Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 59 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 20 post(s) |
Mai Khumm
172.0.0.1
841
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 20:54:54 -
[331] - Quote
I kinda hope you don't screw the Orca pilots royally...like myself who love and live in an Orca.
I'm curious on this new Porpoise ship. I don't see how a new ship is needed where a revamp of the Orca could fix this. But, a new ship is a new ship...just don't screw it up! |
Silven Rubis
Gemini Talon Curatores Veritatis Alliance
3
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 20:55:53 -
[332] - Quote
ZzyyzzxX wrote:Jeinvay Kunsu wrote:As a non-logistics/support player, i have drawn the following conclusion from the past 15 pages of responses to these changes:
A large majority of players think you, Fozzie, and your team are blathering idiots who have no actual idea how boosts should work. I am inclined to agree. Thank you Mr. forum troll, your criticism provides so much insight into how things might need to be tweaked, in order to provide a better fit for the player base who DO actually fly logistics/support roles.
haha, this player base of logi and support roles is small my friend... lets do a rough guessing not ment to be precise yet pictorial - say 10% of player chars do regular pvp and of these less then 10% are doing logi and therefore support role - I dont think you can agrue with that little amount of people 1or2 out of 100
|
Galaxy Mule
Galaxy Farm Carebear Repurposing
16
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 20:56:25 -
[333] - Quote
As someone who doesn't use or care about this feature, HA! |
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
2780
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 20:56:47 -
[334] - Quote
Milla Goodpussy wrote:it is absolutely mind boggling how seagull allows this kind of work done by folks who have zero knowledge about industry.
prepare for epic market disruptions in November. Can you elaborate, I want to be prepared?
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
Syri Taneka
Un4seen Development Sev3rance
139
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:00:54 -
[335] - Quote
At the least I'd like to see the Leadership range bonuses flipped (4%/5%/6% rather than 6%/5%/4%). Wing Command and Fleet Command cost additional time to train and should carry more significant payoffs as a result. This carries well with the logical fact that a fleet or wing will generally spread out more than a squad and thus need more range to hit them all. |
ZzyyzzxX
Another Nameless Corp....
7
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:00:58 -
[336] - Quote
Jeinvay Kunsu wrote:ZzyyzzxX wrote:Jeinvay Kunsu wrote:As a non-logistics/support player, i have drawn the following conclusion from the past 15 pages of responses to these changes:
A large majority of players think you, Fozzie, and your team are blathering idiots who have no actual idea how boosts should work. I am inclined to agree. Thank you Mr. forum troll, your criticism provides so much insight into how things might need to be tweaked, in order to provide a better fit for the player base who DO actually fly logistics/support roles. I like to think my 'criticism' is a summary of the feelings of the majority: Good Idea, bad execution. Really bad. But if it really makes you happy, here's a real simple suggestion: If CCP REALLY wants to change how one initiates boosts, make the modules use scripts, not ammo that needs to be reloaded. That way, at least we can stop wondering what'll happen to a borderline dead ship that suddenly loses HP boosts due to the boosting ship having to reload the ammo to keep the boost going.
I think the reason they are opting for ammo rather than a script is to make the player running boosts remain actively engaged with the fleet. If they were scripts, they wouldn't really need to be monitored. I think a compromise to this could be a destructible script akin to a laser crystal (i.e. runs up to 1000 times until depleted, with a proportionate chance of "breaking" and requiring replacement). |
Silven Rubis
Gemini Talon Curatores Veritatis Alliance
3
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:03:05 -
[337] - Quote
Cerulean Ice wrote:Why does the mining burst trigger a weapons timer?
Why ammo for the boost modules instead of just scripts? They function as scripted modules, so they should actually be scripted modules instead of some weird ammo script hybrid. It makes no sense to have these modules only boost so many times before a reload when the script type isn't changing.
Just for the gameplay and the deeper meaning of flying in space, EVE is unique and wonderfully we love it, yet I never seen any movie or read a fiction that tells a story about a bonus applied by amunition shoot in space - its so unlogical as a cat.
Scripted, yes, or lets say smartbombs kind of enhancing waves but please no launching magic bombs, rockets whatever "...beam me up scotti" |
Draconas109
The Society of Mutual Respect Care Factor
52
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:05:31 -
[338] - Quote
Ancy Denaries wrote:Draconas109 wrote:these boosting changes are flat out ********, on grid mining boosts that require ammunition to run.
Has CCP ever tried to be in a null industrialists boots for a week without their dev tools and see how annoying it is to mine and not get killed? 3 hours a day I can probably get to mine with reds constantly in system and managing barges is hard enough, now we have to baby sit multiple boosters?
No, im being serious, this is a giant middle finger in our faces, and an ammo requirement is the cherry on top of the **** mountain. Oh noes! You can't afk-mine all day in your peaceful null system! OH NOES! Seriously, get more defense fleets?
|
Borat Guereen
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:05:48 -
[339] - Quote
With an initial range (before skill modifiers) of 15km for the radius you are restricting the usage of burst to the current FC anchor tactic, and limiting the development of new, more independent, fleet tactics.
If my calculations are correct (please tell if they are not...) with skills (-/L5/W5/F5) the AOE range will be 15km/18.5km/22.2km/26.6km, doubled with command ship to a max of 53km or so.
Please consider increasing the burst range to around 80-100km with max skills only.
Do not kill new emerging fleet tactics and force all the fleets to anchor with this new AOE range...
Join our Minarchist Revolution!
|
Syri Taneka
Un4seen Development Sev3rance
140
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:05:56 -
[340] - Quote
ZzyyzzxX wrote:Jeinvay Kunsu wrote:ZzyyzzxX wrote:Jeinvay Kunsu wrote:As a non-logistics/support player, i have drawn the following conclusion from the past 15 pages of responses to these changes:
A large majority of players think you, Fozzie, and your team are blathering idiots who have no actual idea how boosts should work. I am inclined to agree. Thank you Mr. forum troll, your criticism provides so much insight into how things might need to be tweaked, in order to provide a better fit for the player base who DO actually fly logistics/support roles. I like to think my 'criticism' is a summary of the feelings of the majority: Good Idea, bad execution. Really bad. But if it really makes you happy, here's a real simple suggestion: If CCP REALLY wants to change how one initiates boosts, make the modules use scripts, not ammo that needs to be reloaded. That way, at least we can stop wondering what'll happen to a borderline dead ship that suddenly loses HP boosts due to the boosting ship having to reload the ammo to keep the boost going. I think the reason they are opting for ammo rather than a script is to make the player running boosts remain actively engaged with the fleet. If they were scripts, they wouldn't really need to be monitored. I think a compromise to this could be a destructible script akin to a laser crystal (i.e. runs up to 1000 times until depleted, with a proportionate chance of "breaking" and requiring replacement).
My biggest concern with the ammo is, I'm assuming that it'll be three types of ammo that have a different effect in each Burst type. That means remembering what each of those is in the middle of a fight. I don't like that because it's complicated.
What would work better (if it can be done), is to have a non-destructible script (clearly named) define the Burst sub-type and a single type of consumable ammo power the module. |
|
Draconas109
The Society of Mutual Respect Care Factor
52
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:06:56 -
[341] - Quote
Ancy Denaries wrote:Draconas109 wrote:these boosting changes are flat out ********, on grid mining boosts that require ammunition to run.
Has CCP ever tried to be in a null industrialists boots for a week without their dev tools and see how annoying it is to mine and not get killed? 3 hours a day I can probably get to mine with reds constantly in system and managing barges is hard enough, now we have to baby sit multiple boosters?
No, im being serious, this is a giant middle finger in our faces, and an ammo requirement is the cherry on top of the **** mountain. Oh noes! You can't afk-mine all day in your peaceful null system! OH NOES! Seriously, get more defense fleets?
I never mined afk in all of my 2768 hours of being logged, nor do I ever intend to. my spot in null is anything but peaceful with blobs of reds coming in multiple times an hour, nor is there enough pilots with the patience to play **** **** games with said blobs of reds for 23/7.
seriously, be in my shoes for a week and experience it from my point of view, or shut the hell up. |
Moac Tor
Cyber Core Stain Confederation
715
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:07:35 -
[342] - Quote
Milla Goodpussy wrote:but a 1% difference between a capital ship and a sub capital ship.. is just total bullchit and someone who came up with those figures didn't even bother to look at the price difference between the two ships. "oh hey spend 2.2bn+ for an extra measly 1% difference"..that guy must wear plaid panties. It's not 1%, it is 5% as it is 1% per level. And then that is multiplied with all the other multiplication factors which actually makes a meaningful difference. You know how multiplication factors work right?
And if you put it into siege then you get another 30% boost on top of that which is already better than the Orca. And I am hoping siege will be reduced to 1 minute to encourage people to use it a bit more.
Modulated ECM Effects
An Alternative to Skill Trading
|
Syri Taneka
Un4seen Development Sev3rance
140
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:08:04 -
[343] - Quote
Silven Rubis wrote:Cerulean Ice wrote:Why does the mining burst trigger a weapons timer?
Why ammo for the boost modules instead of just scripts? They function as scripted modules, so they should actually be scripted modules instead of some weird ammo script hybrid. It makes no sense to have these modules only boost so many times before a reload when the script type isn't changing. Just for the gameplay and the deeper meaning of flying in space, EVE is unique and wonderfully we love it, yet I never seen any movie or read a fiction that tells a story about a bonus applied by amunition shoot in space - its so unlogical as a cat. Scripted, yes, or lets say smartbombs kind of enhancing waves but please no launching magic bombs, rockets whatever "...beam me up scotti"
Psst, large quantities of ANY game mechanics (and especially EVE) are completely illogical = P I fight with this fact every time I try to write realistic fan-fiction. |
ZzyyzzxX
Another Nameless Corp....
7
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:12:45 -
[344] - Quote
Syri Taneka wrote:ZzyyzzxX wrote:Jeinvay Kunsu wrote:ZzyyzzxX wrote:Jeinvay Kunsu wrote:As a non-logistics/support player, i have drawn the following conclusion from the past 15 pages of responses to these changes:
A large majority of players think you, Fozzie, and your team are blathering idiots who have no actual idea how boosts should work. I am inclined to agree. Thank you Mr. forum troll, your criticism provides so much insight into how things might need to be tweaked, in order to provide a better fit for the player base who DO actually fly logistics/support roles. I like to think my 'criticism' is a summary of the feelings of the majority: Good Idea, bad execution. Really bad. But if it really makes you happy, here's a real simple suggestion: If CCP REALLY wants to change how one initiates boosts, make the modules use scripts, not ammo that needs to be reloaded. That way, at least we can stop wondering what'll happen to a borderline dead ship that suddenly loses HP boosts due to the boosting ship having to reload the ammo to keep the boost going. I think the reason they are opting for ammo rather than a script is to make the player running boosts remain actively engaged with the fleet. If they were scripts, they wouldn't really need to be monitored. I think a compromise to this could be a destructible script akin to a laser crystal (i.e. runs up to 1000 times until depleted, with a proportionate chance of "breaking" and requiring replacement). My biggest concern with the ammo is, I'm assuming that it'll be three types of ammo that have a different effect in each Burst type. That means remembering what each of those is in the middle of a fight. I don't like that because it's complicated. What would work better (if it can be done), is to have a non-destructible script (clearly named) define the Burst sub-type and a single type of consumable ammo power the module.
Sounds a little too complicated to implement. It would be easier to create the destructible scripts as new items, with bpo's and industry skill/input material requirements (isotopes, stront, minerals, whatever), and use the existing degradation mechanic from the laser crystals. This would give some respite to the constant reloading concerns, and still require the booster to pay attention.
|
Gneeznow
Ship spinners inc
151
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:13:43 -
[345] - Quote
I've 10 million SP in leadership and I really like these changes. You know why? because I always give my boosts on the field in a BC or Command Destroyer anyway rather than sit in a safe spot.
|
Tex Bloodhunter
State Protectorate Caldari State
13
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:13:48 -
[346] - Quote
What about fleets where the main ship type is a command ship (or any ship that can fit a command burst)? Everyone fits one or two command bursts. Now you literally have 100% of all the boosts available. In the current system this is limited by the need to be in fleet/wing/squad command positions. The new system does not have such limits. Is the new system intentionally designed this way? |
DoctorABC
Viziam Amarr Empire
5
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:18:25 -
[347] - Quote
It would be great to have back those leadership skillpoints, as now they will be useless wihout special ships. So everybody who trained them just for passive bonuses in small fleets (me and my alts, yes) will have another bunch of unneeded skills. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3089
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:19:08 -
[348] - Quote
One other question, since boosts will likely be dropping on and off more often, and we now have an hp bonus boost, will there be any issues regarding not having enough hp to bounce?
I ask this because I have seen ships (a Titan too) die because of errant armor calculations. And going into the negatives won't exactly be the best option either (seen that as well). |
Soldarius
O C C U P Y Test Alliance Please Ignore
1520
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:19:36 -
[349] - Quote
Most of these changes seem fair and well balanced at first glance.
I think my only concern is the AoE on Bursts. With max skills and a CS, and assuming the bonuses are not stacking penalized but are multiplicative, the max range of a CS Command Burst is 58.5km? That's pretty darn small.
Leadership 5, 6% x 5 = 30% WC 5, 5% x 5 = 25% FC 5, 4% x 5 =20% Command Ship Role Bonus = 100% Base Range 15km.
15 x 1.3 x 1.25 x 1.2 x 2 = 58.5km.
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
Lil' Brudder Too
Pistols for Pandas
230
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:19:52 -
[350] - Quote
Soo, it looks like the max number of fleet boosting modules while be limited to 4 on the Command Ships now? (or even less due to rig calibration specs) You used to be able to sacrifice almost everything and fit 7 on some...
This seems like a nerf for the smaller groups. Yes large fleets will easily be able to have the same bases covered...but small fleets will not.
Mining Bursts
The thing i don't like about these "Bursts" and mining...it will need to be very possible to perma run the 3 modules or else there will be alot of ore dropped due to laser range being reduced between cycles, of which every pilot will have different cycle times after the last iteration of mining changes changed everything to a 'cycle time' boost instead of a 'yield' boost.
New Icon SiSi feedback thread that got wholly ignored!
An example of that a good ship icon set looks like.
|
|
Krystyn
Serenity Rising LLC
233
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:21:23 -
[351] - Quote
Cpt Hidoshi Ambraelle wrote:Absolutely the FIRST thing to say about this is IT'S TERRIBLE. Here is why I currently have 2 Rorq's If your currently planned changes go ahead As soon as the November expansion hits I will Reprocess them Plus My Orca as I would rather mine with NO Boosts at all than to put a rorq on grid NO MATTER what you do to it. I would Rather put the capital parts from the 2x Rorq and 1x Orca towards some more dreads to sell than to keep and use them. Rorq's currently cost what 2bill why in hell would someone want to try and boost with it on grid while trying to micro manage everything else.
WTS Rorqual I will never take one out to the belt as it is suicide.
The freeze fleet for 5 minutes will only give the bad guys more time to get more people on the KM |
Careby
289
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:21:50 -
[352] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:...The skills will all continue to exist (under slightly different names) and will impact the same type of gameplay, so there are no plans to refund any skills with this change.
Whether or not it's "the same type of gameplay" depends on your perspective, and I'm quite sure that many will consider the skills they have trained no longer useful to them. Since we now have skill extractors and a strong market for characters with extractable skills, converting unwanted skills or characters to ISK is easy and, most probably, profitable. The problem is the SP loss one experiences when re-applying extracted SP to the same character. For those not interested in converting their unwanted skills to ISK, the cost and waste associated with skill extraction for re-allocation is going to leave a very bitter taste.
|
Daemun Khanid
Kameiran Order Local Is Primary
600
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:22:06 -
[353] - Quote
Without running any of the numbers; taking into consideration that we'll be losing all of our standard leadership bonuses, even though links will indeed be on grid won't the gap between the power of a boosted fleet and a non boosted one be even worse than before? Those passive bonuses might not have been huge but they at least conveyed some sort of bonus just to being in a fleet together. Without them the boosted fleet is going to be even more powerful in comparison. So ppl complaining that you had to have links to win before are gonna really be butt hurt when that reality sets in aren't they? Just wondering, like I said I haven't ran the numbers on the bonuses provided by the new boosts but just assuming they are comparable to what we have now it looks like boosts will be even more mandatory than before.
Daemun of Khanid
|
Chris Kelvin
State War Academy Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:22:36 -
[354] - Quote
Rowells wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:Zanar Skwigelf wrote:Why were the mining yield boosts replaced by a mining crystal destruction boost?
Crystals are a dime a dozen, or am I missing something? There was never a "yield" boost. There was a cycle time boost, a cap cost boost, and a range boost. The cycle time and capacitor cost reduction were rolled into one boost, and the crystal volatility one is new. Yep. Completely new bonus. A creative one, no doubt, but I still believe that by itself it doesn't really do nearly as much as the other two. I worry that it will become one of those boosts that doesn't really get used because its impact is so small.
You mean exactly like it is now? Two modules everyone uses and one that everyone kinda goes, WTF is that for? |
Ben Ishikela
78
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:23:37 -
[355] - Quote
Hmmmmmm......... interesting....... thanx for sharing the devblog.
My issues i had with the old system seem to not be fixed. It just looks pretty and i can see the booster now. The aggression timer is nice.
However: It can still be done by a dual-box alt and requires very little attention. ONCE PER MINUTE WTF?`you could have done so much better. What is the downside in boosting?! I dont see any. Thats so bad in many boooks. .... rant continues ..... *sigh* ok ... what i try to say: Please make battles more spikey in general! How does this go with commandBURSTS? 1) Apply a strong short positive buff (10seconds. +60% speed) 2) Apply a long negative buff (60seconds. +10% signature) 3) Cycle time of module is that of the positive buff. 4) positive does not stack. negative does. 5) the module decides the negative. the ammo the positive effect. 6) heating the module has an effect. Optional: apply effect to all ships on grid. not only the fleet. ( ==> picking the right module and debuffing the enemy appropriately should be viable gameplay as well) ==> the "commander" has to think of WHEN to boost because boosting all the time is not an option
you are currently not changing the exitement of this fleetrole, just a nerf. please consider my suggestions!
Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop fullgrown trees to start a fire.
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3089
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:23:58 -
[356] - Quote
Chris Kelvin wrote:Rowells wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:Zanar Skwigelf wrote:Why were the mining yield boosts replaced by a mining crystal destruction boost?
Crystals are a dime a dozen, or am I missing something? There was never a "yield" boost. There was a cycle time boost, a cap cost boost, and a range boost. The cycle time and capacitor cost reduction were rolled into one boost, and the crystal volatility one is new. Yep. Completely new bonus. A creative one, no doubt, but I still believe that by itself it doesn't really do nearly as much as the other two. I worry that it will become one of those boosts that doesn't really get used because its impact is so small. You mean exactly like it is now? Two modules everyone uses and one that everyone kinda goes, WTF is that for? Yes? |
Daemun Khanid
Kameiran Order Local Is Primary
601
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:26:16 -
[357] - Quote
Ben Ishikela wrote:Hmmmmmm......... interesting....... thanx for sharing the devblog.
My issues i had with the old system seem to not be fixed. It just looks pretty and i can see the booster now. The aggression timer is nice.
However: It can still be done by a dual-box alt and requires very little attention. ONCE PER MINUTE WTF?`you could have done so much better. What is the downside in boosting?! I dont see any. Thats so bad in many boooks. .... rant continues ..... *sigh* ok ... what i try to say: Please make battles more spikey in general! How does this go with commandBURSTS? 1) Apply a strong short positive buff (10seconds. +60% speed) 2) Apply a long negative buff (60seconds. +10% signature) 3) Cycle time of module is that of the positive buff. 4) positive does not stack. negative does. 5) the module decides the negative. the ammo the positive effect. 6) heating the module has an effect. Optional: apply effect to all ships on grid. not only the fleet. ( ==> picking the right module and debuffing the enemy appropriately should be viable gameplay as well) ==> the "commander" has to think of WHEN to boost because boosting all the time is not an option
you are currently not changing the exitement of this fleetrole, just a nerf. please consider my suggestions!
nope.
Daemun of Khanid
|
Noxisia Arkana
Deadspace Knights Sacred Empire of Ellyssium
456
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:27:38 -
[358] - Quote
How about we move these bastards on grid and then if we want to rework the whole command structure work at it next? Pretty much everything after 'on grid' is pretty terrible. |
Daemun Khanid
Kameiran Order Local Is Primary
601
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:30:44 -
[359] - Quote
Just put links on-grid and get rid of the need to assign boosters and call it good. I have to agree. All this buff timer/range/skill rework stuff is just silliness imo.
Daemun of Khanid
|
Andrea Cemenotar
Elena Minasse Operations
10
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 21:32:04 -
[360] - Quote
looks interesting to me and will definitelly affect some of my long term plans,
now I need to see that "porpoise" ship.
[also reading all those ppl claiming how this will ruin the game is.... amusing] |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 59 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |