Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
fox targaryen
Nordwaffe
0
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 10:47:00 -
[61] - Quote
RIP crow and malediction |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1633
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 10:54:00 -
[62] - Quote
Milton Middleson wrote:Not Orious wrote:Damn you missiles! Damn you kiting ships! Real pilots brawl at zero. Ship rebalancing has been a real ***** for kiters thus far. It's pretty much all brawlers, all the time now, and anyone who wants to kite and fight outnumbered has **** for choices.
It is jsut the continuation of the trend that ccp have. Remove anything remotely resembling anythign tha can give players with brains and skills any chance against larger number.
CCP want us to use a single tactic. BRING MORE SHIPS.
Every day combat in eve become dumber.
Instead of finding counters to tactics they remove them.
Instead of nerfing all kiting ships in game, why not use a bit of creativity and for example make webbign drones useful? "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
WASPY69
Hard Knocks Inc.
336
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 10:54:00 -
[63] - Quote
Why are people crying about the dps so much? The main purpose of intys is to avoid bubbles and point and hold things while dps is on the way. Any damage is just an added bonus.
And for those that like to roam null looking for solo frigate fights these changes actually favor that, so stop whining, these are good changes. |
Gvu
Twenty Questions RAZOR Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 11:13:00 -
[64] - Quote
I don't think the Malediction needs any change. Other than that, +1 for the changes. |
Pliskkenn
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 11:26:00 -
[65] - Quote
So, no updates for the Claw and Crusader. Would that indicate that you believe them to be working as intended? |
Jamir Von Lietuva
LDK Sorry We're In Your Space Eh
23
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 11:35:00 -
[66] - Quote
Pliskkenn wrote:So, no updates for the Claw and Crusader. Would that indicate that you believe them to be working as intended? crusader is a good alternative to a taranis
claw is OKish and it is expected looking at all other Minmatar ships in the current meta |
Ulthanon Kaidos
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
0
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 12:02:00 -
[67] - Quote
Is there any reason in particular why the Raptor needed to have its mass and inertia increased? Caldari no longer have a sub-2 align time Interceptor. muh travel fits. |
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys Mordus Angels
2118
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 12:13:00 -
[68] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:...in Oceanus Light Missile Launchers will have their Rate of Fire decreased by ~6%.
Crow: Replace the 10% per level kinetic damage bonus with a 5% per level missile explosion radius bonus. -1 Lowslot +1 Highslot +1 Launcher +5 CPU
So (to my knowledge) there are two common applications for crows these days: the point and annoy crow of lowsec/fac war and the nullbear ganking crow.
With these changes the nullbear ganking crow (which typically hunts in packs of 10 or so, targeting ishtars and the like) loses a pretty useless kinetic bonus (try killing ishtars tanked for guristas with kinetic missiles, or a tengu which has ~90% native kinetic resists regardless of fitting ....yeah, no) in exchange for a damage application bonus against hostile tackle (which is quite useful). The loss of the lowslot in exchange for a hi/launcher slot means you swap a either a nano or a BCS for a launcher, assuming you were already running with a single MAPC and MSE. Swapping the BCS for a launcher is actually a net gain in non-kinetic dps.
Overall non-kin damage remains roughly equivalent or better, but damage application against hostile tackle is gained. So if anything, the nullbear hunting crow gets a slight buff.
On the other hand, the lowsec point-and-annoy crow (most commonly used for killing brawlers with LML's at range aka easy mode kiting, maybe in combination with a sensor damp) gets nerfed pretty hard. This would matter, except both the hookbill and the garmur can do the same exact job, better. In the case of the garmur, much better.
Overall, I don't really see why anyone would be upset by these changes. |
Lumpymayo
Jebediah Kerman's Junkyard and Spaceship Parts Co. Brave Collective
94
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 12:15:00 -
[69] - Quote
What is the logic of increasing the Raptors mass when a few patches ago a ship rebalance went into place where shield frigates had mass decreased and Amarrian Frigates had increased mass.
The Amarrian Frigates had increased mass so there would be a smaller percentage increase of mass when an armor plate was installed. Shield frigates had received decreased mass so they would take a much larger hit from the armor plate.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=325209 |
Max Kolonko
High Voltage Industries Ash Alliance
450
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 12:15:00 -
[70] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Dr Jihad Alhariri wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:One important module tweak that applies significantly to these ships (we'll be discussing it in more detail in an upcoming module balance blog) is that in Oceanus Light Missile Launchers will have their Rate of Fire decreased by ~6%.
Does this RoF reduction include Rapid Light Missile Launchers? No, just the frigate sized LMLs.
When You say "ROF reduction" You mean bonus or penalty, as its not always clear with the-lower-the-better stats? Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff? |
|
H3llHound
Koshaku Tactical Narcotics Team
35
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 12:36:00 -
[71] - Quote
Max Kolonko wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Dr Jihad Alhariri wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:One important module tweak that applies significantly to these ships (we'll be discussing it in more detail in an upcoming module balance blog) is that in Oceanus Light Missile Launchers will have their Rate of Fire decreased by ~6%.
Does this RoF reduction include Rapid Light Missile Launchers? No, just the frigate sized LMLs. When You say "ROF reduction" You mean bonus or penalty, as its not always clear with the-lower-the-better stats?
Its a penalty. A RoF of 10s becomes 10.6s |
Janeway84
Its a good day to die ORPHANS OF EVE
103
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 12:36:00 -
[72] - Quote
Why interceptors getting changed again when there are ship classes still waiting to get their tuning? |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
816
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 12:39:00 -
[73] - Quote
Janeway84 wrote:Why interceptors getting changed again when there are ship classes still waiting to get their tuning?
CCP can keep up with these non-updates for years instead of fixing actual important stuff like links, logis, caps and T3s. probably because it's easier, I guess. I think also because they don't like it when people get mad and complain on the forums, which is something that'll be happening a ridiculous amount if the proper broken stuff got fixed. |
RomeStar
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
524
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 12:43:00 -
[74] - Quote
Yeah Im calling Bullsh#t why not just get rid of LML completely because your just nerfing them into the ground like heavy missiles. Yeah I know adapt or die but why all the hate towards missles? Signatured removed, CCP Phantom |
Iv d'Este
Caldari Special Forces OLD MAN GANG
79
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 12:44:00 -
[75] - Quote
All will fly only on the Ares and Taranis. This boost Gallente. all on the fly Gallente ships. Already all fly to the Gallente ships in cruse size, now it will be in freegsize.
Amarr will not ships working at a distance disruptor. It was Malediction.
I am compelled fly gallente ships, as they are the best. |
MonkeyBusiness Thiesant
randomly named no tax corp v2
12
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 12:46:00 -
[76] - Quote
Ulthanon Kaidos wrote:Is there any reason in particular why the Raptor needed to have its mass and inertia increased? Caldari no longer have a sub-2 align time Interceptor. muh travel fits.
Still possible, via 2 istabs and 2 rigs, or just 3 istabs. |
RomeStar
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
524
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 12:46:00 -
[77] - Quote
PotatoOverdose wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:...in Oceanus Light Missile Launchers will have their Rate of Fire decreased by ~6%.
Crow: Replace the 10% per level kinetic damage bonus with a 5% per level missile explosion radius bonus. -1 Lowslot +1 Highslot +1 Launcher +5 CPU
So (to my knowledge) there are two common applications for crows these days: the point and annoy crow of lowsec/fac war and the nullbear ganking crow. With these changes the nullbear ganking crow loses a pretty useless kinetic bonus (try killing ishtars tanked for guristas with kinetic missiles, or a tengu which has ~90% native kinetic resists regardless of fitting ....yeah, no) in exchange for a damage application bonus against hostile tackle (which is quite useful). The loss of the lowslot in exchange for a hi/launcher slot means you swap a either a nano or a BCS for a launcher, assuming you were already running with a single MAPC and MSE. Swapping the BCS for a launcher is actually a net gain in non-kinetic dps. Overall non-kin damage remains roughly equivalent or better, but damage application against hostile tackle is gained. So if anything, the nullbear hunting crow gets a slight buff. On the other hand, the lowsec point-and-annoy crow (most commonly used for killing brawlers with LML's at range aka easy mode kiting, maybe in combination with a sensor damp) gets nerfed pretty hard. This would matter, except both the hookbill and the garmur can do the same exact job, better. In the case of the garmur, much better. Overall, I don't really see why anyone would be upset by these changes.
They need to nerf the garmur just because its expensive doesn't mean it has to be OP CCP. Get your head out of your arses and fix stuff that really needs fixing. Signatured removed, CCP Phantom |
Charlie Firpol
Noob Mercs Monkeys with Guns.
253
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 13:01:00 -
[78] - Quote
RomeStar wrote:PotatoOverdose wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:...in Oceanus Light Missile Launchers will have their Rate of Fire decreased by ~6%.
Crow: Replace the 10% per level kinetic damage bonus with a 5% per level missile explosion radius bonus. -1 Lowslot +1 Highslot +1 Launcher +5 CPU
So (to my knowledge) there are two common applications for crows these days: the point and annoy crow of lowsec/fac war and the nullbear ganking crow. With these changes the nullbear ganking crow loses a pretty useless kinetic bonus (try killing ishtars tanked for guristas with kinetic missiles, or a tengu which has ~90% native kinetic resists regardless of fitting ....yeah, no) in exchange for a damage application bonus against hostile tackle (which is quite useful). The loss of the lowslot in exchange for a hi/launcher slot means you swap a either a nano or a BCS for a launcher, assuming you were already running with a single MAPC and MSE. Swapping the BCS for a launcher is actually a net gain in non-kinetic dps. Overall non-kin damage remains roughly equivalent or better, but damage application against hostile tackle is gained. So if anything, the nullbear hunting crow gets a slight buff. On the other hand, the lowsec point-and-annoy crow (most commonly used for killing brawlers with LML's at range aka easy mode kiting, maybe in combination with a sensor damp) gets nerfed pretty hard. This would matter, except both the hookbill and the garmur can do the same exact job, better. In the case of the garmur, much better. Overall, I don't really see why anyone would be upset by these changes. They need to nerf the garmur just because its expensive doesn't mean it has to be OP CCP. Get your head out of your arses and fix stuff that really needs fixing.
The Crow nerf is hitting the Lowsec small-gang Crow the hardest, even though the reason for the Crow getting so many kills are the 0sec hunting-fleets. The new Crow will barely be able to fit 4 T1 launchers and a MWD and then it will have 0 PG left!
Nerf the range of the Crow to get it into the danger-zone. 60km range without any range mods on a ship with 40km targeting range is stupid anyway. Also, give people a reason to use T2 launchers. Precision missiles are 100% useless. Precision missiles should give pre-nerf range with ****** DPS. Your general bread-and-butter faction ammo should not have the highest range! |
Ransu Asanari
Powder and Ball Alchemists Union The Predictables
134
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 13:05:00 -
[79] - Quote
I really think the change from the kinetic damage to an explosion radius bonus for the Crow is a poor tradeoff, and I hope you'll rethink it. Here's why:
All of the gunnery Interceptors with a long range bonus (eg optimal range on the Ares) can use boosters to change the other values as needed:
-Need more Tracking? Take Drop. -Need more Optimal Range? Take Frentix. -Need more Falloff? Take Sooth Sayer.
Sure you have the various T2 ammo which can adjust as well but they're roughly on the same level, and a lot of the time, it's not worth using them as Faction ammo is superior from a pure damage perspective.
Now the only option you have for optimizing your missiles is Crash - which reduces the Explosion Radius. So the change to the Crow means that you'll now have less options for landing your damage, since this will now incur a stacking penalty.
Light missiles already apply their damage fairly well, and I find it dubious how much of an explosion radius bonus will be. The way I look at it, is that you may apply your damage a bit better against small targets - and the explosion radius bonus might make it beneficial to use Fury missiles more often instead of Faction ammo; but your damage potential is significantly reduced from the missing Damage/Level bonus, and you'll top out your potential damage faster against larger targets.
I'd rather see the damage bonus reduced in percentage in exchange for the removal of the Kinetic only bonus, or changed to a rate of fire bonus.
---
As for the overall reduction in LML rate of fire (reducing the DPS), I hope it's been looked at a whole, as the change affects a lot more ships than these two. I'm hoping the module devblog will have some new missile stat modification modules - as that had been discussed for a long time. Missiles need a much larger rebalance pass, as well as some new modules and boosters for flexibility.
The Explosion Radius bonus just means you'll top your damage out faster on anything larger than a Destroyer, and do less overall. I'm actually alright with the Crow doing less damage overall, since in my mind Interceptors are meant for tackling, and not doing damage.
But with that in mind - and considering the OP that "light missiles" were the problem, giving the Crow another high slot seems contradictory. I was overjoyed when the useless highslot on the Crow was removed in Rubicon, and a midslot given instead for additional utility. Adding it back seems pointless now.
Looking back on the Rubicon Interceptor Changes, no other Interceptor has less than 3 Lowslots. This really puts the Crow at a disadvantage in speed and agility potential with only 2 low slots, and mediocre base stats to start with.
What it is, is another nerf to the agility and speed of the Crow, since you now have to choose between a Damage Control, and a speed/agility rig, or go with even less tank. Since this is the second time the Crow and Malediction have been hit with this nerf bat since Rubicon, I'm pretty disappointed - they were already not the best at speed, damage, aligning, or target locking.
Please reconsider removing the 3rd low slot. Powder and Ball Alchemists Union - "Turning Lead into Gold since 2008" |
Bronson Hughes
Prophets of Fear
430
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 13:23:00 -
[80] - Quote
I like the direction you're going with the Malediction and Crow, and I say this as a dedicated Malediction and Crow pilot, but I'm a bit worried about how you're doing it with the Crow.
The Khanid line traditionally favors short-range missiles, so having the RoF bonus on the Malediction apply only to rockets is perfectly in line with this. I've always thought having a RoF bonus to light missiles was somewhat odd.
I really like the idea of adding a high and a launcher to the Crow, and I think the application bonus instead of kinetic damage bonus is great: not only does 4 launchers on a Crow model look better, but it cuts the ties to kinetic-only damage and gives it an edge with brawling with other frigates. I feel that a bonus to explosion velocity would be a better choice for application bonus, especially when dealing with other 'ceptors, but I'll take explosion radius.
However, I am sincerely worried about the fact that the extra high slot came from the lows and not the mids. With only two lows, there is no way the Crow can fulfill it's role effectively as a fleet tackler. It's already reasonably slow in 'ceptor terms, and only allowing it to have two speed mods will absolutely kill it. To a 'ceptor, speed is life, and by taking away a low slot from the Crow, you're effectively killing it. I think the fact that no other 'ceptor has two lows, whereas every other 'ceptor slot configuration has a counterpart, also throws the Crow out of line.
Please reconsider your proposed changes to the Crow. Take the extra high from the mids instead of the lows, and swap the application bonus to explosion velocity instead of explosion radius. CCP Falcon's thoughts on suicide ganking. Reading Comprehension: a skill so important it deserves it's own skillbook. I want to create content, not become content. |
|
Duffyman
Phonix Wings SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 13:28:00 -
[81] - Quote
PotatoOverdose wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:...in Oceanus Light Missile Launchers will have their Rate of Fire decreased by ~6%.
Crow: Replace the 10% per level kinetic damage bonus with a 5% per level missile explosion radius bonus. -1 Lowslot +1 Highslot +1 Launcher +5 CPU
So (to my knowledge) there are two common applications for crows these days: the point and annoy crow of lowsec/fac war and the nullbear ganking crow. With these changes the nullbear ganking crow loses a pretty useless kinetic bonus (try killing ishtars tanked for guristas with kinetic missiles, or a tengu which has ~90% native kinetic resists regardless of fitting ....yeah, no) in exchange for a damage application bonus against hostile tackle (which is quite useful). The loss of the lowslot in exchange for a hi/launcher slot means you swap a either a nano or a BCS for a launcher, assuming you were already running with a single MAPC and MSE. Swapping the BCS for a launcher is actually a net gain in non-kinetic dps. Overall non-kin damage remains roughly equivalent or better, but damage application against hostile tackle is gained. So if anything, the nullbear hunting crow gets a slight buff. On the other hand, the lowsec point-and-annoy crow (most commonly used for killing brawlers with LML's at range aka easy mode kiting, maybe in combination with a sensor damp) gets nerfed pretty hard. This would matter, except both the hookbill and the garmur can do the same exact job, better. In the case of the garmur, much better. Overall, I don't really see why anyone would be upset by these changes.
Agreed, these changes don't go nearly far enough to kill coward fleets. Interceptors shouldn't have DPS above 30 or 40 at most. Interceptors shouldn't be used for anything else than holding a target in place until DPS arrives. |
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
32
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 13:29:00 -
[82] - Quote
What do the mass changes mean effectively? I'm my own NPC alt. |
NiteNinja
The Black Dynasty Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
19
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 13:39:00 -
[83] - Quote
At his point do we really need MORE nerfs to missiles?
Why don't we just take missiles out of the game altogether?
Even with the cruise missile launcher buff, nobody uses them for PVP. Light Missiles and Rockets, and heavy assault missiles are the only missiles viable for PVP, and even then, there are better choices of ships than ones that use these platforms.
But with the already negligable DPS light missiles give (outside RLML, which the reload still sucks on 20 charges), might as well cross them off the list and make everything rocket and heavy assault ships.
But I digress. |
Leoric Firesword
Dark Fusion Industries Limitless Redux
83
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 13:42:00 -
[84] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: Crow: Replace the 10% per level kinetic damage bonus with a 5% per level missile explosion radius bonus. -1 Lowslot +1 Highslot +1 Launcher +5 CPU -10000 Mass
Hey fozzie? This is a buff not a nerf....just thought I'd let you know. :) |
Marian Devers
Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities
45
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 13:44:00 -
[85] - Quote
Players: don't give Crow a 4th mid, it's going to overpower it compared to other ceptors. CCP: *crickets*
Players: don't give interceptors bubble immunity, you're gonna have fleets of these things flying around. CCP: *crickets*
Players: told you! CCP: nerf LML!11111
Idiots... |
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots Black Legion.
149
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 13:44:00 -
[86] - Quote
Yeah this missile nerf hits more than just the venerable inties. CCP overstepped this one while again avoiding the huge shadow of more pressing issues.
So far, Oceanus is a downgrade. |
Bronson Hughes
Prophets of Fear
430
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 13:45:00 -
[87] - Quote
Leoric Firesword wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: Crow: Replace the 10% per level kinetic damage bonus with a 5% per level missile explosion radius bonus. -1 Lowslot +1 Highslot +1 Launcher +5 CPU -10000 Mass
Hey fozzie? This is a buff not a nerf....just thought I'd let you know. :) Two things:
1. Try fitting it. You'll notice no additional PG. 2. Try going fast enough to live with only two lows. CCP Falcon's thoughts on suicide ganking. Reading Comprehension: a skill so important it deserves it's own skillbook. I want to create content, not become content. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
702
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 13:52:00 -
[88] - Quote
Thank you for destroying the Malediction for a lot of applications and for removing the only alternative to the Crow. |
Madbuster73
V0LTA Triumvirate.
116
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 14:01:00 -
[89] - Quote
Diivil wrote:You should make all interceptors (and all ships for that matter) have a minimum align time of 2.1s which would be as low as you can go so that they could actually be caught. It's kinda boring to have ships in the game that can run any gate camp except a smartbombing one. And when those uncatchable ships can also fit a cyno and warp speed rigs to at 11 au/s and only cost 20 mil it's just stupid.
Yes, because you are so bad at pvp that you need a 20 man instalock gatecamp to kill that 1 Interceptor that is harrasing your mission runners.
Cry more you Goonie.
Learn how to PVP and get a ship that will kill the malediction that has pointed your missionrunner, instead of relying on your instalock gatecamps.
|
Bronson Hughes
Prophets of Fear
430
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 14:03:00 -
[90] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Thank you for destroying the Malediction for a lot of applications and for removing the only alternative to the Crow. I actually see the Malediction as being far more viable than the Crow after these changes. All it lost was some damage; it still has great speed, good durability, and is easy to fit. The Crow will maintain good damage and gain some application, but it'll be impossible to fit; no more MSE fits (unless you really want to use two fitting mods) since you'll need a fitting mod just to get 4x LMLs and a MWD on.
Basically, they're turning the Crow into a rocket brawler. With bonuses to missile range & application and scram range, it'll make a mean scram kiter, but it'll be horrible as a fleet tackler. CCP Falcon's thoughts on suicide ganking. Reading Comprehension: a skill so important it deserves it's own skillbook. I want to create content, not become content. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |