Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Charlie Jacobson
306
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 19:56:04 -
[61] - Quote
Maybe remove the skill point loss on death while we're nerfing T3s to the ground. :)
I support James 315 and the New Order of Highsec
|
Katrina Oniseki
Revenent Defence Corperation Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
3421
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 19:57:46 -
[62] - Quote
I am disappointed to see CCP making band-aid changes at seemingly random moments when a full balance pass could have been made on T3's already by now. There have been plenty opportunities to work out and finalize a balance pass, but they have not been made yet.
Ch+½j+ì Katrina Oniseki
~ (RDC) Chief Operations Officer
~ [I-RED] Director of Internal Affairs
|
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1604
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 19:58:11 -
[63] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:lol @ fixing t3s = 'nerfing wspace playstyle'
why are you guys are actually happy only ever flying the same 5 ships all the time
Wasn't that the end goal of T3, making it so you could live in a WH becuase your ship was supposed to be at least "OK" at most roles so you didn't have to bring many different one? |
Zomgnomnom
Royal Black Watch Highlanders DARKNESS.
57
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 20:01:34 -
[64] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:lol @ fixing t3s = 'nerfing wspace playstyle'
why are you guys are actually happy only ever flying the same 5 ships all the time Wasn't that the end goal of T3, making it so you could live in a WH becuase your ship was supposed to be at least "OK" at most roles so you didn't have to bring many different one?
Yes. He isn't really considering the logistical and storage issues with wormholes. The problem is that the thing that makes a passive fit Tengu able to be useful in a C3/4 makes them stupid Tanky in Nullsec fleet fights. This is likely why while nerfing the buffer they increased the passive recharge, to keep them useful to you WH folks :) |
Chris Winter
Winters Are Coming
627
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 20:05:59 -
[65] - Quote
Wait...the armor T3s can already get (significantly) more EHP than the Tengu, and yet you're nerfing the Tengu's tank more than the armor ones? How on earth is that reasonable? |
Catherine Laartii
Imperium Technologies Evictus.
482
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 20:14:22 -
[66] - Quote
Fozzie, I'm gonna say it now, so you can get it early in the balance phase:
IT'S THE RESISTS.
7.5% bonus is all well and good, but you NEED to bring the resists, at least on everything but the adaptive sub, down to Interdictor level. Lower resists is what reduces the absurd million-plus ehp you can pull on ships like the Proteus. Keeping high resists on subs like the Adaptive augmenter encourages cooperative gameplay like spider-tanking, while ensuring that local active and passive tanks don't become too powerful. |
LUMINOUS SPIRIT
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
690
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 20:14:58 -
[67] - Quote
Passive regen is interesting.
Not sure if +15% is that much though, I would hope for a bigger boost. |
Grookshank
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
45
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 20:16:22 -
[68] - Quote
Ok, T3 hp and - at least for the hp subs - signature nerf.
Can you please accompany this with a nerf to bombers please, since you make the last subcap, that was not already dying to bombers like flies, weaker to bomb damage? |
Deacon Abox
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
467
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 20:23:46 -
[69] - Quote
The Twitch player is quite bad, freezes and drops. Don't know what you said
CCP, there are off buttons for ship explosions, missile effects, turret effects, etc. "Immersion" does not seem to be harmed by those. So, [u]please[/u] give us a persisting-áoff button for the jump gate and autoscan visuals.
|
Arthur Aihaken
X A X
4083
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 20:36:01 -
[70] - Quote
Catherine Laartii wrote:7.5% bonus is all well and good, but you NEED to bring the resists, at least on everything but the adaptive sub, down to Interdictor level. Lower resists is what reduces the absurd million-plus ehp you can pull on ships like the Proteus. Keeping high resists on subs like the Adaptive augmenter encourages cooperative gameplay like spider-tanking, while ensuring that local active and passive tanks don't become too powerful. This is actually not a bad idea, but I'd be more inclined to adjust the non-adaptive subs to Recon Cruiser levels.
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
|
Komodo Askold
No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad
304
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 20:36:55 -
[71] - Quote
Looks like a promising first approach to Strategic Cruiser rebalance. Time will say if further tweaking is needed in Defensive Subsystems. Looking forward to more, as a wormholer :) |
Lyron-Baktos
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
472
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 20:39:28 -
[72] - Quote
Give T3's bonuses if flown in WH space but none in kspace. That will keep them great in the small gang pvp of wh space but not the blobby fights off null |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2735
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 20:42:40 -
[73] - Quote
These changes seem soft handed, why should a cruiser start with 3650, then get 25% buff from skills then another 37.5% from subsystem skills?
Proteus is looking at 6273 HP with level 5 skills, and that is before modules and resists. That needs to be toned down IMO |
japoke105 Olacar
House of the Dead Monkey SpaceMonkey's Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 20:51:55 -
[74] - Quote
For the Love of god nerf the freaking Ishtar, like last patch |
Derath Ellecon
Blue Sun Exploration Situation: Normal
2389
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 20:53:19 -
[75] - Quote
Charlie Jacobson wrote:Maybe remove the skill point loss on death while we're nerfing T3s to the ground. :)
Yes, please make the only ship that makes me retrain a skill over again easier to kill. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2019
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 20:53:22 -
[76] - Quote
Could we possibly consider giving the Loki a shield boosting bonus for one of its subs? One of the lesser used subs getting a halfway decent bonus or replacing the bonus for a very good boosts to shield boosters.
Seems odd that the cal dark have active bonus considering the pattern of most Calderon ships is in resists or shield amount. |
The Ironfist
Nordbot Capitals Northern Associates.
93
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 21:10:29 -
[77] - Quote
Hello CCP Fozzie,
Finally something on the T3 front which is great. Now I'd like to ask if you can find it within you to finally do something about the Legion and Loki PowerGrid issues on pretty much all their ENGINEERING subsystems. You might be wondering why I'm bringing this up well. Tengu and Proteus can fit the biggest medium longrange guns in the game 425MM RAILS and still fit for all tank and fit a MWD without the need of any fitting mods/riggs/implants yet the Loki and Legion can not they are forced to go with either fitting Rig/mod or implant which seems kind of strange to me. As you have to sacrifice either DPS or TANK on these two yet the other two can have the best of both worlds.
I'd love to hear your thoughts on that. Thanks for your time. |
Typo Interobang
Astral Inferno
19
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 21:26:05 -
[78] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:the proper full nerf had better be soon and it had better be actually proper, unlike this.
Or what? Perhaps a strongly worded forum post? Fozzie said more changes were in the pipeline.
CCP Fozzie wrote:As many of you know, Strategic Cruisers are extremely powerful ships that see common use across EVE. We have said for a long time that we want to do a comprehensive balance pass on them, buffing some aspects of these ships and nerfing some other aspects. That larger set of changes is still in the works, but in the meantime we are making a targeted set of changes to the Defensive Subsystems on the four T3 Cruisers.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
15227
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 21:44:04 -
[79] - Quote
Theses ships will still be walking away with battleship like buffers. You need to hit them harder.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2735
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 22:08:33 -
[80] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Theses ships will still be walking away with battleship like buffers. You need to hit them harder. I agree, the buffer subs need to be reduced to 5% per level and IMO the base HP needs to be brought down to cruiser levels not "somewhere in between cruisers and battlecruiser" areas |
|
Alundil
Isogen 5
870
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 22:21:56 -
[81] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:Rowells wrote:Wander Prian wrote:Rowells wrote:First
Why do the armor subs get less nerf than the tengus shield sub? Imo the armor subs are extremely powerful considering you can out tank every single subcap using them. Because they don't have nifty value like shield regen in armor that they could dump the remaining bonus into without screwing up other stuff besides tanking I honestly don't see passive regen being anywhere near as powerful as an extra 100k+ ehp though. Nice number you pulled out of your butt there, anything else hiding up there with it? Iirc proteus can pull 320k and legion can do 270k with only T2 mods. I believe the highest non-belonged set up I've seen on tengu reached 170 maybe.
BL flies a RailGu setup that easily (and cheaply) hits over 200k EHP before links, etc etc. Legions in a fleet.....those don't happen unless in wspace and they are definitely notn pushing 270k EHP in typical configurations. Same thing with Proteus. No one uses them as a fleet doctrine outside of wspace and those typical configurations are, again, far less tanky than the RailGu seen in 00 (usually on the order of 120k-130k EHP).
I'm right behind you
|
Anthar Thebess
891
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 22:25:14 -
[82] - Quote
5% per level or increase more base signature.
Capital Remote AID Rebalance
Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.
|
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
157
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 22:34:26 -
[83] - Quote
Rowells wrote: Iirc proteus can pull 320k and legion can do 270k with only T2 mods. I believe the highest non-belonged set up I've seen on tengu reached 170 maybe.
No way you can get above 100kehp on just t2 mods without implants and being able to fit modules in mids and high slots.
With this nerf we get ships that aren't versatile(t3 cruisers can't change modes like the t3 destroyers), have less dps then a hac , less ehp like a hac . So basicly a useless ship. They even ecm/damp/tracking disrupt/neut/long point/paint worse then a T2.
Next meta will be command ships with t2 recons.... .
|
Alundil
Isogen 5
870
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 22:49:17 -
[84] - Quote
Aliventi wrote:CCP Fozzie would you please present the numbers showing the current HP stats of a Tengu with supplemental screening fit, a Legion with adaptive plating fit, and Proteus with adaptive plating fit; then compare them to the soon to be nerfed versions? Essentially please give us numerical proof that the Tengu deserves a 5% nerf AND a 200 base HP nerf while the Legion and Proteus only deserve a 2.5% nerf. I have a feeling it does, but I am not 100% sure on how to calculate the numbers. As I mentioned in another comment
same number of damage mods in the lows Typical 00 fleet Tengu (think BL. RailGu for example) will bring >450 dps @ 40km or ~260ish @ 130km (un bonused lock range is 86km). All the while pushing ~206k EHP pure T2 fit. Before links
Typical wspace RailProt (because that's the only place you'll generally see a proteus doctrine) will bring >600 dps @ 18km or ~360 dps @ 65km. All the while pushing ~128k EHP and that's with some faction tank mods for fitting. Before links.
Typical wspace Ham Legion (because that's the only place you'll generally see a legion doctrine and lol at beam legion in land of neuts) will bring >500 dps @ 16km or ~390 dps @ 30km. All the while pushing ~165k EHP and that's with some faction tank mods for fitting. Before links.
So, basically Tengu with the Supplemental Screening sub far outshines what the proteus and legion are capable of in terms of tank without sacrificing much at all in terms dps, while remaining far more mobile and with far more range.
It's really not that hard to figure out why Tengu Supplemental Screening is seeing a 10% to 5% reduction and the other two are only going from 10% to 7.5%
I'm right behind you
|
Alundil
Isogen 5
870
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 23:03:32 -
[85] - Quote
Smelly PirateWhore wrote:No idea what changes will be in store but if there's one thing I really, really would like to see is the Interdiction Nullifier sub and Covert Ops sub moved to the same category, i.e. offensive or whatever. That way someone has to choose either to A) be nullified OR B) be cloaky. Both at the same time are just ridiculous, especially coupled with the reasonably high agility of a tech 3 cruiser. The only way to catch a cloaky-nullified cruiser currently is for the pilot to seriously, SERIOUSLY balls up. All is required is the most basic level of competence and you are nigh-on invulnerable.
Cloaky-nullified t3 jumps in, aligns and cloaks. Re-sebo'd interceptor immediately burns at t3 and scores a decloak. Unfortunately the time it takes the interceptor to close the distance plus the added time of having to then select and lock the t3 is far more than is required for that t3 to have aligned and be entering warp. The only way that t3 is getting caught is either A) he is unlucky and spawns too close to an object to be able to cloak up (incredibly unlikely unless you have the gate surrounded by a decent-sized fleet, or have deposited cans/drones around the gate, which is of course an exploit), or B) if he has mistimed his cloak and it is not ready to be activated again since the last activation. Point B is now far less likely than in the past due to a helpful countdown indicator depicting exactly when that cooldown has finished.
I'm not even gonna get started on cloaky-nullified t3s flying around with fittings and a mobile depot in cargohold to fly to and from systems in which they will plex/run missions etc...
so yeah sorry for rant but to reiterate: I think the cloaky and nullify subs should both be on the same slot I don't fly a nullified T3 setup because, honestly, if I need to be nigh uncatchable and cloaky I'll use a covops for far less risk and I don't do dumb things like try and use a T3 cruiser as a hauler. That said, making the cloak and nulli subs both into the same sub class (offensive) would completely kill the use of the nullification sub. T3 are fat. And unless tricked out for agility don't align very well at all. The time to warp is ~6s or more on all of them. What you have an issue with is the cloak+MWD trick but that is in play with a great number of hulls and not just nulli T3 setups. This is because of server tick. Want a better chance of catching them? Move to London (and no I"m not joking).
Other than that - your suggestion/wish would see a massive drop in the usage of nulli subsystems (if that's even possible) because no one in their right mind would choose nulli over cloak when cloak+MWD is still a "thing".
I'm right behind you
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
11934
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 23:09:29 -
[86] - Quote
While these are fine and dandy...
Do not neglect to fix the Legion's cloak subsystem. It is completely borked.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Alexis Nightwish
89
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 23:18:01 -
[87] - Quote
Sad. You used 'nudge' when you needed to use 'cludge'.
The base HP is still unchanged from their ridiculous level (about *twice* the amount of their navy/faction/T2 counterparts for those wondering) The per level bonus is still full re-tard, especially on the armor tankers. These ships continue to have full T2 resists and THREE rig slots.
And this is just their defensive attributes. I didn't even get into links, nullification and cloaking concurrently, neither nullification nor covert reconfig penalizing their defense, nullification not harming their offense, etc. etc. etc. which results in these ships outclassing every other cruiser, battle cruiser, and battleship in the game (other than the Ishtar and VNI which apparently are not really getting nerfed either).
There's just no way you can be so blind to their level of broken-ness, so I wonder why you don't actually fix them for the good of the game.
You know, with Phoebe I thought CCP was starting down the path of nerfing **** that's glaringly broken with a righteous fury. Seems old habits die hard even if you fire everyone.
Fear not strategic cruiser apologists! Your ships are unharmed and your tears are unfarmed!
CCP only approaches a problem in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
|
Owen Levanth
Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration
370
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 23:32:50 -
[88] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:While these are fine and dandy...
Do not neglect to fix the Legion's cloak subsystem. It is completely borked.
The Legion does not have a cloak subsystem. It's actually a mislabeled suicide subsystem.
|
Lloyd Roses
865
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 23:36:05 -
[89] - Quote
Alexis Nightwish wrote: And this is just their defensive attributes. I didn't even get into links, nullification and cloaking concurrently, neither nullification nor covert reconfig penalizing their defense, nullification not harming their offense, etc. etc. etc. which results in these ships outclassing every other cruiser, battle cruiser, and battleship in the game (other than the Ishtar and VNI which apparently are not really getting nerfed either).
If you can choose between 1 damage mod and nullification or 2 damage mods and no nullification, that's not *no downsides*. Neglecting a better offensive option to go with a worse offensive option but added utility is not 'losing out on nothing*.
I GÖÑ Sleipnir
|
Predator BOA
Bastards Of Anarchy System Inc. Northern Associates.
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 00:43:58 -
[90] - Quote
Gday Guys
It seem like an interesting Buff and Nerf with this Subsystem. But question is there going to be and Nerf or Buff with the Armor or Shield Resistance with the changes? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |