Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 24 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
675
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 14:27:11 -
[31] - Quote
Tyr Dolorem wrote:Why are you nerfing the drones not the hulls that are the problem?
Good question.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Lord LazyGhost
Bear Bones Brigade The Bastards.
488
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 14:27:19 -
[32] - Quote
Tyr Dolorem wrote:Why are you nerfing the drones not the hulls that are the problem?
because its easier |
MasterGlorfy
CyberShield Inc Triumvirate.
4
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 14:28:43 -
[33] - Quote
I'm disappointed with these changes. Nerfing the weapon system over the ships really seems to have worked out poorly in the past (railgun/tengu , hml/drake).
Given how well CCP did with taking feedback on the Jackdaw balancing and generating an exciting bonus, I expect quite a bit more than a sentry-drone damage/optimal/tracking/falloff numbers game. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12836
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 14:29:15 -
[34] - Quote
Tyr Dolorem wrote:Why are you nerfing the drones not the hulls that are the problem? Because both the drones and the hulls are problems, and the solutions will involve ongoing changes to both.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
675
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 14:30:51 -
[35] - Quote
Lord LazyGhost wrote:Tyr Dolorem wrote:Why are you nerfing the drones not the hulls that are the problem? because its easier
Stomping the Armageddon into the ground because of the double bonus on the Domi can work, but upto a point.
Though, there's also the issue of carriers employing them - this can't effectively be balanced on a hull basis.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Alexhandr Shkarov
Swamphole Inc. Swamphole
11
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 14:31:23 -
[36] - Quote
I hope one day the Ishtar loses any sentry bonuses, and instead is more tailored to heavy-drone platforms. It retains a lot of the power but no longer the range that sentries can project damage at. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1083
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 14:32:26 -
[37] - Quote
where are the ongoing changes to combat drones to make them viable |
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1772
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 14:34:54 -
[38] - Quote
I'm on board with the idea of sentry ships being too strong.
I'm not on board with the concept of nerfing the weapon system instead of the broken hulls.
While you remove 3% dps, drone boats still run around with double 10/7.5 bonuses, drone boats still run around with the same PWG / CPU levels than other ships of their class, even though they don't have to fit weapons (!), ishtars can still use battleship weapons...
So yeah... its too little, too far away from the real issue. But at least the conclusion that something needs to change with sentries is good.
Signature Tanking Best Tanking
Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1233
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 14:37:01 -
[39] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Tyr Dolorem wrote:Why are you nerfing the drones not the hulls that are the problem? Because both the drones and the hulls are problems, and the solutions will involve ongoing changes to both.
Unless I (and everyone I know) is wrong, you're vastly overstating the drones themselves.
The issue is 95% in the hulls (and that's being kind), if we deleted the ishtar and dominix tomorrow, people wouldn't leap to sentry geddons to replace it, a whole new meta would spring forth. And it would be one without sentries.
If there is some evidence/stats to show my assertion is false, please share
NB: I'm ignoring capitals because that's a whole different bag o' fish. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
678
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 14:40:11 -
[40] - Quote
Carriers, afkalt, carriers.
You can't balance that platform without either looking at the Sentries as a weapons system, or restricting carriers to fighters-only.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
|
Savant Alabel
Locus Signatures
39
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 14:50:23 -
[41] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: Current plan is: Gardes: -25% Optimal, +33% Falloff, -3% Damage, -6.67% Tracking Curators: -3.1% Damage, -13% Tracking Bouncers: -3.3% Damage, -12.5% Tracking
We welcome feedback as always!
So you make sentry drones on non-ishtar/dominix ships fully useless crap? isn't better just drop ability of cruiser-size hulls to launch full pack of sentry? |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1235
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 14:54:33 -
[42] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Carriers, afkalt, carriers.
You can't balance that platform without either looking at the Sentries as a weapons system, or restricting carriers to fighters-only.
I did later say I was ignoring capitals. Basically because I didnt want to diverge the thread into them alone (which is where it'll probably end up). Capitals shouldn't be anywhere near subcapital drones. Period. Any attempt to balance subcapital drones deployed form capitals with cavernous drone bays would be an exercise in futility as someone would end up shafted. Caps should have their own drone class. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
678
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 14:56:28 -
[43] - Quote
As it stands, they are part of the equation.
Perhaps, later on it will change, but they are right now.
afkalt wrote:Caps should have their own drone class.
As much as that would be reasonable and maybe even balanced, Capital Sentry drones would further disincentivise Battleship use.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Taram Caldar
Royal Black Watch Highlanders DARKNESS.
78
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 14:57:01 -
[44] - Quote
Just my opinion but sentries aren't the problem, currently. The problem is the bonuses on the ishtar that push their drone damage, in general, so over and above the damage output of other ships in their peer group.
I know you prefer to adjust weapon groups rather than ship bonuses but in this case the problem is, very clearly, the ship bonuses. It's not the drones themselves. The only drone boats being abused are the ones with the insane drone bonuses. Other ships use drones but you don't see entire drone doctrines around them like you do the ishtar and domi.
Tone those ship bonuses down rather than crippling a weapon class for every ship in the game.
"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country.-á He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."
|
Jessica Danikov
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
446
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 14:57:10 -
[45] - Quote
How about returning drones to the traditional meta where both the speed of the attacker and the defender play into tracking and damage application? The fact that drone boats enjoy full mobility without any penalty to damage application has always been disproportionately advantageous.
The fix is simple- have sentry drones be aimed by the hull, e.g. make the tracking relative to the hull. This will improve tracking in certain circumstances, while reducing it in many others, often proportional to any defensive bonuses incurred through piloting. Fundamentally, piloting will play a bigger part in sentry drone pilots lives rather than sentry drones being easy mode and thus favoured for nerfs into the ground. |
Valterra Craven
542
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 15:00:59 -
[46] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Tyr Dolorem wrote:Why are you nerfing the drones not the hulls that are the problem? Because both the drones and the hulls are problems, and the solutions will involve ongoing changes to both.
I'm curious, what evidence do you have to support your argument that both drones and hulls are the problem, as opposed to just drones, or just hulls. I've seen no data analysis posted by devs in this thread as to why they think sentries themselves are still the problem. Or are you guys just basing balancing decisions on gut feelings now? :P |
Lord LazyGhost
Bear Bones Brigade The Bastards.
488
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 15:02:06 -
[47] - Quote
Jessica Danikov wrote:How about returning drones to the traditional meta where both the speed of the attacker and the defender play into tracking and damage application? The fact that drone boats enjoy full mobility without any penalty to damage application has always been disproportionately advantageous.
The fix is simple- have sentry drones be aimed by the hull, e.g. make the tracking relative to the hull. This will improve tracking in certain circumstances, while reducing it in many others, often proportional to any defensive bonuses incurred through piloting. Fundamentally, piloting will play a bigger part in sentry drone pilots lives rather than sentry drones being easy mode and thus favoured for nerfs into the ground.
got to remmber unlike other ships drones can loose all their dammage if killed |
Seven Koskanaiken
Positive Failure Black Legion.
1508
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 15:04:10 -
[48] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Tyr Dolorem wrote:Why are you nerfing the drones not the hulls that are the problem? Because both the drones and the hulls are problems, and the solutions will involve ongoing changes to both.
Because the geddon, rattle and drone proteus are causing sooo many problems right now...... |
Valterra Craven
542
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 15:05:16 -
[49] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Current plan is: Gardes: -25% Optimal, +33% Falloff, -3% Damage, -6.67% Tracking Curators: -3.1% Damage, -13% Tracking Bouncers: -3.3% Damage, -12.5% Tracking
We welcome feedback as always!
I think what you need to do is compare these drones to what they are supposed to be competing with.
So for example, is the garde supposed to be competitive with blasters or rails?
If blasters, then gardes need high damage, high tracking, low range. If rails, then gardes need moderate damage, low tracking, high range.
From there you just compare how many drones a player has and find dps profiles that match ships, So for example a blaster mega compared to a garde wielding domi.
Given you keep nuking the optimal of the garde it seems to me you want to compare it to blasters, so why are you still nuking the tracking and damage on it?
|
Fredric Wolf
Black Sheep Down Tactical Narcotics Team
89
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 15:05:20 -
[50] - Quote
Has there ever been talk at CCP about Creating S,M,L, and XL sentries? If so what is preventing these from coming into game and making this a better fix by removing L weapons from cruiser hulls? |
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
678
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 15:06:46 -
[51] - Quote
Valterra Craven wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Tyr Dolorem wrote:Why are you nerfing the drones not the hulls that are the problem? Because both the drones and the hulls are problems, and the solutions will involve ongoing changes to both. I'm curious, what evidence do you have to support your argument that both drones and hulls are the problem, as opposed to just drones, or just hulls. I've seen no data analysis posted by devs in this thread as to why they think sentries themselves are still the problem. Or are you guys just basing balancing decisions on gut feelings now? :P
http://i.imgur.com/GqTO6zd.png http://i.imgur.com/cP7kPvH.png
Working as intended.
Feel free to provide me a Zealot setup that would match that at least within 10%.
Bonuses being the obvious part, as has been said, you can't balance sentry carriers without looking at the weapon system as a whole.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1235
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 15:07:48 -
[52] - Quote
Seven Koskanaiken wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Tyr Dolorem wrote:Why are you nerfing the drones not the hulls that are the problem? Because both the drones and the hulls are problems, and the solutions will involve ongoing changes to both. Because the geddon, rattle and drone proteus are causing sooo many problems right now......
Nah, it's the Myrm's o' DOOM. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1084
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 15:10:50 -
[53] - Quote
Fredric Wolf wrote:Has there ever been talk at CCP about Creating S,M,L, and XL sentries? If so what is preventing these from coming into game and making this a better fix by removing L weapons from cruiser hulls?
a better solution would be to just get rid of sentries |
Phaade
Perimeter Defense Systems Templis CALSF
348
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 15:11:56 -
[54] - Quote
Mind **** wrote:well done Fozzie, another ship nerfed into crap. CCP Fozzie wrote:We welcome feedback as always! nope you don't.
You're joking right?
Sentry drones were, and still are going to be, utterly broken.
What is wrong with you people. Fozzie still didn't go far enough. |
Phaade
Perimeter Defense Systems Templis CALSF
348
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 15:13:51 -
[55] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Ishtar still not fixed by this.
Xaxaxa
Yep, it will still be far and away the most powerful HAC. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
678
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 15:15:05 -
[56] - Quote
Lord LazyGhost wrote:Jessica Danikov wrote:How about returning drones to the traditional meta where both the speed of the attacker and the defender play into tracking and damage application? The fact that drone boats enjoy full mobility without any penalty to damage application has always been disproportionately advantageous.
The fix is simple- have sentry drones be aimed by the hull, e.g. make the tracking relative to the hull. This will improve tracking in certain circumstances, while reducing it in many others, often proportional to any defensive bonuses incurred through piloting. Fundamentally, piloting will play a bigger part in sentry drone pilots lives rather than sentry drones being easy mode and thus favoured for nerfs into the ground. got to remmber unlike other ships drones can loose all their dammage if killed
Got to remember unlike the other turret ships, drones track their targets irrespective of the velocity, range, or direction of the host ship, and losing target lock does not nullify damage dealt.
Capless, omni-damage weapons systems to boot.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Desudes
Adversity. Northern Coalition.
433
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 15:17:39 -
[57] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Tyr Dolorem wrote:Why are you nerfing the drones not the hulls that are the problem? Because both the drones and the hulls are problems, and the solutions will involve ongoing changes to both.
How about you nerf the fundamental problem of disjointed transversal and the ability to command an entity from 120km that can itself reach beyond even that on a hull size that is usually restricted to 30-70km engagements, rather than introducing nerfs that hurt non-abusive doctrines and are countered by the abusive doctrine by simply bringing more dudes?
In other words: If you keep nerfing only the projection and damage of sentries, people will bring MORE of them, and it will become (even more) a doctrine that is useless to small groups and overpowered for large groups, because raw stats aren't the issue with the ishtar.
Excuse me, but what the f*ck are you desu?
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
678
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 15:22:58 -
[58] - Quote
Desudes wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Tyr Dolorem wrote:Why are you nerfing the drones not the hulls that are the problem? Because both the drones and the hulls are problems, and the solutions will involve ongoing changes to both. How about you nerf the fundamental problem of disjointed transversal and the ability to command an entity from 120km that can itself reach beyond even that on a hull size that is usually restricted to 30-70km engagements, rather than introducing nerfs that hurt non-abusive doctrines and are countered by the abusive doctrine by simply bringing more dudes?
The solution is far simpler - remove the Optimal range part of the double bonus on the Ishtar.
Let them choose either Range+Tank, or Damage - not all three at once.
Quote:In other words: If you keep nerfing only the projection and damage of sentries, people will bring MORE of them, and it will become (even more) a doctrine that is useless to small groups and overpowered for large groups, because raw stats aren't the issue with the ishtar.
That will be the case until the fundamental problem of those double bonuses is resolves.
Long live the Wardens!
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Rumpelstilz Rumtopf
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 15:24:37 -
[59] - Quote
target : destroy a funny game. another step is done! |
Max Kolonko
WATAHA. Unseen Wolves
518
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 15:25:26 -
[60] - Quote
Altrue wrote:I'm on board with the idea of sentry ships being too strong.
I'm not on board with the concept of nerfing the weapon system instead of the broken hulls.
While you remove 3% dps, drone boats still run around with double 10/7.5 bonuses, drone boats still run around with the same PWG / CPU levels than other ships of their class, even though they don't have to fit weapons (!), ishtars can still use battleship weapons...
So yeah... its too little, too far away from the real issue. But at least the conclusion that something needs to change with sentries is good.
The problem us that drone ships of medium size (hacs, commands) can field bs size drones. If you renove those ships from equation you end up with either: slow cats and sentry domnis/other bs. Thise are waaay slower making them easier to counter and easier to balance in this regard.
Read and support:
Don't mess with OUR WH's
What is Your stance on WH stuff?
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 24 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |