you have someone with the brains of a stuffed animal making changes, what do you expect. |
Frank Millar
427
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 14:20:00 -
[130] - Quote
This thread delivers. |
|
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Academy The ROC
2227
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 14:24:00 -
[131] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: You've obviously not fought competent fleets with a Marauder. I have in a Golem and against people who know what they're doing your 1k dps will not do anything and your tank being active based is reliant purely on cargo hold. I had Oracles, SB, T3's, BC, legions with neut subs and had they not derped on the wormhole not realising I was a war target I would have died.
That was a 22k tank, 2900m3 cargo, duel XLASB setup doing 1100 dps. It was no where near sufficient to beat their local RR / nuets and EHP.
How could you possibly argue that you should be able to win this engagement? This is just sad now. Whats sad is the I Win Button of bringing more people. Its why PvP in EvE is so mediocre. You take a look at Afghanistan or Iraq, where technology > bunch of dweebs with 1950's designed AK47's. EVE PvP is about as intelligent as 100 low tech insurgents beating 50 high tech first world soldiers. Shouldn't happen simply because they bring more numbers of crappy ships. Just like in Iraq or Afghanistan, high tech should give similiar casualty results, 200 insurgents corpses for 20 coalition deaths. Instead, one of the newest, highest tech, super expensive machines quite literally fails to kill even one crappy 20 mill cruiser due to lame RR mechanics.
Speaking as a soldier, you are a ******* idiot.
We always tried to outnumber them if we could, and bring way more heat if we couldn't. That's why half of our doctrine is mobility, the other half to bring the hammer down with the most possible force.
Now, speaking as a gamer... you're still a ******* idiot.
You're literally telling me that pricetag should trump everything else. If you can't realize just how goddamn stupid that is, then you are beyond all help. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
2149
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 14:24:00 -
[132] - Quote
So now that the Halloween war is over, can we nerf drone-assist without all the tears? Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal |
Arsine Mayhem
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
111
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 14:28:00 -
[133] - Quote
Vald Tegor wrote: Pre patch Garde with two omnis 45.6 Optimal + 12k falloff ~ 50 k effective range, half dmg at ~ 58k, 0 dmg at 70k
Post patch Garde with two omnis range scripted 39K Optimal + 19.7 falloff ~46 k effective range, half dmg at ~ 58k, 0 dmg at 78k
No, the sky didn't fall range wise on "unbonused" boats.
What the patch did hurt, is your ability to actually track small, high transversal targets maintaining that 50km range. Which was part of the problem with drone boats overperforming, particularly the range and tracking bonused hulls. When it comes to tracking a target at a more reasonable range, switching to tracking scripts nets you a 9.35% buff before overheating.
Care to elaborate what PvE content features small signature hostiles orbiting at 50+km, making unbonused ships with the new Omni useless? Furthermore, why should battleship class guns be used to fire at them, instead of switching to a more reasonable anti-frigate drone choice or using the high slots? After all, the sentry Myrm is little more than the drone version of a 6 gun Talos. Would you expect a blaster Talos to track sig tanking frigates at 50+km?
Seems you have stuffing for brains also.
Vexor Navy, 2 omni's.
Garde II 34.4km+15.5km (pyfa)
You mention nothing about tracking, but then you have no clue cause you haven't tried it. |
Arsine Mayhem
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
111
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 14:35:00 -
[134] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:So now that the Halloween war is over, can we nerf drone-assist without all the tears?
Start another goon tears thread and leave this one alone.
Not like you haven't had enough of them. |
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
673
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 14:48:00 -
[135] - Quote
Layla Firoue wrote:I too compare internet SPACE ships with WW2 SEA ships. And to lump in the Graf Spee with Scharnhorst and Bismark One was a cruiser class ship herself, the other was a battlecruiser and the third a fast battleship and circumstances were quite different with superior british forces always close by in all 3 cases as well as bad weather conditions for the Scharnhorst engagement and the cruisers shadowing the Bismark. Graf Spee was outnumbered. But hey leave out the important parts.
What important parts ? All of those German ships were directly superior to any individual unit they faced in the actions I chose to highlight, all of the actions included cruisers being fired at, and none of them were sunk. In any case the deck and hull armored pocket battleship intended to directly outclass a treaty cruiser that could catch it was designed with the specific shortcoming of being damn expensive, and thus history found it being caught by 3 cheap treaty cruisers, rather than the 1 on 1 which the designers anticipated.
The parallel with Zionas situation is obvious, she had a ship that would win many 1 on 3s, but found itself facing what sounds like 1 on 7, including spaceship pixel submarine specific heavy units aka strategic cruisers.
This game -is inspired by naval conflict- deal with it. |
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
673
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 14:50:00 -
[136] - Quote
Arsine Mayhem wrote:
Seems you have stuffing for brains also.
Vexor Navy, 2 omni's.
Garde II 34.4km+15.5km (pyfa)
You mention nothing about tracking, but then you have no clue cause you haven't tried it.
Instead of insulting people, how about you load the scripts into them.
|
Arsine Mayhem
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
111
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 14:54:00 -
[137] - Quote
Tauranon wrote:Arsine Mayhem wrote:
Seems you have stuffing for brains also.
Vexor Navy, 2 omni's.
Garde II 34.4km+15.5km (pyfa)
You mention nothing about tracking, but then you have no clue cause you haven't tried it.
Instead of insulting people, how about you load the scripts into them.
Oh yea, what was I thinking. Idiot.
Garde II Targeting Scripts 30+13 Tracking .0708 Garde II Range Scripts 39+19.7 Tracking .0432
Now you go out and test it. See what you hit.
Let alone Bouncer, Warden, Curator. |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
2171
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 14:58:00 -
[138] - Quote
Arsine Mayhem wrote:Vald Tegor wrote: Pre patch Garde with two omnis 45.6 Optimal + 12k falloff ~ 50 k effective range, half dmg at ~ 58k, 0 dmg at 70k
Post patch Garde with two omnis range scripted 39K Optimal + 19.7 falloff ~46 k effective range, half dmg at ~ 58k, 0 dmg at 78k
No, the sky didn't fall range wise on "unbonused" boats.
What the patch did hurt, is your ability to actually track small, high transversal targets maintaining that 50km range. Which was part of the problem with drone boats overperforming, particularly the range and tracking bonused hulls. When it comes to tracking a target at a more reasonable range, switching to tracking scripts nets you a 9.35% buff before overheating.
Care to elaborate what PvE content features small signature hostiles orbiting at 50+km, making unbonused ships with the new Omni useless? Furthermore, why should battleship class guns be used to fire at them, instead of switching to a more reasonable anti-frigate drone choice or using the high slots? After all, the sentry Myrm is little more than the drone version of a 6 gun Talos. Would you expect a blaster Talos to track sig tanking frigates at 50+km?
Seems you have stuffing for brains also. Vexor Navy, 2 omni's. Garde II 34.4km+15.5km (pyfa) You mention nothing about tracking, but then you have no clue cause you haven't tried it.
I have retired my Proteus, as hits against Tyrants, etc, that orbit at 49 km, is awful compared to Monday. And for trying to shoot stuff further out, before it can shoot me, forget it.
Also, now, I have cap issues on a ship that was barely stable. And also another "feature", this nerf provided, is the major lag out when swapping targets to frigs from longer range targets.
Of course, the CCP apologists will say "whaa whaa, guns have this issue already". Of course, we all know about the drawbacks that sentries already imposed on a pilot, before the nerf, making the gun comparison completely idiotic, but these devs and their apologists never let facts get in the way of ideology.
Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |
Arsine Mayhem
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
111
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 15:11:00 -
[139] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Arsine Mayhem wrote:Vald Tegor wrote: Pre patch Garde with two omnis 45.6 Optimal + 12k falloff ~ 50 k effective range, half dmg at ~ 58k, 0 dmg at 70k
Post patch Garde with two omnis range scripted 39K Optimal + 19.7 falloff ~46 k effective range, half dmg at ~ 58k, 0 dmg at 78k
No, the sky didn't fall range wise on "unbonused" boats.
What the patch did hurt, is your ability to actually track small, high transversal targets maintaining that 50km range. Which was part of the problem with drone boats overperforming, particularly the range and tracking bonused hulls. When it comes to tracking a target at a more reasonable range, switching to tracking scripts nets you a 9.35% buff before overheating.
Care to elaborate what PvE content features small signature hostiles orbiting at 50+km, making unbonused ships with the new Omni useless? Furthermore, why should battleship class guns be used to fire at them, instead of switching to a more reasonable anti-frigate drone choice or using the high slots? After all, the sentry Myrm is little more than the drone version of a 6 gun Talos. Would you expect a blaster Talos to track sig tanking frigates at 50+km?
Seems you have stuffing for brains also. Vexor Navy, 2 omni's. Garde II 34.4km+15.5km (pyfa) You mention nothing about tracking, but then you have no clue cause you haven't tried it. I have retired my Proteus, as hits against Tyrants, etc, that orbit at 49 km, is awful compared to Monday. And for trying to shoot stuff further out, before it can shoot me, forget it. Also, now, I have cap issues on a ship that was barely stable. And also another "feature", this nerf provided, is the major lag out when swapping targets to frigs from longer range targets. Of course, the CCP apologists will say "whaa whaa, guns have this issue already". Of course, we all know about the drawbacks that sentries already imposed on a pilot, before the nerf, making the gun comparison completely idiotic, but these devs and their apologists never let facts get in the way of ideology.
Well, yea, the concept that closer range weapons require more tracking eludes them, so yea, lets nerf range and tracking at the same time. In a weapon that suffers largely from tracking issues in the first place. |
Effect One
Vengeful Swan
103
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 15:37:00 -
[140] - Quote
So basically, omnis have now been brought in line with tracking computers. Seems fair to me. |
|
Eram Fidard
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
754
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 15:46:00 -
[141] - Quote
Hey look, another thread derailed by how infinity ziona doesn't get eve. Poster is not to be held responsible for damages to keyboards and/or noses caused by hot beverages. |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1553
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 23:18:00 -
[142] - Quote
Layla Firoue wrote:Tauranon wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: You've obviously not fought competent fleets with a Marauder. I have in a Golem and against people who know what they're doing your 1k dps will not do anything and your tank being active based is reliant purely on cargo hold. I had Oracles, SB, T3's, BC, legions with neut subs and had they not derped on the wormhole not realising I was a war target I would have died.
That was a 22k tank, 2900m3 cargo, duel XLASB setup doing 1100 dps. It was no where near sufficient to beat their local RR / nuets and EHP.
How could you possibly argue that you should be able to win this engagement? This is just sad now. Whats sad is the I Win Button of bringing more people. Its why PvP in EvE is so mediocre. You take a look at Afghanistan or Iraq, where technology > bunch of dweebs with 1950's designed AK47's. EVE PvP is about as intelligent as 100 low tech insurgents beating 50 high tech first world soldiers. Shouldn't happen simply because they bring more numbers of crappy ships. Just like in Iraq or Afghanistan, high tech should give similiar casualty results, 200 insurgents corpses for 20 coalition deaths. Instead, one of the newest, highest tech, super expensive machines quite literally fails to kill even one crappy 20 mill cruiser due to lame RR mechanics. Except that this is a naval simulator, and cruisers engaging beyond their class is a common theme in naval history. The Graf Spee, Scharnhorst and Bismark all had very specific issues with being unable to deal with British cruisers, that either lead directly to their loss, or directly to them not completing their objective and then subsequently being lost. If you visit London, you can actually go see the Belfast, which was part of a 3 cruiser force protecting a convoy that engaged and drove off the nominally superior and supposedly largely invulnerable to 8in gunfire Scharnhorst (after the Norfolk poked it squarely in its one good eye). ie there is a bit of cruiser history you might even be able to board on a tour. I too compare internet SPACE ships with WW2 SEA ships. And to lump in the Graf Spee with Scharnhorst and Bismark One was a cruiser class ship herself, the other was a battlecruiser and the third a fast battleship and circumstances were quite different with superior british forces always close by in all 3 cases as well as bad weather conditions for the Scharnhorst engagement and the cruisers shadowing the Bismark. Graf Spee was outnumbered. But hey leave out the important parts. EvE is based on naval warefare. Its why ships are called ships, ship classes match identically to all historical classes of naval vessels other than submarines which have been renamed stealth bombers, and Titans.
The Graf Spee and Scharnhorst were both pocket battleships, none were cruisers.... The Graf Spee engaged 3 cruisers, kicked their asses, took some damage and docked but was scuttled due to politics.
Scharnhorst along with her sister ship Gneisenau were both pocket battleships, they sortied together and at one point took on a battleship, aircraft carrier and two destroyers, they sunk both destroyers and the aircraft carrier before withdrawing.
The Bismarck was engaged in a multi-ship battle between multiple cruisers, a large battleship and the battlecruiser HMS Hood. She engaged the battlecruiser Hood and the battleship Prince of Wales. Destroying the Hood and damaging the Prince of Wales to such an extent it has to withdraw.
Examples of superior ships beating inferior ships with skill and technology.
The issue is not that I didn't win my engagement, the issue was I was able to kill anything regardless of my technological advantage (faction fitted bastioned Marauder vs cruisers, BC, frigs) |
Jill Chastot
Oath of the Forsaken
190
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 23:24:00 -
[143] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: No its not. Missiles and speed tanking make it mediocre.
Use the correct missiles for the job at hand.
NUUU MUSHT YUS MOAR SCOURGE FURY https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=298596&find=unreadOATHS wants you. Come to the WH |
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
678
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 01:04:00 -
[144] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:
The Graf Spee and Scharnhorst were both pocket battleships, none were cruisers.... The Graf Spee engaged 3 cruisers, kicked their asses, took some damage and docked but was scuttled due to politics.
Pocket battleship is an arbitrary term that arose from treaties limiting cruiser guns to 8in, and from the Germans not being bound by treaty, so building their cruisers to deliberately obsolete treaty cruisers. It wasn't a German term (they were probably just called panzerschiffs).
The point being, that the strategy of the german navy command was ruined, because despite it being point superior to a treaty cruiser, it could not sustain material damage from a cruiser and continue with its mission, and since treaty cruisers were cheap and plentiful it was inevitable it would run into not an individual, but a squadron, which succeeded in their mission of patrolling for and preventing commerce raiding. Aside from the state of mind of the Captain a pressing physical reason for the Graf Spee being scuttled was it was an expensive ship with expensive engines that required a fuel purifier that either failed or was damaged in battle.
Quote:
Scharnhorst along with her sister ship Gneisenau were both pocket battleships, they sortied together and at one point took on a battleship, aircraft carrier and two destroyers, they sunk both destroyers and the aircraft carrier before withdrawing.
Both of these ships fit the definition of battleship, ie both of them carried 9 large cailbre guns, and armor thickness (though not as well arranged) similar to the bismark, and both of them had significant immune zones to their own fire (a common definition of battleship is armored against their largest calibre weapons), Yet it was chased off by 3 cruisers and failed in its mission to intercept the convoy. The cruisers however succeeded in their mission of defending the convoy without being sunk.
Quote:
The Bismarck was engaged in a multi-ship battle between multiple cruisers, a large battleship and the battlecruiser HMS Hood. She engaged the battlecruiser Hood and the battleship Prince of Wales. Destroying the Hood and damaging the Prince of Wales to such an extent it has to withdraw.
except that the only way the hood and POW intercepted it, was because it overran the patrol line of cruisers, which subsequently followed it and reported positions to the intercepting Hood and POW, something that the bismark could not prevent them doing. ie the cruisers pressed home their mission in the face of a superior enemy and didn't get sunk doing it.
Quote:
The issue is not that I didn't win my engagement, the issue was I was not able to kill anything regardless of my technological advantage (faction fitted bastioned Marauder vs cruisers, BC, frigs)
I'm not focusing at all on whether a cruiser should be able to solo a marauder, I'm focusing on whether cruisers should be able to perform their tasks on a battlefield populated by poorly supported marauders, and the answer is yes, and so it should be. |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1561
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 07:32:00 -
[145] - Quote
Tauranon wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:
The Graf Spee and Scharnhorst were both pocket battleships, none were cruisers.... The Graf Spee engaged 3 cruisers, kicked their asses, took some damage and docked but was scuttled due to politics.
Pocket battleship is an arbitrary term that arose from treaties limiting cruiser guns to 8in, and from the Germans not being bound by treaty, so building their cruisers to deliberately obsolete treaty cruisers. It wasn't a German term (they were probably just called panzerschiffs). The point being, that the strategy of the german navy command was ruined, because despite it being point superior to a treaty cruiser, it could not sustain material damage from a cruiser and continue with its mission, and since treaty cruisers were cheap and plentiful it was inevitable it would run into not an individual, but a squadron, which succeeded in their mission of patrolling for and preventing commerce raiding. Aside from the state of mind of the Captain a pressing physical reason for the Graf Spee being scuttled was it was an expensive ship with expensive engines that required a fuel purifier that either failed or was damaged in battle. Quote:
Scharnhorst along with her sister ship Gneisenau were both pocket battleships, they sortied together and at one point took on a battleship, aircraft carrier and two destroyers, they sunk both destroyers and the aircraft carrier before withdrawing.
Both of these ships fit the definition of battleship, ie both of them carried 9 large cailbre guns, and armor thickness (though not as well arranged) similar to the bismark, and both of them had significant immune zones to their own fire (a common definition of battleship is armored against their largest calibre weapons), Yet it was chased off by 3 cruisers and failed in its mission to intercept the convoy. The cruisers however succeeded in their mission of defending the convoy without being sunk. Quote:
The Bismarck was engaged in a multi-ship battle between multiple cruisers, a large battleship and the battlecruiser HMS Hood. She engaged the battlecruiser Hood and the battleship Prince of Wales. Destroying the Hood and damaging the Prince of Wales to such an extent it has to withdraw.
except that the only way the hood and POW intercepted it, was because it overran the patrol line of cruisers, which subsequently followed it and reported positions to the intercepting Hood and POW, something that the bismark could not prevent them doing. ie the cruisers pressed home their mission in the face of a superior enemy and didn't get sunk doing it. Quote:
The issue is not that I didn't win my engagement, the issue was I was not able to kill anything regardless of my technological advantage (faction fitted bastioned Marauder vs cruisers, BC, frigs)
I'm not focusing at all on whether a cruiser should be able to solo a marauder, I'm focusing on whether cruisers should be able to perform their tasks on a battlefield populated by poorly supported marauders, and the answer is yes, and so it should be. You pretty much got everything wrong there. The Graf Spee damaged the Exeter, knocking out all her guns and forcing her to withdraw. Despite being a battleship she was faster than the cruisers but engaged anyway outnumbered. She docked in Montevideo (sp?) because she had orders not to risk being sunk and giving the allies a morale boost. She was scuttled for the same reason not because she was incapable of winning outnumbered, she was.
The pocket battleships were indeed battleships, the ToV prohibited ships over 10,000 tons (large cruisers) however the pocket battleships were twice that and has 8 inch guns which were battleship sized guns albeit not large ones.
The cruisers shadowed the Bismarck allowing the Hood and PoW to engage after which they were defeated, the Bismarck subsequently losing them and escaping into the Atlantic with minimal damage (she skill and isk tanked).
A marauder is a marauder. From a play experience its poor gameplay for only large fleets to be able to harm individual ships in other large fleets.
In any game a high experienced high value ship should be able to engage a fleet and cause some damage. If a marauder engages 2 T3's, 2 Oracles, 3 stealth bombers, a Thorax in a suicide attack you would expect it reasonable that the maruader would eventually be destroyed however it is as reasonable to expect that the Marauder would be able to destroy an Oracle (cheap, low ehp), a thorax (super cheap, super low ehp) in exchange.
The reason this is so is a) an inability to harm any fleet ship without another fleet eliminates any reason to engage with inferior numbers b) encourages blobbing c) its fracking stupid..
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8880
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 07:54:00 -
[146] - Quote
I really don't understand why people are complaining about tracking with sentries. If you use the scripts your tracking got BETTER. It's just that you can't get a range bonus at the same time. My EVE Videos 59-15 |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8880
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 07:57:00 -
[147] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:In any game a high experienced high value ship should be able to engage a fleet and cause some damage. If a marauder engages 2 T3's, 2 Oracles, 3 stealth bombers, a Thorax in a suicide attack you would expect it reasonable that the maruader would eventually be destroyed however it is as reasonable to expect that the Marauder would be able to destroy an Oracle (cheap, low ehp), a thorax (super cheap, super low ehp) in exchange. I dare say your inability to do so was probably not the ship's fault. My EVE Videos 59-15 |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1561
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 08:44:00 -
[148] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:In any game a high experienced high value ship should be able to engage a fleet and cause some damage. If a marauder engages 2 T3's, 2 Oracles, 3 stealth bombers, a Thorax in a suicide attack you would expect it reasonable that the maruader would eventually be destroyed however it is as reasonable to expect that the Marauder would be able to destroy an Oracle (cheap, low ehp), a thorax (super cheap, super low ehp) in exchange. I dare say your inability to do so was probably not the ship's fault. No it was more the fault that 8 high slots of damage from an advanced battleship costing a billion + with fittings costing billions requiring many months of training can be completely defeated by one or two cheap low skilled cruiser remote repairers that somehow magically put ships together again. |
Vald Tegor
Empyrean Guard Tactical Narcotics Team
135
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 08:58:00 -
[149] - Quote
Arsine Mayhem wrote:Vald Tegor wrote: Pre patch Garde with two omnis 45.6 Optimal + 12k falloff ~ 50 k effective range, half dmg at ~ 58k, 0 dmg at 70k
Post patch Garde with two omnis range scripted 39K Optimal + 19.7 falloff ~46 k effective range, half dmg at ~ 58k, 0 dmg at 78k
No, the sky didn't fall range wise on "unbonused" boats.
What the patch did hurt, is your ability to actually track small, high transversal targets maintaining that 50km range. Which was part of the problem with drone boats overperforming, particularly the range and tracking bonused hulls. When it comes to tracking a target at a more reasonable range, switching to tracking scripts nets you a 9.35% buff before overheating.
Care to elaborate what PvE content features small signature hostiles orbiting at 50+km, making unbonused ships with the new Omni useless? Furthermore, why should battleship class guns be used to fire at them, instead of switching to a more reasonable anti-frigate drone choice or using the high slots? After all, the sentry Myrm is little more than the drone version of a 6 gun Talos. Would you expect a blaster Talos to track sig tanking frigates at 50+km?
Seems you have stuffing for brains also. Vexor Navy, 2 omni's. Garde II 34.4km+15.5km (pyfa) You mention nothing about tracking, but then you have no clue cause you haven't tried it. Nice job tossing out insults, for someone who managed to not script the omnis and failed to read past the first four lines of the post.
Arsine Mayhem wrote: Oh yea, what was I thinking. Idiot.
Garde II Targeting Scripts 30+13 Tracking .0708 Garde II Range Scripts 39+19.7 Tracking .0432
Now you go out and test it. See what you hit.
Let alone Bouncer, Warden, Curator.
For targets at less than 30 odd K, you hit more than before the patch... For targets beyond 34K, there won't be much difference in shooting battleships and battlecruisers (the intended targets of a 400 sig res weapon). Frigates and cruisers moving directly towards/away from you will be no real change from before. Small ships actively attempting to evade your fire at high range is what will change, as intended. As I posted the first time.
You really need to clarify what situations you are talking about being a problem here, that are not answered by "use your spare drone bay space and bonused anti-frigate drones, or fit anti-frigate guns in your empty highs".
If you're deploying the long range variants, they blap just fine in PvE. After all, everything at their expected range should be moving towards you, so tracking doesn't matter.
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote: Also, now, I have cap issues on a ship that was barely stable.
Yes, this 0.4 cap per second is absolutely terrible. I too lament my loss of afk ability cap stability on my ratting ship. With my less than perfect cap skills, it now caps out in 44 minutes!
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote: course, the CCP apologists will say "whaa whaa, guns have this issue already". Of course, we all know about the drawbacks that sentries already imposed on a pilot, before the nerf, making the gun comparison completely idiotic, but these devs and their apologists never let facts get in the way of ideology.
Why is it idiotic to reference a 400 signature resolution weapon to another 400 signature resolution weapon, when your ship posesses no less than two alternative weapon systems for dealing with 30m targets?
|
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
2364
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 08:58:00 -
[150] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote: why cant i solo structures designed to provoke fleet fights
Result: "CCP should remove POCO timers!"
Infinity Ziona wrote: why cant i solo fleets more prepared than i am
Prediction: "CCP should remove logistics ships!" |
|
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1564
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 09:34:00 -
[151] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: why cant i solo structures designed to provoke fleet fights Result: "CCP should remove POCO timers!" Infinity Ziona wrote: why cant i solo fleets more prepared than i am Prediction: "CCP should remove logistics ships!" Strawmen. I have no issue dying to a fleet. I have issue dying to a fleet full of newbs in newb ships and not being able to take out even one due to wow style healer modules.
But back on topic, the nerf / buff that was Omni's completely missed what was OP about drones. The only conclusion that could be drawn, CCP got some chars in PL / N3 and don't want to screw the wrecking ball. No other reason they would address the drone problem without addressing the drone problem. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
10003
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 10:10:00 -
[152] - Quote
Bit late for the wrecking ball. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University Minmatar Republic
252
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 10:13:00 -
[153] - Quote
Bismark was able to be sunk because its rudder had been damaged by a Torpedo from a biplane.
... just saying |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1208
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 10:21:00 -
[154] - Quote
Hasikan Miallok wrote:Bismark was able to be sunk because its rudder had been damaged by a Torpedo from a biplane.
... just saying
on a stupid lucky hit equivalent in eve of a 300 man fleet all hitting with a wreacking shot on the first salvo. "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1208
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 10:23:00 -
[155] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: why cant i solo structures designed to provoke fleet fights Result: "CCP should remove POCO timers!" Infinity Ziona wrote: why cant i solo fleets more prepared than i am Prediction: "CCP should remove logistics ships!"
Well to be frank, POCOS could very well ahve a bit less HP. There are more than enough things in eve that invite to use of a dread to kill. We coudl use a few more things under 1 million EHP. "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1208
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 10:24:00 -
[156] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:In any game a high experienced high value ship should be able to engage a fleet and cause some damage. If a marauder engages 2 T3's, 2 Oracles, 3 stealth bombers, a Thorax in a suicide attack you would expect it reasonable that the maruader would eventually be destroyed however it is as reasonable to expect that the Marauder would be able to destroy an Oracle (cheap, low ehp), a thorax (super cheap, super low ehp) in exchange. I dare say your inability to do so was probably not the ship's fault. No it was more the fault that 8 high slots of damage from an advanced battleship costing a billion + with fittings costing billions requiring many months of training can be completely defeated by one or two cheap low skilled cruiser remote repairers that somehow magically put ships together again.
Each time you post you show more and more proof that you have no clue in this game..
HOW IN HELL you have 8 HIGH SLOTS in damage on a marauder?
PLEASE, STOP POSTING.. and go to eve uni. "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
678
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 10:35:00 -
[157] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote: You pretty much got everything wrong there. The Graf Spee damaged the Exeter, knocking out all her guns and forcing her to withdraw. Despite being a battleship she was faster than the cruisers but engaged anyway outnumbered. She docked in Montevideo (sp?) because she had orders not to risk being sunk and giving the allies a morale boost. She was scuttled for the same reason not because she was incapable of winning outnumbered, she was.
The pocket battleships were indeed battleships, the ToV prohibited ships over 10,000 tons (large cruisers) however the pocket battleships were twice that and has 8 inch guns which were battleship sized guns albeit not large ones.
The cruisers shadowed the Bismarck allowing the Hood and PoW to engage after which they were defeated, the Bismarck subsequently losing them and escaping into the Atlantic with minimal damage (she skill and isk tanked).
You are hilariously missing the point, and you have no idea what a treaty cruiser is (hint Versailles did not bind the british navy to build cruisers to a certain size, the Naval Treaty of Washington did, which the Germans were not a party to, therefore they put larger guns on their heavy cruisers intending to directly obsolete British heavy cruisers). Lanngsdorf was sent out with order to commerce raid. He failed the moment he took material damage from the Exeter. Ultimately Lanngsdorf committed suicide. Harwood had orders to find and stop the commerce raider, and he succeeded. He was >>knighted<< for his success, despite the fact his ship got shot up. It still did not sink, and it was still on station outside the River Plate when it needed to be. ie material damage to the Spee was strategically more important than material damage to the Exeter.
Quote:
A marauder is a marauder. From a play experience its poor gameplay for only large fleets to be able to harm individual ships in other large fleets.
In any game a high experienced high value ship should be able to engage a fleet and cause some damage. If a marauder engages 2 T3's, 2 Oracles, 3 stealth bombers, a Thorax in a suicide attack you would expect it reasonable that the maruader would eventually be destroyed however it is as reasonable to expect that the Marauder would be able to destroy an Oracle (cheap, low ehp), a thorax (super cheap, super low ehp) in exchange.
The reason this is so is a) an inability to harm any fleet ship without another fleet eliminates any reason to engage with inferior numbers b) encourages blobbing c) its fracking stupid..
There is a penny arcade shirt with a heavy and a doctor. There is an arrow pointing to the doctor, with the legend. SHOOT THIS GUY FIRST. If I find out the RR was coming from an actual RR boat like an exeq in that fleet, then I'm going to split my sides laughing.
|
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
678
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 10:37:00 -
[158] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:
HOW IN HELL you have 8 HIGH SLOTS in damage on a marauder?
PLEASE, STOP POSTING.. and go to eve uni.
Its a pretty well understood shorthand for the marauder weapon bonuses.
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1208
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 10:41:00 -
[159] - Quote
Tauranon wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:
HOW IN HELL you have 8 HIGH SLOTS in damage on a marauder?
PLEASE, STOP POSTING.. and go to eve uni.
Its a pretty well understood shorthand for the marauder weapon bonuses.
Coming from him.. i doubt it... he sheer amount of nonsense he posts does not support that "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
678
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 10:43:00 -
[160] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote: No it was more the fault that 8 high slots of damage from an advanced battleship costing a billion + with fittings costing billions requiring many months of training can be completely defeated by one or two cheap low skilled cruiser remote repairers that somehow magically put ships together again.
One more thing I might add, is that had you brought along 1 friend with an alpha maelstrom, then you may in fact have been able to shoot more than the repairable buffer in a single salvo, which would have meant in 2 or 3 salvos that thing was going to pop, even if it could repair more dps than the Maelstrom fired.
ie there is a very good weapon out there for ruining cruiser buffers through RR. |
|
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1566
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 10:47:00 -
[161] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Tauranon wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:
HOW IN HELL you have 8 HIGH SLOTS in damage on a marauder?
PLEASE, STOP POSTING.. and go to eve uni.
Its a pretty well understood shorthand for the marauder weapon bonuses. Coming from him.. i doubt it... he sheer amount of nonsense he posts does not support that Taur is correct. In fact I had the equivalent of 16 high slots since I was using RHML which double the already doubled dps of the Golems missile launchers.
Tauranon wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: No it was more the fault that 8 high slots of damage from an advanced battleship costing a billion + with fittings costing billions requiring many months of training can be completely defeated by one or two cheap low skilled cruiser remote repairers that somehow magically put ships together again.
One more thing I might add, is that had you brought along 1 friend with an alpha maelstrom, then you may in fact have been able to shoot more than the repairable buffer in a single salvo, which would have meant in 2 or 3 salvos that thing was going to pop, even if it could repair more dps than the Maelstrom fired. ie there is a very good weapon out there for ruining cruiser buffers through RR. Why? I already had a ship that required more isk, more training and more balls to solo than the entire fleet I was attacking. |
Moneta Curran
Lunar Industries Ltd
270
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 11:03:00 -
[162] - Quote
I was somehow under the impression that this topic was not actually about your failed PVP endeavours.
|
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1566
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 11:10:00 -
[163] - Quote
Moneta Curran wrote: I was somehow under the impression that this topic was not actually about your failed PVP endeavours.
Its about CCP's inability to make changes that are relevant. Whether they are drones, RR, fleet or SoV based they're invariably changes that do nothing for playability and everything for null sec blob warfare.
In regards to the recent drone changes, they nerfed solo drone users, but made no difference at all to fleets of drone assisting morons using insta locking interceptors with 500 assisting drones. |
Batelle
Komm susser Tod
1489
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 15:35:00 -
[164] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote: You're obviously trolling I guess. Just a few examples of people training for things that are now useless.
Titan doomsday...
LOL WHAT. "CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"
Never forget. |
Slade Trillgon
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
2314
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 15:47:00 -
[165] - Quote
Moneta Curran wrote:Thomas Mickelson wrote:Ok so I use a Myrmidon for ratting, I got 4 curators and can usually rip stuff up before the rats even get into lock on range. Now all of a sudden they can't hit the broadside of a barn, and at that, Omnidirectional tracking links seem to be activitable now, and I thought they were passive before.
CCP plan to fix this? Or was this intentional? Nice way of showing you have been living under a rock for the last couple of months. Are you familiar with the concept of patch notes?
I am quite sick of tards throwing this around. Not all of EvE's playerbase are basement dwellers that can read every patch note or read every forum. Granted if you are the type that does not have time to read patch notes that should be explained at the begining and then take a massively passive nature to one's OP. But you sir are a **** along with whoever else screams "shoulda read the patch notes grrr slurpgurggleyarr" |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Academy The ROC
2241
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 15:49:00 -
[166] - Quote
Quote:Not all of EvE's playerbase are basement dwellers that can read every patch note or read every forum.
No, but presumably you do use the launcher.
At no point did you think "Hey, patch notes! Better check those out."? Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á |
Eram Fidard
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
755
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 15:50:00 -
[167] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote: Why? I already had a ship that required more isk, more training and more balls to solo than the entire fleet I was attacking.
Ladies and gentlemen, another sterling example of how this player does not get eve.
Did you start the game and train straight into a raven with heavy launchers, dual tank, and no drones at all?
Muffin... Poster is not to be held responsible for damages to keyboards and/or noses caused by hot beverages. |
Slade Trillgon
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
2314
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 15:51:00 -
[168] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Quote:Not all of EvE's playerbase are basement dwellers that can read every patch note or read every forum. No, but presumably you do use the launcher. At no point did you think "Hey, patch notes! Better check those out."?
But if you have been out for awhile, checking the patch notes could take your whole play time
The guy asked a simple question, without vitriol I may add, and he gets blasted with elementary school type response. Very **** like coming from aged males. |
Moneta Curran
Lunar Industries Ltd
270
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 19:59:00 -
[169] - Quote
Slade Trillgon wrote:Moneta Curran wrote:Thomas Mickelson wrote:Ok so I use a Myrmidon for ratting, I got 4 curators and can usually rip stuff up before the rats even get into lock on range. Now all of a sudden they can't hit the broadside of a barn, and at that, Omnidirectional tracking links seem to be activitable now, and I thought they were passive before.
CCP plan to fix this? Or was this intentional? Nice way of showing you have been living under a rock for the last couple of months. Are you familiar with the concept of patch notes? I am quite sick of tards throwing this around. Not all of EvE's playerbase are basement dwellers that can read every patch note or read every forum. Granted if you are the type that does not have time to read patch notes that should be explained at the begining and then take a massively passive nature to one's OP. But you sir are a **** along with whoever else screams "shoulda read the patch notes grrr slurpgurggleyarr"
Common sense would dictate that if something has been changed intentionally, it must have been documented in the patch notes. Failing to grasp this and creating another pointless thread here is nothing but a shameful display of cluelessness and poor judgement.
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8884
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 21:06:00 -
[170] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:In fact I had the equivalent of 16 high slots since I was using RHML See there's your problem. My EVE Videos 59-15 |
|
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1577
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 21:57:00 -
[171] - Quote
Batelle wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: You're obviously trolling I guess. Just a few examples of people training for things that are now useless.
Titan doomsday...
LOL WHAT. The original area of effect Doomsday. |
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University Minmatar Republic
256
|
Posted - 2014.02.01 01:33:00 -
[172] - Quote
Moneta Curran wrote:
Common sense would dictate that if something has been changed intentionally, it must have been documented in the patch notes.
Actually the RLMLand RHML cahnges were intentional but missed the patch notes :D
Just saying ... |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1577
|
Posted - 2014.02.01 02:49:00 -
[173] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:In fact I had the equivalent of 16 high slots since I was using RHML See there's your problem. Yeah because RHML are not the best battleship sized missile launcher to use to do highest dps against cruiser sized targets. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8885
|
Posted - 2014.02.01 03:15:00 -
[174] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:The original area of effect Doomsday. While they're not quite as ridiculously overpowered as they used to be, the ability to deliver 3 million alpha damage to a capital target is still very useful and incredibly powerful. See: HED-GP, B-R5RB. See Asakai for an example of where titans were neutered by their inability to use it.
Infinity Ziona wrote:Yeah because RHML are not the best battleship sized missile launcher to use to do highest dps against cruiser sized targets. They probably aren't, because of the reload timer. Ideally you should have been using cruise. My EVE Videos 59-15 |
Slade Trillgon
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
2388
|
Posted - 2014.02.03 17:33:00 -
[175] - Quote
Moneta Curran wrote:Slade Trillgon wrote:Moneta Curran wrote:Thomas Mickelson wrote:Ok so I use a Myrmidon for ratting, I got 4 curators and can usually rip stuff up before the rats even get into lock on range. Now all of a sudden they can't hit the broadside of a barn, and at that, Omnidirectional tracking links seem to be activitable now, and I thought they were passive before.
CCP plan to fix this? Or was this intentional? Nice way of showing you have been living under a rock for the last couple of months. Are you familiar with the concept of patch notes? I am quite sick of tards throwing this around. Not all of EvE's playerbase are basement dwellers that can read every patch note or read every forum. Granted if you are the type that does not have time to read patch notes that should be explained at the begining and then take a massively passive nature to one's OP. But you sir are a **** along with whoever else screams "shoulda read the patch notes grrr slurpgurggleyarr" Common sense would dictate that if something has been changed intentionally, it must have been documented in the patch notes. Failing to grasp this and creating another pointless thread here is nothing but a shameful display of cluelessness and poor judgement.
Common sense would dictate that one should read the OP, interpret from it that the poster did not read the patch notes and then recognize and see that the last question of the OP was, "Or is this intentional?"
All the first responder needed to do was say, 'Yes this change was intentional and you can read up on it in Patch # .......
But no this is general discussion where no one knows how to answer a question properly.
Point, set and match. |
Batelle
Komm susser Tod
1553
|
Posted - 2014.02.03 17:41:00 -
[176] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Batelle wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: You're obviously trolling I guess. Just a few examples of people training for things that are now useless.
Titan doomsday...
LOL WHAT. The original area of effect Doomsday.
Yeah, a lot of people cried when they got rid of it. Too bad though, it needed to go (I remember when they started alpha-ing entire capital fleets). But you cannot possibly be calling the current version useless. Doomsdays are the only reason all those titans died the other day. Doomsdays are the only reason to bring a titan into combat. Doomsdays are a perfect example of why CCP doesn't and shouldn't refund SP for simply changing something. "CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"
Never forget. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19134
|
Posted - 2014.02.03 17:49:00 -
[177] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Batelle wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: You're obviously trolling I guess. Just a few examples of people training for things that are now useless. Titan doomsday...
LOL WHAT. The original area of effect Doomsday. GǪwhich doesn't make the current doomsday useless. Calling it such just indicates that you have no clue about how to properly measure usefulness.
By the way, you have yet to come up with a single example of a change that GÇ£invalidate an entire line of ships / modules / skillsGÇ¥ or that invalidates skillspoints without a reimbursement. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Bellatren Star
BRAB0 The Volition Cult
56
|
Posted - 2014.02.03 18:43:00 -
[178] - Quote
I don't have too much of a problem with CCP nerfing Sentry Drone tracking as a Drone user what bothers me is the fact you now have to use Light Combat Drones to counter close fast moving Frigates and it's really really difficult to do that when you have 4 Frigates insta locking them and alpha'ing them off the field.
I wish they would have a look at trying to fix this. Are YOU covered? |
Arsine Mayhem
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
122
|
Posted - 2014.02.03 18:57:00 -
[179] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:Sentries are so last year. It's all about light combat drones now. Trust me. Mr Epeen
These stats also effect combat drones.
|
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University Minmatar Republic
266
|
Posted - 2014.02.04 09:35:00 -
[180] - Quote
Arsine Mayhem wrote:Mr Epeen wrote:Sentries are so last year. It's all about light combat drones now. Trust me. Mr Epeen These stats also effect combat drones.
1. No saneperson fits omnis to a boat using light drones.
2. Lights have had a significant buff with the drone shield recharge changes |
|
Moneta Curran
Lunar Industries Ltd
270
|
Posted - 2014.02.04 14:51:00 -
[181] - Quote
Slade Trillgon wrote:Moneta Curran wrote:Slade Trillgon wrote:Moneta Curran wrote:Thomas Mickelson wrote:Ok so I use a Myrmidon for ratting, I got 4 curators and can usually rip stuff up before the rats even get into lock on range. Now all of a sudden they can't hit the broadside of a barn, and at that, Omnidirectional tracking links seem to be activitable now, and I thought they were passive before.
CCP plan to fix this? Or was this intentional? Nice way of showing you have been living under a rock for the last couple of months. Are you familiar with the concept of patch notes? I am quite sick of tards throwing this around. Not all of EvE's playerbase are basement dwellers that can read every patch note or read every forum. Granted if you are the type that does not have time to read patch notes that should be explained at the begining and then take a massively passive nature to one's OP. But you sir are a **** along with whoever else screams "shoulda read the patch notes grrr slurpgurggleyarr" Common sense would dictate that if something has been changed intentionally, it must have been documented in the patch notes. Failing to grasp this and creating another pointless thread here is nothing but a shameful display of cluelessness and poor judgement. Common sense would dictate that one should read the OP, interpret from it that the poster did not read the patch notes and then recognize and see that the last question of the OP was, "Or is this intentional?" All the first responder needed to do was say, 'Yes this change was intentional and you can read up on it in Patch # ....... But no this is general discussion where no one knows how to answer a question properly. Point, set and match.
While you may be content with your dimwitted comeback, you fail to see that my original question, "Are you familiar with the concept of patch notes?" already covered all of those assumptions regarding the OP.
Please try to improve your reading comprehension skills before you try to lecture others on how to address silly questions.
I will concur that perhaps people like the OP and you do need to have everything spelled out for them in the most simple terms..
You presume that it is somehow our duty to inform the clueless and the lazy. It is not. |
Ruskarn Andedare
Lion Investments
428
|
Posted - 2014.02.04 15:32:00 -
[182] - Quote
Hasikan Miallok wrote:Arsine Mayhem wrote:Mr Epeen wrote:Sentries are so last year. It's all about light combat drones now. Trust me. Mr Epeen These stats also effect combat drones. 1. No saneperson fits omnis to a boat using light drones. 2. Lights have had a significant buff with the drone shield recharge changes
1. Unless those light drones are your point defence against targets that are too small and close for your sentries to track
2. Which doesn't help when the poor dears get alpha'd |
Slade Trillgon
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
2391
|
Posted - 2014.02.04 15:48:00 -
[183] - Quote
Moneta Curran wrote:Thomas Mickelson wrote:Ok so I use a Myrmidon for ratting, I got 4 curators and can usually rip stuff up before the rats even get into lock on range. Now all of a sudden they can't hit the broadside of a barn, and at that, Omnidirectional tracking links seem to be activitable now, and I thought they were passive before.
CCP plan to fix this? Or was this intentional? Nice way of showing you have been living under a rock for the last couple of months. Are you familiar with the concept of patch notes?
See, above we have a nice and simple question. No flames and simple statement about an observation and then asking if it was planned and if not if it has been recognized. Hell, he also admits that he may have missed the reported change.
Following that we have the typical GD ass hat response in the form of an insult and then a half assed attempt to point the OP in the some vague direction to the patch notes. Your response did nothing.
Moneta Curran wrote:While you may be content with your dimwitted comeback, you fail to see that my original question, "Are you familiar with the concept of patch notes?" already covered all of those assumptions regarding the OP.
Please try to improve your reading comprehension skills before you try to lecture others on how to address silly questions.
I will concur that perhaps people like the OP and you do need to have everything spelled out for them in the most simple terms..
You presume that it is somehow our duty to inform the clueless and the lazy. It is not.
You also seem to have missed my prior comment on how not everyone has the time to keep up with patch notes and the General Discussion is the place to come and ask simple questions like this.
P.S. Someone calling another out about insults when their original question was preceded by an insult is pure hypocrisy
P.S.S. If you really were an intelligent individual and wanted to actually help the community you would have provided the OP with a link to the patch notes that contained the changes....But I guess that was too much work for someone of your capacity. |
Moneta Curran
Lunar Industries Ltd
270
|
Posted - 2014.02.04 16:00:00 -
[184] - Quote
Slade Trillgon wrote: ..and the General Discussion is the place to come and ask simple questions like this.
Ehm, no.. it's not.. and since this is the cornerstone of your argument, you are completely wrong.
In the spirit of enlightening our misguided fellow players, let me provide you with a helpful link:
Eve New Citizens Q&A |
Pok Nibin
Filial Pariahs
218
|
Posted - 2014.02.04 19:36:00 -
[185] - Quote
Ships & Modules.... Don't fight it.-á Rejoin your Amarrian patriarchs.-á You know you want to. |
Slade Trillgon
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
2391
|
Posted - 2014.02.04 20:10:00 -
[186] - Quote
Moneta Curran wrote:Slade Trillgon wrote: ..and the General Discussion is the place to come and ask simple questions like this. Ehm, no.. it's not.. and since this is the cornerstone of your argument, you are completely wrong. In the spirit of enlightening our misguided fellow players, let me provide you with a helpful link: Eve New Citizens Q&A
Wow, so you provide that link to the New Citizens forum to prove an invalid point and not a link to the patch notes in your first response. Shaking my head. If you had put an once of this effort into your first response none of this would be going on.
EDIT: Technically there is a sub forum for every potential topic so technically GD is really a waste of space....with your line of thought that is. |
Moneta Curran
Lunar Industries Ltd
270
|
Posted - 2014.02.04 20:17:00 -
[187] - Quote
Pok Nibin wrote:Ships & Modules....
Right, forgot about that one.. anyway, they struck me as newbs.
|
Lugia3
Emerald Inc.
794
|
Posted - 2014.02.04 20:28:00 -
[188] - Quote
Because Archon blobs care about a microscopic amount of capacitor being used by the omni... "CCP Dolan is full of ****." - CCP Bettik |
Arsine Mayhem
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
123
|
Posted - 2014.02.04 20:54:00 -
[189] - Quote
Slade Trillgon wrote:Moneta Curran wrote:Thomas Mickelson wrote:Ok so I use a Myrmidon for ratting, I got 4 curators and can usually rip stuff up before the rats even get into lock on range. Now all of a sudden they can't hit the broadside of a barn, and at that, Omnidirectional tracking links seem to be activitable now, and I thought they were passive before.
CCP plan to fix this? Or was this intentional? Nice way of showing you have been living under a rock for the last couple of months. Are you familiar with the concept of patch notes? See, above we have a nice and simple question. No flames and simple statement about an observation and then asking if it was planned and if not if it has been recognized. Hell, he also admits that he may have missed the reported change. Following that we have the typical GD ass hat response in the form of an insult and then a half assed attempt to point the OP in the some vague direction to the patch notes. Your response did nothing. Moneta Curran wrote:While you may be content with your dimwitted comeback, you fail to see that my original question, "Are you familiar with the concept of patch notes?" already covered all of those assumptions regarding the OP.
Please try to improve your reading comprehension skills before you try to lecture others on how to address silly questions.
I will concur that perhaps people like the OP and you do need to have everything spelled out for them in the most simple terms..
You presume that it is somehow our duty to inform the clueless and the lazy. It is not. You also seem to have missed my prior comment on how not everyone has the time to keep up with patch notes and the General Discussion is the place to come and ask simple questions like this. P.S. Someone calling another out about insults when their original question was preceded by an insult is pure hypocrisy P.S.S. If you really were an intelligent individual and wanted to actually help the community you would have provided the OP with a link to the patch notes that contained the changes....But I guess that was too much work for someone of your capacity.
I like this. Fuktards in abundance in this game. |
Arsine Mayhem
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
123
|
Posted - 2014.02.04 20:56:00 -
[190] - Quote
Moneta Curran wrote:Slade Trillgon wrote: ..and the General Discussion is the place to come and ask simple questions like this. Ehm, no.. it's not.. and since this is the cornerstone of your argument, you are completely wrong. In the spirit of enlightening our misguided fellow players, let me provide you with a helpful link: Eve New Citizens Q&A
Umm, no, that's for noobs as you might gather from the name of it. |
|
Moneta Curran
Lunar Industries Ltd
270
|
Posted - 2014.02.04 21:28:00 -
[191] - Quote
Arsine Mayhem wrote:Moneta Curran wrote:Slade Trillgon wrote: ..and the General Discussion is the place to come and ask simple questions like this. Ehm, no.. it's not.. and since this is the cornerstone of your argument, you are completely wrong. In the spirit of enlightening our misguided fellow players, let me provide you with a helpful link: Eve New Citizens Q&A Umm, no, that's for noobs as you might gather from the name of it.
Yes...., so perfectly suitable for people who aren't familiar with patch notes. Noobs. |
Moneta Curran
Lunar Industries Ltd
270
|
Posted - 2014.02.04 21:29:00 -
[192] - Quote
double post removed |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
2636
|
Posted - 2014.02.04 21:35:00 -
[193] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone.
I want to officially clarify that the fact that drone attributes are not properly displaying in show info is a bug and that your Omnis are in fact applying their bonuses correctly. The issue with show info is a long standing bug that has to do with the way the client displays attributes on items that aren't your ship (or directly fitted to your ship). We're looking into getting it fixed, but it's not a simple issue.
As for the discussion on the strength of Sentry drones after this change, I will reiterate what I've said before. We don't want to make Sentries just like other weapons, the fact that they are very distinct with their own strengths, weaknesses and tactics is part of what makes them valuable to the game. We do always want to ensure that they have excellent strengths to make up for their special weaknesses. But the honest truth is that Sentries were too good relative to other comparable weapons. Their damage envelope (the combination of range, damage and tracking) is very good and was one of several contributing factors that were leading to Sentries becoming overly dominant in almost all areas of EVE. Like I said in the original post, the fact that these changes reduce the power of Omnis is completely intentional. Nerfing the base stats of sentries while leaving the incredibly effective Omnis was not going to be the best way to approach the issue, as that would leave us in a place where Sentries would have been underpowered when no Omnis are fitted and overpowered when people stack lots of them. We totally understand that bringing Omnidirectionals in line was a bitter pill to swallow for people who use Sentries a lot, but we are confident that the game is in a better place with these changes then it would be without them.
There are obviously lots of other changes we need to make to drones and the ships that use them, but the best way to approach these kinds of issues is in an iterative manner, making focused changes and watching the results carefully.
We also are aware that the Rattlesnake isn't in quite as strong of a place as many other Pirate BS right now, and that is high on our agenda at the moment.
So yes, there has been a nerf. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3143
|
Posted - 2014.02.04 21:46:00 -
[194] - Quote
Arsine Mayhem wrote:Moneta Curran wrote:Slade Trillgon wrote: ..and the General Discussion is the place to come and ask simple questions like this. Ehm, no.. it's not.. and since this is the cornerstone of your argument, you are completely wrong. In the spirit of enlightening our misguided fellow players, let me provide you with a helpful link: Eve New Citizens Q&A Umm, no, that's for noobs as you might gather from the name of it. As an Eve New Citizens Q&A forum regular, I can assure you that account age and experience matters not to asking questions there. It is a troll-free zone (though sometimes they sneak in for a drive-by) filled with people that try to help and answer all questions.
However, anything ship related really belongs in Ships & Modules.
I do recommend avoiding whines / tirades about broken mechanics, and instead phrasing the same message as "Did X change?" or "What am I missing?" or "How do I best accomplish X now?" and so forth. |
Winchester Steele
322
|
Posted - 2014.02.05 02:08:00 -
[195] - Quote
Katran Luftschreck wrote:MaligoLibens wrote:don't use a myrmidon. it is not a viable ship anymore. This is sad but true. I used to run L4s in a Myrmidon. Did it for over a year, loved every moment of it. Then came the first "drone hate" patch. Heavy drones became the laughing stock of EvE and your lights & mediums draw so much aggro that actually tanking your ship became pointless, because the rats never actually fired at you, just your drones. Traded up to a Gila, then a Rattlesnake, basically as an excuse to switch to sentries. At least those I know I can recall in time when twenty rats decide to alpha my drones one second after launch. But that wasn't good enough, obviously, because now they've nerfed all the sentries as well. Which comes as a total surprise to exactly no drone boat user ever. Good thing I still have mining to fall back on for my EvE excitement, eh?
For some reason I feel as though all your posts should be read in Mort Goldman's voice. Do you ever do anything besides cry?
At least Dinsdale brings tinfoil to the party.
"Please don't spit in my eggs, please don't spit in my eggs, please don't spit in my eggs."
... |
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University Minmatar Republic
269
|
Posted - 2014.02.05 03:00:00 -
[196] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:
So yes, there has been a nerf.
No one ever said otherwise.
Its a significant nerf for Rattlers/Geddons/Phoons etc using Garde.
However hull bonused ships like the Domi and Ishtar, especially if fighting from range with bouncers, are far less effected.
|
Signal11th
Northern Coalition.
1277
|
Posted - 2014.02.05 10:07:00 -
[197] - Quote
As usual CCP required fix to stop abuse of a certain mechanic effects everyone else apart from the people whom the fix was needed for. Powered by-áreaTh-áFilter V1.23 "All posts by this pilot are personal held views and not representitive of-áany-ácorp or alliance I am currently a member of. Like I'd give a-ásh*t anyway. God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!" I came fifth and won a toaster. |
Layla Firoue
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
54
|
Posted - 2014.02.05 12:23:00 -
[198] - Quote
Signal11th wrote:As usual CCP required fix to stop abuse of a certain mechanic effects everyone else apart from the people whom the fix was needed for.
It-¦s a nerf to the slow cats doctrine without involving mass Domi fleets too much exactly what the CFC wanted. |
Kitty Bear
Disturbed Friends Of Diazepam Disturbed Acquaintance
1202
|
Posted - 2014.02.05 13:54:00 -
[199] - Quote
MaligoLibens wrote:don't use a myrmidon. it is not a viable ship anymore.
yeah .. it stopped being an excellent drone boat with the addition of the bandwidth mechanism now it's just mediocre
like all nerfed things, it was overdone in the 1st instance |
Dreygun
Alexylva Paradox
74
|
Posted - 2014.02.05 14:57:00 -
[200] - Quote
I use sentries exclusively the nerf mainly makes the use of sentries more active because u have to overheat and swap scripts other than that the actual nerf if u are using them right is not to bad |
|
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
2204
|
Posted - 2014.02.05 15:01:00 -
[201] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone.
I want to officially clarify that the fact that drone attributes are not properly displaying in show info is a bug and that your Omnis are in fact applying their bonuses correctly. The issue with show info is a long standing bug that has to do with the way the client displays attributes on items that aren't your ship (or directly fitted to your ship). We're looking into getting it fixed, but it's not a simple issue.
As for the discussion on the strength of Sentry drones after this change, I will reiterate what I've said before. We don't want to make Sentries just like other weapons, the fact that they are very distinct with their own strengths, weaknesses and tactics is part of what makes them valuable to the game. We do always want to ensure that they have excellent strengths to make up for their special weaknesses. But the honest truth is that Sentries were too good relative to other comparable weapons. Their damage envelope (the combination of range, damage and tracking) is very good and was one of several contributing factors that were leading to Sentries becoming overly dominant in almost all areas of EVE. Like I said in the original post, the fact that these changes reduce the power of Omnis is completely intentional. Nerfing the base stats of sentries while leaving the incredibly effective Omnis was not going to be the best way to approach the issue, as that would leave us in a place where Sentries would have been underpowered when no Omnis are fitted and overpowered when people stack lots of them. We totally understand that bringing Omnidirectionals in line was a bitter pill to swallow for people who use Sentries a lot, but we are confident that the game is in a better place with these changes then it would be without them.
There are obviously lots of other changes we need to make to drones and the ships that use them, but the best way to approach these kinds of issues is in an iterative manner, making focused changes and watching the results carefully.
We also are aware that the Rattlesnake isn't in quite as strong of a place as many other Pirate BS right now, and that is high on our agenda at the moment. So yes, there has been a nerf.
And yes, the dev in question has zero clue about "balancing" weapon systems, and thinks wiping out the effectiveness of a weapon system that people throw millions of SP into and buy billions of ISK of ships dedicated to using that weapon system, all to cater to a vocal whiny bunch of null sec blobbers, is perfectly reasonable. Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |
Cyrek Ohaya
Perkone Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2014.02.05 15:44:00 -
[202] - Quote
Launcher/Turret projection has been nerfed in the past, and now sentry drones, and I don't think now it isn't the time to play victim, still, makes me wonder if CCP wants to tone down general damage projection but keep all EWAR ranges untouched.
This drone update might have come a little too harsh but don't you think 179km Wardens 3 omnis without rigs sounded a lot nasty? |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
2207
|
Posted - 2014.02.05 16:18:00 -
[203] - Quote
Cyrek Ohaya wrote:Launcher/Turret projection has been nerfed in the past, and now sentry drones, and I don't think now it isn't the time to play victim, still, makes me wonder if CCP wants to tone down general damage projection but keep all EWAR ranges untouched.
This drone update might have come a little too harsh but don't you think 179km Wardens 3 omnis without rigs sounded a lot nasty?
You can pick an choose your examples all day. Don't you think rails at 200 km is a bit nasty? Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |
Soldarius
Deadman W0nderland Test Alliance Please Ignore
506
|
Posted - 2014.02.05 16:24:00 -
[204] - Quote
Katran Luftschreck wrote:I suppose asking for a refund on all my sentry drone SP so I can put it into basic gunnery is out of the question?
So what you're saying is you trained the minimum skills to use the ship, modules, and drones, did not train support skills, and expect said equipment to function as well as before after they are properly balanced.
Train the damn support skills. Free Ripley Weaver! |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
2207
|
Posted - 2014.02.05 16:27:00 -
[205] - Quote
Soldarius wrote:Katran Luftschreck wrote:I suppose asking for a refund on all my sentry drone SP so I can put it into basic gunnery is out of the question? So what you're saying is you trained the minimum skills to use the ship, modules, and drones, did not train support skills, and expect said equipment to function as well as before after they are properly balanced. Train the damn support skills.
I have 121 M SP. You can see all my skills on Chribba's Eveboard. My ship support skills are PERFECT, as in all 5's.
And yes, I would indeed like the millions of SP I put into drones back to apply to other ships, now that drones are utterly useless in a PvE environment. Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
4584
|
Posted - 2014.02.05 16:28:00 -
[206] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone.
I want to officially clarify that the fact that drone attributes are not properly displaying in show info is a bug and that your Omnis are in fact applying their bonuses correctly. The issue with show info is a long standing bug that has to do with the way the client displays attributes on items that aren't your ship (or directly fitted to your ship). We're looking into getting it fixed, but it's not a simple issue.
As for the discussion on the strength of Sentry drones after this change, I will reiterate what I've said before. We don't want to make Sentries just like other weapons, the fact that they are very distinct with their own strengths, weaknesses and tactics is part of what makes them valuable to the game. We do always want to ensure that they have excellent strengths to make up for their special weaknesses. But the honest truth is that Sentries were too good relative to other comparable weapons. Their damage envelope (the combination of range, damage and tracking) is very good and was one of several contributing factors that were leading to Sentries becoming overly dominant in almost all areas of EVE. Like I said in the original post, the fact that these changes reduce the power of Omnis is completely intentional. Nerfing the base stats of sentries while leaving the incredibly effective Omnis was not going to be the best way to approach the issue, as that would leave us in a place where Sentries would have been underpowered when no Omnis are fitted and overpowered when people stack lots of them. We totally understand that bringing Omnidirectionals in line was a bitter pill to swallow for people who use Sentries a lot, but we are confident that the game is in a better place with these changes then it would be without them.
There are obviously lots of other changes we need to make to drones and the ships that use them, but the best way to approach these kinds of issues is in an iterative manner, making focused changes and watching the results carefully.
We also are aware that the Rattlesnake isn't in quite as strong of a place as many other Pirate BS right now, and that is high on our agenda at the moment. So yes, there has been a nerf. And yes, the dev in question has zero clue about "balancing" weapon systems, and thinks wiping out the effectiveness of a weapon system that people throw millions of SP into and buy billions of ISK of ships dedicated to using that weapon system, all to cater to a vocal whiny bunch of null sec blobbers, is perfectly reasonable.
We can talk about your tinfoil-hattery all day and night.
But it pales in comparison to the rank ignorance and foolishness one would have to have in order to believe that insulting game developers is the best way to get that same developer to listen to you.
For years you've been doing this, and rather than create a following that could exert pressure (that could lead to change you want) you've alienated every single possible ally you could have had and have actually made it EASIER for the people you spew hate at to succeed. There is nothing more destructive to the Dinsdale worldview than a Dinsdale post lol.
|
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
2214
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 00:46:00 -
[207] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone.
I want to officially clarify that the fact that drone attributes are not properly displaying in show info is a bug and that your Omnis are in fact applying their bonuses correctly. The issue with show info is a long standing bug that has to do with the way the client displays attributes on items that aren't your ship (or directly fitted to your ship). We're looking into getting it fixed, but it's not a simple issue.
As for the discussion on the strength of Sentry drones after this change, I will reiterate what I've said before. We don't want to make Sentries just like other weapons, the fact that they are very distinct with their own strengths, weaknesses and tactics is part of what makes them valuable to the game. We do always want to ensure that they have excellent strengths to make up for their special weaknesses. But the honest truth is that Sentries were too good relative to other comparable weapons. Their damage envelope (the combination of range, damage and tracking) is very good and was one of several contributing factors that were leading to Sentries becoming overly dominant in almost all areas of EVE. Like I said in the original post, the fact that these changes reduce the power of Omnis is completely intentional. Nerfing the base stats of sentries while leaving the incredibly effective Omnis was not going to be the best way to approach the issue, as that would leave us in a place where Sentries would have been underpowered when no Omnis are fitted and overpowered when people stack lots of them. We totally understand that bringing Omnidirectionals in line was a bitter pill to swallow for people who use Sentries a lot, but we are confident that the game is in a better place with these changes then it would be without them.
There are obviously lots of other changes we need to make to drones and the ships that use them, but the best way to approach these kinds of issues is in an iterative manner, making focused changes and watching the results carefully.
We also are aware that the Rattlesnake isn't in quite as strong of a place as many other Pirate BS right now, and that is high on our agenda at the moment. So yes, there has been a nerf. And yes, the dev in question has zero clue about "balancing" weapon systems, and thinks wiping out the effectiveness of a weapon system that people throw millions of SP into and buy billions of ISK of ships dedicated to using that weapon system, all to cater to a vocal whiny bunch of null sec blobbers, is perfectly reasonable. We can talk about your tinfoil-hattery all day and night. But it pales in comparison to the rank ignorance and foolishness one would have to have in order to believe that insulting game developers is the best way to get that same developer to listen to you. For years you've been doing this, and rather than create a following that could exert pressure (that could lead to change you want) you've alienated every single possible ally you could have had and have actually made it EASIER for the people you spew hate at to succeed. There is nothing more destructive to the Dinsdale worldview than a Dinsdale post lol.
Yeah, I have zero respect for most of the dev's, and the reasons are well-known and documented. But perhaps I scream at them because normal discourse has utterly failed in the past.
The meta-game is rigged. That is as clear as anything in the world of Eve. So I post because clearly it incites people like you, which gives me some modicum of pleasure. Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
19155
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 00:55:00 -
[208] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:And yes, the dev in question has zero clue about "balancing" weapon systems, and thinks wiping out the effectiveness of a weapon system that people throw millions of SP into and buy billions of ISK of ships dedicated to using that weapon system, all to cater to a vocal whiny bunch of null sec blobbers, is perfectly reasonable. When has this ever happened?
Quote:The meta-game is rigged. That is as clear as anything in the world of Eve. Which meta-game are you talking about, and how is it rigged? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
699
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 01:07:00 -
[209] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Yeah, I have zero respect for most of the dev's, and the reasons are well-known and documented. But perhaps I scream at them because normal discourse has utterly failed in the past.
The meta-game is rigged. That is as clear as anything in the world of Eve. So I post because clearly it incites people like you, which gives me some modicum of pleasure.
Except that people that previously might have engaged with you, now write it off as dinsdaletinfoil, a particularly thick and crunchy type of tinfoil used for the construction of particularly radiowave resistant hats and full body suits.
In any case, I have been using my proteus drone fit after the nerf, if you actually compare a myrmidon and a drone fit proteus, you'll see they are in fact very similar. (bandwidth, bonuses, gunpower is quite close etc).
With T2 omnis, I had to move the proteus to 40 km instead of 45 km to kill the station at the end of the maze, and since I was testing stuff, I killed dewak Humphries with garde IIs and spike m, and had to fly back about 6km to make Humphries fly into optimal of the drones since he orbits at 45.
The only problem I see is that the myrm can't carry sufficient drones at present, and therefore is fussily overreliant on mobile depots and its cargo to carry a spare drone to switch to a racial set to manage the shortened optimal in the more common way of switching drones (rather than rolling back as I did - which is feasible 2 gates deep in piths penal, but not so much in an anomaly).
As far as the metagame goes, I'll only ever say one thing to that, and that is moongoo nerf, which was a great thing for null generally and not done with respect to doing the CFC any favours. |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
794
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 01:20:00 -
[210] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone.
I want to officially clarify that the fact that drone attributes are not properly displaying in show info is a bug and that your Omnis are in fact applying their bonuses correctly. The issue with show info is a long standing bug that has to do with the way the client displays attributes on items that aren't your ship (or directly fitted to your ship). We're looking into getting it fixed, but it's not a simple issue.
As for the discussion on the strength of Sentry drones after this change, I will reiterate what I've said before. We don't want to make Sentries just like other weapons, the fact that they are very distinct with their own strengths, weaknesses and tactics is part of what makes them valuable to the game. We do always want to ensure that they have excellent strengths to make up for their special weaknesses. But the honest truth is that Sentries were too good relative to other comparable weapons. Their damage envelope (the combination of range, damage and tracking) is very good and was one of several contributing factors that were leading to Sentries becoming overly dominant in almost all areas of EVE. Like I said in the original post, the fact that these changes reduce the power of Omnis is completely intentional. Nerfing the base stats of sentries while leaving the incredibly effective Omnis was not going to be the best way to approach the issue, as that would leave us in a place where Sentries would have been underpowered when no Omnis are fitted and overpowered when people stack lots of them. We totally understand that bringing Omnidirectionals in line was a bitter pill to swallow for people who use Sentries a lot, but we are confident that the game is in a better place with these changes then it would be without them.
There are obviously lots of other changes we need to make to drones and the ships that use them, but the best way to approach these kinds of issues is in an iterative manner, making focused changes and watching the results carefully.
We also are aware that the Rattlesnake isn't in quite as strong of a place as many other Pirate BS right now, and that is high on our agenda at the moment.
Just for grins.
1) "We want drones to be different"......obviously why they mirrored Omni's off of Tracking Computers 2) Rattler is better than that hunk of crap Nestor.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: [one page] |