Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 58 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
Sister Bliss
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
68
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:07:00 -
[151] - Quote
Skia Aumer wrote:Cherry Yeyo wrote:Its so easy to bomb and wipe out an entire fleet I'm sure you did it many times, wouldn't be a problem to link your killboard. Or would it? Bomber were there for ages, and for ages there were large BS fleets. If a fleet has a proper anti-bomber support, it's close to impossible to bomb them.
It's never impossible to bomb a fleet, difficult yes, but not impossible. Bombers are incredibly low-risk and cheap to fly while the impact they have is completely disproportional. Despite my love of bombers and obliterating BS fleets they have had (in my opinion) a negative impact on the game by virtually eliminating the BS class of ships from the battlefield. Similarly for Tier 3's in fact.
The only BS fleets you tend to see now are Navy Apocs, Tempest Fleets and Megas (due in part to their low signature radius) and Apocs (cheap Napoc to counter Ishtars). Virtually every other BS hull (barring boutique fleet setups) is relegated to be mothballed when bombers are so prevalent. I know this isn't a bomber thread but I hope it is being looked at. |
Akasha Mayan
Paladin Order Fidelas Constans
2
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:07:00 -
[152] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:
We expect that some of you will feel this is far too gentle on the Ishtar, and we understand that (it's what we heard from the CSM as well), but we get releases very often now and we're happy to be conservative here, rather than nuke it out of the game, and just make more changes if they're needed in the following release.
Note for clarity: Hyperion release date is August 26
We will think this is far too gentle, because it is far too gentle. A month to a fix that won't have an effect, then 2 months for you to realise this, then another month to decide what, another month to actually do another fix is too slow. We log in (or don't) on a daily basis to not bother taking fights (against ishtars) that we don't need to take but might, if they weren't so ridiculous.
Please just fix it now.
|
Duckslayer
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
24
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:09:00 -
[153] - Quote
also, arent these adjustments database tweaks? Why do we have to wait a month for them to come into effect. Literally change something at DT tomorrow. See how it goes. Adjust again in a weeks time. Add "Agile development" to your CV.
All this fannying about to change database values is remedial |
Fredric Wolf
Black Sheep Down Tactical Narcotics Team
64
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:11:00 -
[154] - Quote
Duckslayer wrote:Fredric Wolf wrote:Duckslayer wrote:[img]http://i.imgur.com/5yUfi0k.png[/img]
Geddon seems totally balanced yo. How about you put 800's in your cap booster instead of 25s unless you are tying to make it missleading. after looking at that fit further I have no idea what you are trying to get across with that? No skills either being used. Its a ship that with 6 days of training you can get in. Its a noble idea by my alliance to get newbies into something useful for cap fights almost instantly. The fit gets fed cap by carriers, but you can put 800s in the cap booster too. Its supposed to be a no skill fit Look how ridiculously useful it is in comparison to any other 6 day old battleship fit you care to work My point was more "CCP Rise is terrible at balance" as that is his baby right there. A bit cryptic im sorry
Ah, thanks for the reply and clearing up the confusion. Yes if that is something a 6 day old character can get into that is a little out of whack. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1634
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:14:00 -
[155] - Quote
Ugly Eric wrote: Make all the cruiser size droneboats have medium drone bonuses. Not heavy nor sentry. Like Gila, but with 5 drones. Having BS sized weapon bonuses to aply BS damage and range to a cruiser just makes no sence whatsoever.
Do you really want the vexor, navy vexor and the ishtar to be virtually the same? Senturies are not really a BS weapon system but I agree that their damage projection kind of makes them seem like one. +1 |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
643
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:14:00 -
[156] - Quote
How much further do you want to nerf the Isthar EHP? A Shield Ratting Buffer Ishtar has around 23k EHP with a 700 DPS at 45 km range (and you can honestly only really tank Serp and Guri with it; Angel, Blood and Sansha are not tankable with it in most cases. An Armor Ishtar has around 500 DPS with Gardes at 45 km range (no idea on the HP, as I don't use such a crappy ship).
Where's the problem? |
Misaniovent
Origin. Black Legion.
0
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:16:00 -
[157] - Quote
What about the Sacrilege? Currently the Deimos does significantly more damage and tanks about as well. What about recon balance? The Curse and the Pilgrim are both in desperate need of attention. |
Skia Aumer
Atlas Research Group
80
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:17:00 -
[158] - Quote
Sister Bliss wrote:The only BS fleets you tend to see now... What you see now may have very little to do with bombers. For example, it's really annoying to make 10 to 20 jumps to get a fight while in a battleship. Why, if you can use Ishtar instead? My point stands - bombers and battleships have a very long mutual history. And now we have MJD.
|
Soldarius
Deadman W0nderland Test Alliance Please Ignore
743
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:17:00 -
[159] - Quote
The fact that the Ishtar is the only cruiser-sized ship with bonuses to large weapons is absurd and unbalanced. It is essentially a super ABC without any of the penalties associated with glass-cannon ABCs, much greater velocity, smaller sigRad... it's absurdly OP.
There are a lot of options that can be explored when it comes to Sentry Drones and the Ishtar. I've listed a few ideas below.
Change the Heavy Drone velocity and optimal bonus to include all drones except sentries. Make it velocity only.
Change the sentry tracking bonus per level of HAC skill to include all drones except sentries.
Reduce Ishtar drone bay size. Alternatively, make sentries twice as large. WTF, Ishtar drone bay is as big as the Domi's.
Double the bandwidth requirement of Sentries. Increase the available bandwidth of ships designed to field sentries. Pilots will still be limited to 5 drones by skills, unless they are in a capital ship with Drone Control Units fitted.
Bandwidth is an entirely under-utilized resource. There is no real reason not to use it as an actual limiting factor, rather than a pseudo-resource that almost never matters. We've already seen a little of this with Amarr ships.
Personally, when I first heard of sentry drones years ago, I thought they were like an automated turret that would work without any oversight. Not very intuitive. GÇ£I personally refuse to help AAA take space from itself so it can become an even shittier version of itselfGÇ¥ -Grath Telkin, 2014. |
Duckslayer
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
25
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:19:00 -
[160] - Quote
Isnt Gila new FOTM over Ishtar anyway? |
|
Dr Ngo
JESUS CHRIST IT'S A LION GET IN THE CAR WE FORM VOLTRON
13
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:19:00 -
[161] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:
PS - how would you feel about an 8/4/7 Tempest?
Not that enthused here. The Mael is a dedicated 8-gun shield beast and the Phoon is a wonderful Frankenstein monster but there is something about the pest that just feels unique. The utility highs and ambiguous slot layout make it feel kind of like a pirate faction bs lite that gives it a clear identity.
If it's going to be changed then I think it would be better to push it a bit more toward the new geddon and tweak some stuff to give it a bonus that really makes that extra mid slot pop when you choose to armor tank it. |
|
CCP Rise
C C P C C P Alliance
4318
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:21:00 -
[162] - Quote
Impressively scattered discussion so far. I can respond to a few things directly:
Anything related to the tournament - the tournament has no impact on game balance decisions. We handle tournament balance using tournament rules and I don't think we would ever postpone balance changes based on the tournament schedule. We want to try and make sure tournament participants are informed of incoming balance changes but we will never make compromises to the whole player base because of a tournament.
"Battleships are not in a good place, you crazy Rise" - an important distinction here is that I meant battleships are in a relatively good place WITHIN the class. Whether or not they are healthy relative to other classes is more complicated, but if there's issues there (because of bombers for instance) we would more likely want to deal with that problem from the other direction (by making changes to bombers for instance) rather than changing every BS to compensate. Between Duckslayer's insults he mentioned MWD cap use on BS being a problem which I agree with and I may try to get a change for that in shortly.
Tempest - like watching this discussion, happy to see that a significant chunk of people seem to prefer it the way it is now.
Ishtar - really want to emphasize how we would rather take smaller steps more often than big ones more rarely. After some more feedback here we will definitely revisit and make sure we are happy with this change for this release.
Keep it comin @ccp_rise |
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
724
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:23:00 -
[163] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Impressively scattered discussion so far. I can respond to a few things directly:
Anything related to the tournament - the tournament has no impact on game balance decisions. We handle tournament balance using tournament rules and I don't think we would ever postpone balance changes based on the tournament schedule. We want to try and make sure tournament participants are informed of incoming balance changes but we will never make compromises to the whole player base because of a tournament.
Battleships are in a good place - an important distinction here is that I meant battleships are in a relatively good place WITHIN the class. Whether or not they are healthy relative to other classes is more complicated, but if there's issues there (because of bombers for instance) we would more likely want to deal with that problem from the other direction (by making changes to bombers for instance) rather than changing every BS to compensate. Between Duckslayer insulting me he mentioned MWD cap use on BS which I agree with and I may try to get a change for that in shortly.
Tempest - like watching this discussion, happy to see that a significant chunk of people seem to prefer it the way it is now.
Ishtar - really want to emphasize how we would rather take smaller steps more often than big ones more rarely. After some more feedback here we will definitely revisit and make sure we are happy with this change for this release.
Keep it comin
why do you think battleships are in a good place? I never see them used for anything. |
Rheba
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
6
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:25:00 -
[164] - Quote
Misaniovent wrote:What about the Sacrilege? Currently the Deimos does significantly more damage and tanks about as well. What about recon balance? The Curse and the Pilgrim are both in desperate need of attention.
This, It gets a resist bonus but has 2 less low slots than the zealot. I try to fit one every now and then and it just hurts my brain. All i ever wanted in this game is a good armor tanking missile cruiser. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
734
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:25:00 -
[165] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote: Ishtar - really want to emphasize how we would rather take smaller steps more often than big ones more rarely. After some more feedback here we will definitely revisit and make sure we are happy with this change for this release.
Keep it comin
How do you feel about breaking out the sentry bonus to hitpoints and damage from the base hitpoints and damage bonus so that sentries can be tweaked separately from small / medium / heavy drones? This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
Skia Aumer
Atlas Research Group
80
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:25:00 -
[166] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:how would you feel about an 8/4/7 Tempest? How about just plain buff in EHP? |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1454
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:26:00 -
[167] - Quote
Dr Ngo wrote:CCP Rise wrote:
PS - how would you feel about an 8/4/7 Tempest?
Not that enthused here. The Mael is a dedicated 8-gun shield beast and the Phoon is a wonderful Frankenstein monster but there is something about the pest that just feels unique. The utility highs and ambiguous slot layout make it feel kind of like a pirate faction bs lite that gives it a clear identity. If it's going to be changed then I think it would be better to push it a bit more toward the new geddon and tweak some stuff to give it a bonus that really makes that extra mid slot pop when you choose to armor tank it.
Yet you simply do nto see them around. Within the last 1 year is the single ship I have least seen around. Not a single time outr alliacne killed one.. because they are more rare than the dodo.
Being unique does nto pay if you are horrible.
The ship is simpy outmatched completely bu typhoon and malestrom. I do nto think 8/4/7 is the right way to fix it, but as it is is a HORRIBLE and inneficient ship. So comepsnate on soft stats what it lacks on slow layout and damage it would need to weight less than ANY battleship (includign the mordus legion and machariel).
The typhoon can outtank, out move, out accelerate, outdamage our project the tempest. The maelstrom takes competely the arti platform role or the super tank role. So how do we make the tempest USEFUL? Give it a purpose? "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Oddsodz
The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare.
94
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:26:00 -
[168] - Quote
This is getting dam stupid. Again I Am getting hit with a drone neft bat due to BLOCs in Nullsec heavy CSM moaning about how they cant blob harder because of drones.
Before the Kronos patch I had perfect t2 sentry drones skills. After the patch, I did not. Now Comes the next patch on the line and again I am getting the neft to my sentry drones again because the nullsec CSM blocs complaining. DID YOU SEE ANYBODY ELSE COMPLAIN? How about the likes of me who is not part of a block of any kind? Who PvP's in small gang and solo? Where the ISHTAR sentry drones has real trouble hitting anything smaller than a battlecruiser? And oh great, you are going to neft it's speed too. Great, Now my Armor fit is even more Sexually Molested in the anus region.
To end my rant before I get a forum ban.
DO NOT CHANGE THE ISHTAR ONE BIT. |
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
1598
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:26:00 -
[169] - Quote
If anything I wouldn't mind seeing one of the tempest's lows get moved up to mid or a hit point tweak.
Moving a mid to low makes it a less compelling Typhoon.
RE Ishtar I like the new small, measured changes approach. Will be a good habit to get into and make the full reworks more significant. #RiotPlaybook "Alekseyev Karrde: mercenary of my heart." -Arydanika, Voices from the Void
Hero of the CSM Noir./Noir. Academy Recruiting: www.noirmercs.com |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1456
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:27:00 -
[170] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:How much further do you want to nerf the Isthar EHP? A Shield Ratting Buffer Ishtar has around 23k EHP with a 700 DPS at 45 km range (and you can honestly only really tank Serp and Guri with it; Angel, Blood and Sansha are not tankable with it in most cases. An Armor Ishtar has around 500 DPS with Gardes at 45 km range (no idea on the HP, as I don't use such a crappy ship).
Where's the problem?
adn wich other hac deals 700 dps at 40 km? "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
|
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
848
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:27:00 -
[171] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:CCP Rise wrote:Impressively scattered discussion so far. I can respond to a few things directly:
Anything related to the tournament - the tournament has no impact on game balance decisions. We handle tournament balance using tournament rules and I don't think we would ever postpone balance changes based on the tournament schedule. We want to try and make sure tournament participants are informed of incoming balance changes but we will never make compromises to the whole player base because of a tournament.
Battleships are in a good place - an important distinction here is that I meant battleships are in a relatively good place WITHIN the class. Whether or not they are healthy relative to other classes is more complicated, but if there's issues there (because of bombers for instance) we would more likely want to deal with that problem from the other direction (by making changes to bombers for instance) rather than changing every BS to compensate. Between Duckslayer insulting me he mentioned MWD cap use on BS which I agree with and I may try to get a change for that in shortly.
Tempest - like watching this discussion, happy to see that a significant chunk of people seem to prefer it the way it is now.
Ishtar - really want to emphasize how we would rather take smaller steps more often than big ones more rarely. After some more feedback here we will definitely revisit and make sure we are happy with this change for this release.
Keep it comin why do you think battleships are in a good place? I never see them used for anything.
against other battleships :P ... part of the problem is T3's ... they do everything better at a similar price.. Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
848
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:28:00 -
[172] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:How much further do you want to nerf the Isthar EHP? A Shield Ratting Buffer Ishtar has around 23k EHP with a 700 DPS at 45 km range (and you can honestly only really tank Serp and Guri with it; Angel, Blood and Sansha are not tankable with it in most cases. An Armor Ishtar has around 500 DPS with Gardes at 45 km range (no idea on the HP, as I don't use such a crappy ship).
Where's the problem? adn wich other hac deals 700 dps at 40 km?
cerb ... mainly cos HAM range is the same as torps.. Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1637
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:28:00 -
[173] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote: "Battleships are not in a good place, you crazy Rise" - an important distinction here is that I meant battleships are in a relatively good place WITHIN the class. Whether or not they are healthy relative to other classes is more complicated...
It's irrelevant whether they are good in their own class as we are playing a sandbox MMO. They have virtually no advantages over smaller combat ships in the game +1 |
|
CCP Rise
C C P C C P Alliance
4319
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:28:00 -
[174] - Quote
Quote:why do you think battleships are in a good place? I never see them used for anything.
If you read the text you quoted you will see that I said battleships as a whole getting used isn't what I said was in a good place, rather that battleships are in a pretty good place relative to other battleships.
Also, even though you've been very unlucky not to see them at all, I can assure you they are used for things. @ccp_rise |
|
Corey Lean
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:28:00 -
[175] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:why do you think battleships are in a good place? I never see them used for anything. He meant in a good place compared to each other within the class. No matter than no one can use a shield BS fleet anymore without getting obliterated by bombs.
Ishtars and interceptors online continues |
Aareya
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
23
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:30:00 -
[176] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Ishtar - really want to emphasize how we would rather take smaller steps more often than big ones more rarely. After some more feedback here we will definitely revisit and make sure we are happy with this change for this release.
I think the community understand this. CCP has aligned the development process to support more frequent releases that allow an iterative approach to balance changes.
However, while small chances might be bandaid fixes, the ishtar still is the only HAC that gets multiple bonuses to battleship sized weapons. So while there are small, iterative changes, is the long term vision to make the ishtar deviate from the rest of the HAC class? Or can we expect Muninns to get a bonus to 800mm autocannons? Twitter:-á-á @AareyaEVE |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
725
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:31:00 -
[177] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Quote:why do you think battleships are in a good place? I never see them used for anything. If you read the text you quoted you will see that I said battleships as a whole getting used isn't what I said was in a good place, rather that battleships are in a pretty good place relative to other battleships. Also, even though you've been very unlucky not to see them at all, I can assure you they are used for things.
eh. if you count highsec pve and addled nullsec people, I guess they are a bit. pls fix T3s and caps so they can be relevant again. |
Rheba
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
6
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:32:00 -
[178] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Quote:why do you think battleships are in a good place? I never see them used for anything. If you read the text you quoted you will see that I said battleships as a whole getting used isn't what I said was in a good place, rather that battleships are in a pretty good place relative to other battleships. Also, even though you've been very unlucky not to see them at all, I can assure you they are used for things.
If you type the word Sacrilege i would be happy just to know that you know it exists
|
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
848
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:32:00 -
[179] - Quote
Rise .. any thoughts on changing the optimal range bonus too falloff instead? .. on the ishtar Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Rab See
Fool Mental Junket
94
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:34:00 -
[180] - Quote
Ishtar - how many times?
x Ishtar in fleet - always, convo, i'm training for Ishtar.
Its an "ishtar fleet with scimi support". They can apply DPS at every range, and of any chosen type. More than the Tempest you propose at massively better range.
Please god nerf it into oblivion like the:
- 'Hurricane' (more fart in a hurricane now)
- Vagabond, slower than its T1 counterpart - 20x the price.
- Munnin, crap dps, crap range, zero tank - amazing that anyone would use it over the Ishtar.
- Cynabal ... it gets there fast, it kites, it ... applies crap dps until it dies or it runs.
Holy cow - why so gentle with THE MOST OVERPOWERED SHIP ever. It eclipses the Tengu of old, it transcends 90% of the battleship line. There is nothing else flying thats competitive. 5 of these vs 5 of anything? The only opposition is another 5 of these.
Find a 3/10, 4/10. 5/10. 6/10 DED, inside. Guarantee, an Ishtar. Covert Besegied Mordu site, Ishtar!!! Mission in your Ishtar! PVE or PVP ... yes - you created a bettter OP Tengu.
Every single player I know is training or using one of these, every ALT of every single player is training or using one of these.
Broken, so fix it with a sledgehammer like everything else, not poke it a bit. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 58 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |