Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 47 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 17 post(s) |
Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
310
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 04:05:00 -
[1021] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:Xavier Thorm wrote:Also, can we get a less horrendously ugly model for the Gila already? get out if they change the ape carrying a briefcase im canceling sub(gila) |
Arthur Aihaken
Arsenite
3270
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 04:17:00 -
[1022] - Quote
Flyinghotpocket wrote:if they change the ape carrying a briefcase im canceling sub(gila) It does look better with the new graphics update. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Dorian Wylde
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
453
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 04:46:00 -
[1023] - Quote
Silivar Karkun wrote:
would have preferred a +1 drone bonus instead of that 500% bonus, its a unique bonus already for a non capital ship (the guardian vexor is the only subcap with that bonus), but CCP seems to agree in going over the supposed chart and give pirate ships an specialized role, much as T2, when they're supposed to be an upgrade above the other T1 ships, and as such have a general aplication.....
More drones means more lag. No ship will ever be getting that bonus back. That's why Interfacing was changed to +damage from +drones. |
Cannibal Kane
Somali Coast Guard Authority
3605
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 07:15:00 -
[1024] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Arthur Aihaken wrote:CCP Rise, please pimp my Mach next week... GÇó Drop one turret and turn it into a six-gun (looks better) GÇó Remove one high slot and extend an additional mid slot instead GÇó 37.5% rate of fire role bonus to offset the turret loss and here is me thinking the only battleship you fly is 18bil pimped CNR's.. 8-6-6 should be mach layout 7 turrets is fine allows a neut
That will kill the Armor Mach. Stop it...
"I saw him fight by the monument in Jita. He flowed in his Machariel like a Shinto spirit, 800MM shells sprouting in his passing. His hair flowed in the corona of his target's warp core breach. It was truly majestic. And while everyone stared in awe I stole the loot and ran off. Because I am like that." - NEONOVUS |
Catherine Laartii
Knights of Xibalba
147
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 10:40:00 -
[1025] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Xavier Thorm wrote:Also, can we get a less horrendously ugly model for the Gila already? It's a feature with Caldari ships. What about switching it to something like the Osprey instead?
I'd be down with that. Osprey is the sexiest of the fat-bird ships next to the prophecy. <3 |
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld White Mountain Coalition
1270
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 10:47:00 -
[1026] - Quote
hi Fozzie and Rise,
I don't think the changes to the Gila are making much sense, the Gallente bonus is the missile bonus when we all know that the gallente are not masters of missile technology, that's a caldari discipline. I think the role bonus should be a 50% bonus to kinetic and thermal missile damage and the gallente bonus should be a drone related advantage of some kind.
Also given the new changes to medium drones I think a 500% bonus to medium drone damage and hitpoints whilst attractive is a little too high and will surely result in a nerf at some time in the near future. We all know there's nothing more depressing than a nerf.
Love the phantasm though. Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction... |
Sgt Ocker
Last Bastion of Freedom
154
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 10:52:00 -
[1027] - Quote
Dorian Wylde wrote:Silivar Karkun wrote:
would have preferred a +1 drone bonus instead of that 500% bonus, its a unique bonus already for a non capital ship (the guardian vexor is the only subcap with that bonus), but CCP seems to agree in going over the supposed chart and give pirate ships an specialized role, much as T2, when they're supposed to be an upgrade above the other T1 ships, and as such have a general aplication.....
More drones means more lag. No ship will ever be getting that bonus back. That's why Interfacing was changed to +damage from +drones. True and of course there are so many Guristas ship out there the lag produced by them would be simply mind boggling.
I'd so be willing to pay to hear from a Dev, the logic behind the upcoming changes to Guristas Ships and the roles they are expected to fill.
NB; CCP Rise - it will be fun and give pilots new ways of using them - just won'y cut it, you tried that one with rapid launchers and aside from very limited niche situations, they are just not fun.
I always believed having developers who actually played the game they were designing would be good for the game.. Recent history is very quickly pushing that theory way way off into the distance. Simply removing ships and modules from roles they filled and not having viable alternatives is not game "development" as much as it is game changing and not good change.
Maybe the problem isn't that devs play the game so much as their closed minded opinions on how the game should be played by others.
When a company develops a new product or drastically changes an existing 1, they usually poll users in the planning stages to see if it is what their customers want or would use.. If the feedback in the planning stage is not good they go back to the proverbial drawing board. This doesn't happen in eve, devs get an idea (good or bad) and aside from a little tweaking (if there is enough outcry) users are stuck with it (good or bad). And before anyone says "the CSM represents players with devs and ccp" the CSM represent their "place" in eve and are by no means representative of the majority of players. Many players disagree with decisions made by CSM, which is pointless because they have no voice. Much the same as feedback devs base a lot of change on, comes from a very small pool of those it will affect. If CCP Rises attitude towards rapid launchers is to be the example of CCP's position on what players would like to see in the game they play. . . .Well yeah, if you worked for me and treated paying customers with that type of arrogance, you would very quickly be looking for another job.
|
Gargep Farrow
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
55
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 12:16:00 -
[1028] - Quote
Not sure how I missed this thread, but better late than never.
I find the changes on the Gila to be interesting enough to want to buy one and play around a bit.
Please consider the frequent requests for the extra bandwidth for a fifth small drone, an extra 25m3 to carry those drones, along with the standard 5 or 10 percent bonus to them.
Curious and nervous about what you are going to do to the Rattlesnake. |
Nam Dnilb
Universal Frog
149
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 12:47:00 -
[1029] - Quote
Gargep Farrow wrote:Not sure how I missed this thread, but better late than never.
I find the changes on the Gila to be interesting enough to want to buy one and play around a bit.
Please consider the frequent requests for the extra bandwidth for a fifth small drone, an extra 25m3 to carry those drones, along with the standard 5 or 10 percent bonus to them.
Curious and nervous about what you are going to do to the Rattlesnake.
Pretty much this. Drone bonused boat and can't even field a flight of unbonused ligths, a trait enjoyed by the majority of cruiser+ sized ships in the game. This needs to happen IMO. 25 bandwith for a full flight of lights, or at least some bonus to HP of lights. Without that it will end up a little too far into the corner of a "all or nothing" brawler. |
Gargep Farrow
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
55
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 12:47:00 -
[1030] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Maybe the problem isn't that devs play the game so much as their closed minded opinions on how the game should be played by others.
Sorry to cut your post down to such a small snippet, but the above if expanded it covers the main problem Eve has. Its not just the devs, its a good portion of the players also. "My play style is right and yours is wrong" is way too prevalent in the game. This also makes the idea of polling players on new changes almost worthless as 1 group will love a change and another will hate it with a passion. Well there is the "if both sides a bitching it must be a good change" option, but that can backfire badly
|
|
Gargep Farrow
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
55
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 12:51:00 -
[1031] - Quote
Nam Dnilb wrote:Gargep Farrow wrote:Not sure how I missed this thread, but better late than never.
I find the changes on the Gila to be interesting enough to want to buy one and play around a bit.
Please consider the frequent requests for the extra bandwidth for a fifth small drone, an extra 25m3 to carry those drones, along with the standard 5 or 10 percent bonus to them.
Curious and nervous about what you are going to do to the Rattlesnake. Pretty much this. Drone bonused boat and can't even field a flight of unbonused ligths, a trait enjoyed by the majority of cruiser+ sized ships in the game. This needs to happen IMO. 25 bandwith for a full flight of lights, or at least some bonus to HP of lights. Without that it will end up a little too far into the corner of a "all or nothing" brawler.
|
marVLs
581
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 14:16:00 -
[1032] - Quote
Gila (removed drone bandwidth):
Role bonus: - can deploy maximum 2 drones af any kind
- 200% hp and damage of light drones - 500% hp and damage of medium drones - 200% hp and damage of heavy drones
or something like this |
Lloyd Roses
Blue-Fire
561
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 14:22:00 -
[1033] - Quote
if it had just 5mbit in addition, that surely would't be so bad. Could still only use two massively bonused drones - but then there'd be a lone warrior II or ec-300 flying around, which would look quite silly in space.
A Gila (chunk of damage), two Hammerheads (chunk of damage each) and le WTF-drone. "I honestly thought I was in lowsec"
Moving pictures |
Naomi Anthar
323
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 14:32:00 -
[1034] - Quote
marVLs wrote:Gila (removed drone bandwidth):
Role bonus: - can deploy maximum 2 drones af any kind
- 200% hp and damage of light drones - 500% hp and damage of medium drones - 200% hp and damage of heavy drones
or something like this
What would stop pilots from using fighters/fighter-bombers - especially fighter bombers ? It would be silly if Gilas would be never anti capital platforms ;p |
Laiannah Sahireen
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
72
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 14:41:00 -
[1035] - Quote
marVLs wrote:Gila (removed drone bandwidth):
Role bonus: - can deploy maximum 2 drones af any kind
- 200% hp and damage of light drones - 500% hp and damage of medium drones - 200% hp and damage of heavy drones
or something like this
It's a boat that specialises in Medium drones, what is so hard to understand about this? Medium drones are going to be in a better place than you think come come summer.
Also, RLMLs are going to ruin the day of most frigates.
Honestly, 90% of the time I'm in EVE I'm PVPing in lowsec and I barely see any Gilas as it is. If I do, they're usually running sites. Suddenly they announce a change and the entire playerbase is making a fuss.
If the Gila is so precious to everybody, why do I never see anybody PVPing in one? |
Arthur Aihaken
Arsenite
3277
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 14:51:00 -
[1036] - Quote
Gargep Farrow wrote:Thanks for putting the proper justification out for the extra bandwidth. Yeah, +1. I don't see a problem with an additional 5mbit of bandwidth. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
KaDa en Bauldry
Aliastra Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 15:42:00 -
[1037] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:There's some sentiment (as there often seems to be) that these changes somehow pigeonhole ships into roles that we have explicitly defined rather than allowing for more open or generalized ships. I would say that while some roles have shifted (no more Sentry Drones for the Gila being the best example), Pirate Faction ships remain a set of very good generalists. We have an opportunity, because of their flavor and cost, to give them some very interesting capabilities that go a bit outside the box, which is great, but we haven't tried to restrict them to a specific environment at all. The Gila will still have plenty of PVE application and I think you'd be hard-pressed to find examples of lost capability for the rest of these ships resulting from the proposed changes. I'm (also) having some doubts on the Gila's PvE usefulness.
Frigates and cruisers can go after the drones at a moment's notice. Now since a so greatly buffed Hammerhead will be so good at dealing punishment for ONE drone, while I'm not exactly sure on the agro mechanics, I imagine they can pretty easily present a high-priority target, at which point I am probably forced to recall it, thus losing half my drone damage, instead of 20%.
As such, for level 1 and 2 I would rather take something, that can field 5 lights (especially an Ishtar with a flight of Gardes or the to-be-buffed Bouncers, should rats spawn far enough). For L3 and L4, ranges become more and more, thus sentries, for me Ishtar wins once more.
For belt-ratting, I can see some use in it, though with the fixed damage bonus a Navy Vexor could probably serve just as well (better?) with 5 velocity/tracking-buffed heavies, while still able to launch a full flight or two of light ECM drones should I be dropped suddenly (I always carry a bunch of those when in low in a drone ship, gives a warm fuzzy feeling when they save my bacon).
Exploration? SoE ships with cloak!
Anoms, Ishtar/SoE again.
Am I missing something of the awesomeness of the proposed Gila apart from being able to fit ...HML? RLML against interceptors? |
Arthur Aihaken
Arsenite
3277
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 16:11:00 -
[1038] - Quote
Rattlesnake drone change = Nestor appealGǪ? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
KaDa en Bauldry
Aliastra Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 16:30:00 -
[1039] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Rattlesnake drone change = more Nestor appealGǪ? In the case of the Nestor, they saw that what the frig and cruiser hulls could do, the battleship shouldn't try, and went for something different.
Super-sentries might be interesting though... |
Fabulous Rod
Darkfall Corp
32
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 17:36:00 -
[1040] - Quote
There is no good reason to change Gurstas so drastically. Many Guristas pilots trained to use sentries for a Snake and that is what we want to use.
Be a responsible dev instead of an negligent ******* and create "new and exciting" ships instead of shitting on your players and drastically changing old ones, please. You people clearly don't even understand your own game.
Look at all of the valid complaints over your horrible idea and do the right thing. |
|
Smelly PirateWhore
Reikoku Pandemic Legion
22
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 18:16:00 -
[1041] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Hexatron Ormand wrote:So there are the cruisers! Waited for them quite some time. Next thing i am looking forward to is the posting about the battleships. Going to give these a few days and hopefully post the BS near the end of the week.
or not |
Aglais
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
493
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 18:26:00 -
[1042] - Quote
Fabulous Rod wrote:There is no good reason to change Gurstas so drastically. Many Guristas pilots trained to use sentries for a Snake and that is what we want to use, not be forced into switching into Gallente ships due to an inability to see reason on the part of certain devs. Currently the only commonality between Guristas is the use of drones. Missiles, shield bonuses and the hull and ship maneuverability all belong to Caldari. There is no overlap with Gallente.
Be a responsible dev instead of an negligent ******* and create "new and exciting" brawler ships instead of shitting on your players and drastically changing old ones, please. You people clearly don't even understand your own game and have your head way too far up your own ass.
Look at all of the valid complaints over your horrible idea and do the right thing.
Your argument is literally "I don't like what you did stop trying to fix and optimize things and instead introduce more pointless ships/factions because THATS how you rebalance things, you add more things to balance". What do you even mean by "no overlap with Gallente" anyways? I suppose the fact that they were both sentry platforms has gone completely over your head, somehow. It's not stats. It's ROLES. Besides, if you trained to use sentries on a Rattlesnake, did you know that in fact it requires Gallente Battleship to fly? So picking up a Dominix for use as a sentry boat really isn't that much of a stretch.
tl;dr you don't understand the changes, you're projecting ("...clearly don't even understand (the) game and have your head way too far up your own ass."), and indeed, the Devs will look at the valid complaints and do the right thing.
They'll probably tweak the new Gila to have better functionality against a wider range of shiptypes but otherwise keep it roughly the way it's on the path to becoming. And ignore your angry unconstructive attack on their efforts. |
Arthur Aihaken
Arsenite
3278
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 18:46:00 -
[1043] - Quote
Aglais wrote:Your argument is literally... Don't feed the trollGǪ I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Hasril Pux
Red Cabal
1
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 19:20:00 -
[1044] - Quote
Insulting posts directed at developers only serve to aggravate their minds. An aggravated mind can't even think straight about what you are saying because it's too spun up by the noise of your angry attitude. You are not helping yourself or anyone who might agree with your concerns if you are constantly peppering your words with insults.
That being said, I don't like the proposals concerning Guristas ships either. In a Gila or a Rattlesnake I have personally never felt outclassed by Ishtars and Dominixes respectively. I have always felt that the shield tank and use of missiles combined with the supreme versatility of a drone boat has been a big enough difference to make the Guristas line a very unique and intriguing option.
With the current proposal I see the Gila losing all ability to function efficiently in the roles I currently use it in and have planned for the future. As a Gila pilot I use sentry drones and light drones almost exclusively. I barely ever use medium drones at all. I like being able to drop onto the field like a brick ****house, hold position, drop sentries and apply instant reliable damage, while still having the option to switch tactics on the fly and brawl whenever I want.
While the idea of having two super drones is a cool idea, I don't like my Gilas being forced to brawl with medium drones alone.
I agree that Guristas ships need to be changed to bring them up to speed. I disagree with the sentiment that they need to be so drastically different than other drone boats as to sacrifice bandwidth and diminish the effectiveness and variety of tools at their disposal. A Worm can now only field 2 E-war/Repair/Salvage drones, a Gila only 4.
No one seems to be complaining about the loss of the 50% range bonus on missiles. Neither am I, that has always seemed like an unnecessary bonus on these ships that didn't fit with any of my uses for them. Maybe that could be switched out for the 50% bonus to damage for kinetic/thermal missiles. And then I could safely justify drawing a missile between the teeth of my Guristas bunny-skull like a big cigar. That's got to be the most reasonable argument posted so far.
Include an increase (over the current 10%) in drone hitpoints/damage to focus Guristas ships more on raw striking power and endurance which would emphasize a more conventional approach as a contrast to the advanced tracking and range capabilities of Gallente ships.
|
Fabulous Rod
Darkfall Corp
32
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 19:47:00 -
[1045] - Quote
Hasril Pux wrote: No one seems to be complaining about the loss of the 50% range bonus on missiles. Neither am I, that has always seemed like an unnecessary bonus on these ships that didn't fit with any of my uses for them.
Don't say no one is complaining about it. The velocity bonus greatly helps to in torpedo fits and shortens the time between target switches for cruise missiles.
If these ships need balance, fine. But why unnecessarily take things away from them and gimp so severely(20 drone bandwidth) ? We chose to fly these ships because of their high versatility. The only people who like these changes are people who don't fly Guristas. |
Hasril Pux
Red Cabal
3
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 19:51:00 -
[1046] - Quote
Noted. Rather I should say, less people. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
622
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 19:52:00 -
[1047] - Quote
Fabulous Rod wrote:Hasril Pux wrote: No one seems to be complaining about the loss of the 50% range bonus on missiles. Neither am I, that has always seemed like an unnecessary bonus on these ships that didn't fit with any of my uses for them.
Don't say no one is complaining about it. The velocity bonus greatly helps to in torpedo fits and shortens the time between target switches for cruise missiles. If these ships need balance, fine. But why unnecessarily take things away from them and gimp so severely(20 drone bandwidth) ? We chose to fly these ships because of their high versatility. The only people who like these changes are people who don't fly Guristas.
damage-bonused cruise will probably outdamage and outrange torpedoes, without all the other horrible problems torpedoes get (constant reloads, ridiculous charge size, and yeah, laughable range). you're only trading versatility here when swapping sentries for mediums. |
Fabulous Rod
Darkfall Corp
32
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 19:54:00 -
[1048] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:Fabulous Rod wrote:Hasril Pux wrote: No one seems to be complaining about the loss of the 50% range bonus on missiles. Neither am I, that has always seemed like an unnecessary bonus on these ships that didn't fit with any of my uses for them.
Don't say no one is complaining about it. The velocity bonus greatly helps to in torpedo fits and shortens the time between target switches for cruise missiles. If these ships need balance, fine. But why unnecessarily take things away from them and gimp so severely(20 drone bandwidth) ? We chose to fly these ships because of their high versatility. The only people who like these changes are people who don't fly Guristas. damage-bonused cruise will probably .
try not to talk out of your *******. Thanks. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
622
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 19:59:00 -
[1049] - Quote
Fabulous Rod wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Fabulous Rod wrote:Hasril Pux wrote: No one seems to be complaining about the loss of the 50% range bonus on missiles. Neither am I, that has always seemed like an unnecessary bonus on these ships that didn't fit with any of my uses for them.
Don't say no one is complaining about it. The velocity bonus greatly helps to in torpedo fits and shortens the time between target switches for cruise missiles. If these ships need balance, fine. But why unnecessarily take things away from them and gimp so severely(20 drone bandwidth) ? We chose to fly these ships because of their high versatility. The only people who like these changes are people who don't fly Guristas. damage-bonused cruise will probably . try not to talk out of your *******. Thanks.
what do the stars mean |
Kitty Bear
Disturbed Friends Of Diazepam Disturbed Acquaintance
1258
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 20:40:00 -
[1050] - Quote
KaDa en Bauldry wrote:
Super-sentries might be interesting though...
oh no. they can't give the snake a bonus to sentries, because then it would overlap with the dominix
so the snake will get 2 super heavy drones because that doesn't overshadow other ship lines
that logic was the Dev's btw not mine, on why the gila got 2 mediums - because Ishtar
and people don't understand why it's such a stupid, ******, fuckwit change |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 47 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |