Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Zazz Blammy Matazz
The Institution. Did he say Jump
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.06 11:06:43 -
[211] - Quote
Larrakin, the risk from firing a bust projector is still not inline with the reward. They have near the same penalty as a doomsday with Nowhere near the offensive/defensive capabilities. If you insist on these rediculously useless periods of effect, you need to remove the jump/cloak/warp penalty if you actually want them used. As they stand, they're still useless. |
Tabyll Altol
Vision Inc Hole Control
183
|
Posted - 2017.03.06 12:33:52 -
[212] - Quote
So much tears from the PVE 0.0 Carebears.
I ratted about 40 hours in a niddy. My drones had around 5-6 times the aggro and i managed to lose only 1 fighter.
If this is 100% for some guys or way to much. No it isn-Št stop crying. Carrier ratting was/is way to safe for the ticks.
This is a start.
+1 |
Lugh Crow-Slave
3872
|
Posted - 2017.03.06 12:36:13 -
[213] - Quote
Tabyll Altol wrote:So much tears from the PVE 0.0 Carebears.
I ratted about 40 hours in a niddy. My drones had around 5-6 times the aggro and i managed to lose only 1 fighter.
If this is 100% for some guys or way to much. No it isn-Št stop crying. Carrier ratting was/is way to safe for the ticks.
This is a start.
+1
i would gladly see ratting carriers made nonviable if it some how meant they could have a decent place in pvp q.q
BLOPS Hauler
|
Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners Test Alliance Please Ignore
15269
|
Posted - 2017.03.06 13:44:13 -
[214] - Quote
Smugest Sniper wrote:Quote:
Can you please tell me how you managed to find / spawn Havens / Sanctums? I cant find a single system that as any combat anomaly. I was told to upgrade a system so the sites spawn, but I nether have a ship that is able to transport sov upgrades, nor do I have any idea how to use them. Its seems that CCP is making it incredible hard to actually test these changes.
It wasn't easy, found a system someone else had already upgraded in impass and was grinding it a bit. 9I-SRF if you wanna see for yourself. but I suggest looking somewhere that has sanctums more profilerated than this place. In that system I chained Rock Havens and Forsaken Hubs, made 30-40mil ticks being conservative and pulling my fighters in on the final waves. If you can't pull your fighters in fast enough on the final waves or during a big wave to reset agro, they will die. Even a few seconds too long and without good durability skills and FSU's they will die. Quote:[Nidhoggur, Smugest Sniper's Nidhoggur] Drone Damage Amplifier II Drone Damage Amplifier II Drone Damage Amplifier II Drone Damage Amplifier II Damage Control II
Sentient Drone Navigation Computer Capital Shield Extender II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II EM Ward Field II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Capital Shield Extender II
Networked Sensor Array Fighter Support Unit I Fighter Support Unit I Fighter Support Unit I Fighter Support Unit I
Capital Core Defense Field Extender II Capital Core Defense Field Extender II Capital Core Defense Field Extender II
Einherji I x20 Templar I x48
I pretty much maxed drone support skills and fighters 4 light fighters 3.(I have higher on live now) I've lost 2 fighters in the first haven until I changed tactics but I need to see how much worse Gas havens are with these changes to know for sure. So I dunno, I'm mixed in opinion thus far, if I didn't have the skills and fit I used, I would have had more dead fighters than I did. I want to try with 3 FSU and a cyno but we'll see what the other sites do before I make any final judgement. Quote:2017.03.05 11:18:50Bounty Prize Corporation Tax-2,000,539 ISK1,169,325,254 ISK[r] Corporation tax on pirate bounties 2017.03.05 11:18:50Bounty Prizes40,010,793 ISK1,171,325,793 ISK[r] Smugest Sniper got bounty prizes for killing pirates in 9I-SRF 2017.03.05 10:58:50Bounty Prize Corporation Tax-1,540,888 ISK1,131,315,000 ISK[r] Corporation tax on pirate bounties 2017.03.05 10:58:50Bounty Prizes30,817,762 ISK1,132,855,888 ISK[r] Smugest Sniper got bounty prizes for killing pirates in 9I-SRF
I'll be on later to get on SiSi, but if you play before that then try a Drone Durability Enhancer rig and see if it helps.
I'm also going to give the old "distract them with ECM bursting" trick people moved away from when fighters/carriers changed.
|
Solidus Obscura
Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition
14
|
Posted - 2017.03.06 14:08:33 -
[215] - Quote
Quote:Lastly, there was a bug when our AI evaluated the threat of fighters. NPCs didn't consider fighters as threatening as they should have. This bug has now been fixed, and NPCs will more often shoot at fighters.
This is just going to make PVEing in Carriers a lot more frustrating. How will you make it easier for players to see that their fighters are taking significant damage? Right now 1-99% is just a single color.
Solidus for CSM!
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=512158&find=unread
|
Juvir
Omega Nebula BattleWorks Requiem Eternal
38
|
Posted - 2017.03.06 14:12:15 -
[216] - Quote
Tabyll Altol wrote:So much tears from the PVE 0.0 Carebears.
I ratted about 40 hours in a niddy. My drones had around 5-6 times the aggro and i managed to lose only 1 fighter.
If this is 100% for some guys or way to much. No it isn-Št stop crying. Carrier ratting was/is way to safe for the ticks.
This is a start.
+1
Yes, because this is so OP compared to wormhole mining and site running -_-
Next nerf coming will be incursions. I mean why not? We've released a FTP model, might as well put everything past alpha behind a "pay wall". One of the most attractive things about this game is that you CAN make enough income to pay for your accounts using in game currency. But hey, my WH group can't kill a carrier with 3 people, so we need to nerf them. |
Cade Windstalker
1001
|
Posted - 2017.03.06 14:16:22 -
[217] - Quote
Zazz Blammy Matazz wrote:Larrakin, the risk from firing a bust projector is still not inline with the reward. They have near the same penalty as a doomsday with Nowhere near the offensive/defensive capabilities. If you insist on these rediculously useless periods of effect, you need to remove the jump/cloak/warp penalty if you actually want them used. As they stand, they're still useless.
They're not supposed to be in line with the reward of a Titan Doomsday though. That's a much more expensive ship producing a shorter duration effect. Completely removing the penalties associated with a Burst Projector would also completely remove almost all trade off with their use and make them incredibly ubiquitous in Null combat. Given the strength of their AoE effects I don't think that would be particularly good for the game.
|
Juvir
Omega Nebula BattleWorks Requiem Eternal
38
|
Posted - 2017.03.06 14:48:34 -
[218] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Zazz Blammy Matazz wrote:Larrakin, the risk from firing a bust projector is still not inline with the reward. They have near the same penalty as a doomsday with Nowhere near the offensive/defensive capabilities. If you insist on these rediculously useless periods of effect, you need to remove the jump/cloak/warp penalty if you actually want them used. As they stand, they're still useless. They're not supposed to be in line with the reward of a Titan Doomsday though. That's a much more expensive ship producing a shorter duration effect. Completely removing the penalties associated with a Burst Projector would also completely remove almost all trade off with their use and make them incredibly ubiquitous in Null combat. Given the strength of their AoE effects I don't think that would be particularly good for the game.
I think he more meant the time of the effect vs the duration of the negative effect. I agree it shouldn't be as powerful as a doomsday, but at the same time the negative effect is almost as bad. If the duration of the effect isn't going to increase porportionally to the effectiveness vs. the risk, it's never going to be used. |
Destriouth Hollow
Star-Destroying-Warlords Kraftwerk.
90
|
Posted - 2017.03.06 15:52:30 -
[219] - Quote
Is there even a single comment on this thread agreeing fighte sig rad or aggro needs a nerf? lol ^^ I haven't seen one and I agree with fighter pve/pvp beeing in a good place.
Maybe Anti-fighters are a bit too good at their job against upers, but otherwise? |
Cade Windstalker
1002
|
Posted - 2017.03.06 16:20:48 -
[220] - Quote
Juvir wrote:I think he more meant the time of the effect vs the duration of the negative effect. I agree it shouldn't be as powerful as a doomsday, but at the same time the negative effect is almost as bad. If the duration of the effect isn't going to increase porportionally to the effectiveness vs. the risk, it's never going to be used.
I'd agree that the duration on the effect could use either a skill affecting it or a reduction, considering some Titan DDs have a shorter duration on the module than these things do, but I don't think the risk/reward trade off should ever feel like a no brainer for these modules. These should be something where you go "OMG the enemy left himself open to this, do it now!" not an "oh, it's off cooldown, firing burst projector again".
Destriouth Hollow wrote:Is there even a single comment on this thread agreeing fighte sig rad or aggro needs a nerf? lol ^^ I haven't seen one and I agree with fighter pve/pvp beeing in a good place.
Maybe Anti-fighters are a bit too good at their job against upers, but otherwise?
I actually do think the sig radius changes are probably justified, I'm just a little worried about two things here:
- The combined effect of the agro fix and the sig radius change on NPC agro in sites, since the sig radius change pushes Fighters up past the level of Medium Drones and almost to the same level as Heavies.
- That Fighters already don't have a ton of HP so while I like the idea of increasing counter play it feels a bit too binary if they're just getting nuked off field all the time considering in small to medium gang fights an Ishtar can still yank his drones in as they take agro most of the time.
The problem here is that in larger fights drones and other things that work well against Fighters just nuke them off the field by sheer volume of fire, but if you balance them around surviving agro under those circumstances then they become unkillable wrecking machines in smaller fights. I think CCP is more balancing around the smaller fight case since that's more controllable. |
|
Trevize Demerzel
79
|
Posted - 2017.03.06 17:11:07 -
[221] - Quote
Few things
#1 - I don't understand the point of these Dev posts. All they do is anger the player base and CCP does the change anyway ignoring pages of feedback.
#2 - before this change goes live I believe they must first fix/change he ui so players can easily see the % health of each fighter.
#3 - for ewar each fighter must be treated as an individual. Why should it be easier to lock down a [super]carrier then a drone boat Dominix.
Balancing things is all well in good but the CCP nerf bat swings way to extreme these days.
These [proposed] nerfs must come with the ability for the players to more easily see fighters' health. Or must we all start support tickets for getting fighters refunded due to poor ui design. We will be loosing fighters faster then the ui pop-op will appear. So makes logical sense to me.
-
|
Thomas Lot
Astrocomical Warped Intentions
116
|
Posted - 2017.03.06 17:19:04 -
[222] - Quote
Make no mistake, THIS
Isk Faucet
is the reason for this change to fighter sig and npc aggression. No matter that virtually EVERY carrier pilot does not want this change, it is being forced on us without ANY consulting opinion from the player base that it is effecting.
Hey CCP Devs, why not consult the player base BEFORE making such a drastic change instead of forcing it on us and asking for our opinion which you will obviously ignore.
If you don't want or do not plan to use our opinion on a topic, then don't ask for it.
SHEESH |
xOmGx
Order of Order SOLAR FLEET
2
|
Posted - 2017.03.06 17:35:08 -
[223] - Quote
CCP nerfs everything people like
as for me they nerfed Motherships so hard that i am starting to think that they are super useless now
Before they used to be interesting anti capital plarform that used to put out 10-13k dps (back then it was 2x Dred DPS) It was worth to get a Mothership coz it did reasonable DPS for its costs It was also able to hold its own against subcapitals Now all supers - just a EHP box - easy kills for subcapitals who cant defend themselfs
Now mother do what? 4-6k dps? LOL compared to 10-15k Dread dps is just LOL lol loooool DPS *by dps i mean consistent DPS 3 torpedo thingies are not serious in capital engagement*
Now these changes hit capitals even more making them more and more... useless
CCP should boost Supers and make them worth their pricetag And change claim mechanics that will motivate Alliances field capitals and super on battlefield
Every capital need boost (maybe beside dreads tho they do need some dps reduction imho)
Ow ye CCP plz fire the person responsible for fighter mechanics (how EWAR works on them) it take 2-3 BlackBirds to lock out Carrier / Mothership lel
And start doing something that matter - make it possible to heal fighters in combat and show each figher HP in the fighter bar (not just RED) |
Thomas Lot
Astrocomical Warped Intentions
116
|
Posted - 2017.03.06 17:49:52 -
[224] - Quote
xOmGx wrote: - make it possible to heal fighters in combat and show each fighter HP in the fighter bar (not just RED)
THIS ^
You want a feature that the Carrier and Super player-base can support? Look into this. |
Zazz Blammy Matazz
The Institution. Did he say Jump
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.06 18:10:48 -
[225] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Zazz Blammy Matazz wrote:Larrakin, the risk from firing a bust projector is still not inline with the reward. They have near the same penalty as a doomsday with Nowhere near the offensive/defensive capabilities. If you insist on these rediculously useless periods of effect, you need to remove the jump/cloak/warp penalty if you actually want them used. As they stand, they're still useless. They're not supposed to be in line with the reward of a Titan Doomsday though. That's a much more expensive ship producing a shorter duration effect. Completely removing the penalties associated with a Burst Projector would also completely remove almost all trade off with their use and make them incredibly ubiquitous in Null combat. Given the strength of their AoE effects I don't think that would be particularly good for the game.
I'm not saying do away with the penalty, just either shorten the penalty or lengthen the effect
|
Cade Windstalker
1005
|
Posted - 2017.03.06 19:12:48 -
[226] - Quote
Zazz Blammy Matazz wrote:I'm not saying do away with the penalty, just either shorten the penalty or lengthen the effect
Which is what they're doing now. Given the tweaks they've been making to caps fairly regularly since Citadel dropped I'd be very surprised if this is the last change they make to the class as a whole. If they don't see any changes to Burst Projector use after this then they'll probably tweak things again since this suggests that they want to differentiate Supers from "Carriers but bigger and better" in a meaningful way and are trying to use the BPs to do that to an extent.
xOmGx wrote:CCP nerfs everything people like
Nah, it only seems that way because people like and gravitate towards OP things. Those things are then fun for the players using them and less fun for everyone who isn't. Then the thing gets nerfed, the people who didn't like it just silently nod and breath a sigh of relief, and people using the OP thing get pissed.
This holds for every game, not just Eve.
Trevize Demerzel wrote:Few things
#1 - I don't understand the point of these Dev posts. All they do is anger the player base and CCP does the change anyway ignoring pages of feedback.
#2 - before this change goes live I believe they must first fix/change he ui so players can easily see the % health of each fighter.
#3 - for ewar each fighter must be treated as an individual. Why should it be easier to lock down a [super]carrier then a drone boat Dominix.
- Two things here. One, if CCP doesn't make these announcement posts people get even more pissed. Two, CCP listens but "OMG no nerfs! Nerfs bad!!!" isn't much of an argument. People get pissed whenever CCP changes anything, or refuses to change anything, or pretty much does or doesn't do anything. If people not yelling in a thread was a criteria for game balance CCP would never change anything. These posts exist primarily for people to point out issues or things CCP might have missed and for CCP to provide explanations and feedback to the playerbase, not for CCP to bow to a few dozen player's rage-post objections and reverse course on something they already believe will be a good change.
- While I think pretty much everyone with any interest in Carriers supports this idea I don't think it needs to happen before this change goes in. The current Fighter survivability is based on the current information level, so the information this change is based on is valid regardless of any changes to the UI. Also a change like that is likely non-trivial or it would be out already.
- By that logic why should it be easier to lock down a regular Battleship than a Carrier or Dominix? Ignoring that ECM as a whole isn't a great mechanic I don't think this is much of an argument. Different things have different counters, making ECM affect a squad of 9 Fighters individually would just swing it from a reasonably effective counter to completely ineffective and worthless.
|
Tydorus Adoudel
Ascendance Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.07 00:18:13 -
[227] - Quote
Honestly you guys just ****** me over. I do not multi box I only have one account and I carrier rat. I just started carrier ratting and now I am going to lose my fighters and not make isk. Why not raise the Hp for fighters if They are going to be easier to kill or make it to where the ratts do not aggro fighters as much. I really do not understand this and its a **** idea. |
Oracle of Machina
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
38
|
Posted - 2017.03.07 00:38:48 -
[228] - Quote
I love how two weeks later, the "Reserved for answers" section contains exactly zero answers or explanations.
Great change, CCP! Make carriers useless again! |
Aernir Ridley
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
7
|
Posted - 2017.03.07 02:25:46 -
[229] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote: FIGHTERS We'd like to increase the potential counter-play options vs fighters. We're going to do this by increasing their signature radius which makes them a little easier to hit. They are currently around the small-medium drone range. This will put them in the same size category as heavy drones. [/list]
Would you be willing to take a look at the hard ECM counter to fighters at the moment? As is, a single griffin is basically a hard counter a single carrier. Would you consider buffing the sensor strength of fighters in some way as a way to balance this out if you're going to make larger ships able to hit them?
"For most people, the sky's the limit... For those who love aviation, the sky, is home."
-Cheers! :D
|
Cade Windstalker
1009
|
Posted - 2017.03.07 02:53:01 -
[230] - Quote
Aernir Ridley wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote: FIGHTERS We'd like to increase the potential counter-play options vs fighters. We're going to do this by increasing their signature radius which makes them a little easier to hit. They are currently around the small-medium drone range. This will put them in the same size category as heavy drones.
Would you be willing to take a look at the hard ECM counter to fighters at the moment? As is, a single griffin is basically a hard counter a single carrier. Would you consider buffing the sensor strength of fighters in some way as a way to balance this out if you're going to make larger ships able to hit them?
The flip side of this is that if that Griffin is even a tiny big slow on his locks he just disappears off grid in a puff of missiles, and he can be easily killed by any kind of support fleet.
While I'm certainly not a fan of ECM as it currently stands I don't think ECM as Fighter counterplay is inherently broken. It's not really out of line with how ECM works with other ships, except that it basically takes one ECM ship and a lot of micro to tie down one Carrier, where as a single ECM ship can normally tie down multiple sub-caps. |
|
Aegon Cadelanne
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1
|
Posted - 2017.03.07 02:53:46 -
[231] - Quote
Tabyll Altol wrote:So much tears from the PVE 0.0 Carebears.
I ratted about 40 hours in a niddy. My drones had around 5-6 times the aggro and i managed to lose only 1 fighter.
If this is 100% for some guys or way to much. No it isn-Št stop crying. Carrier ratting was/is way to safe for the ticks.
This is a start.
+1
soooo null space is safe huh? |
Kagi Anzomi
CK-0FF Reverberation Project
19
|
Posted - 2017.03.07 02:55:55 -
[232] - Quote
Oracle of Machina wrote:I love how two weeks later, the "Reserved for answers" section contains exactly zero answers or explanations.
Great change, CCP! Make carriers useless again! There really haven't been many questions asked. This thread is 85% "no, please don't do this" and 15% "yay, now nerf carrier damage so they can't kill cruisers" with approximately 0% questions. |
Moxy Algaert
Raised By Wolves Inc Blades of Grass
7
|
Posted - 2017.03.07 05:05:40 -
[233] - Quote
Mousing over squadrons to see damage % is beyond annoying. Fighter damage needs to be indicated in some heads-up display (like drones). |
Kagi Anzomi
CK-0FF Reverberation Project
20
|
Posted - 2017.03.07 08:19:50 -
[234] - Quote
Moxy Algaert wrote:Mousing over squadrons to see damage % is beyond annoying. Fighter damage needs to be indicated in some heads-up display (like drones). Indeed. Let me just point over to this little mockup I made nearly a year ago. The top is what we have now. Not much useful information, is there? The next three rows are very simple changes that would make a world of difference for all of us carrier pilots who don't like keeping our cursors over fighter squads at all times. |
Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation
92
|
Posted - 2017.03.07 09:13:15 -
[235] - Quote
If it hasn't been obvious before - this is why!
From the Economic Report
The massive increase is almost entirely due to Carrier/Super-ratting.
Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
|
Lugia3
The Pinecone Squad United Federation of Conifers
1525
|
Posted - 2017.03.07 12:27:15 -
[236] - Quote
Wow this thread is delicious.
"CCP Dolan is full of shit." - CCP Bettik
|
comander klieve
DeadMan's Squad Test Alliance Please Ignore
3
|
Posted - 2017.03.07 12:40:37 -
[237] - Quote
I think if you are going to increase the sig of fighters you should give a slight buff to fighter resists (or add a skill that can effect this?).
But as much as I am gonna be pissed the sig of a fighter being less then a heavy drone was kinda dumb in the first palce |
Captain Awkward
Republic University Minmatar Republic
136
|
Posted - 2017.03.07 13:22:18 -
[238] - Quote
Marcus Tedric wrote:If it hasn't been obvious before - this is why! From the Economic ReportThe massive increase is almost entirely due to Carrier/Super-ratting.
If carriers need to be nerfed then they need to be nerfed. But making NPCs volly 10m fighers of the field is a realy stupid way to nerf carrier income. There are so many ways they could have nerfed carrier ratting without making it feel so dumb and punishing. |
Le Prospecteur
El Ultimo Hombre Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2017.03.07 13:24:24 -
[239] - Quote
Captain Awkward wrote:Marcus Tedric wrote:If it hasn't been obvious before - this is why! From the Economic ReportThe massive increase is almost entirely due to Carrier/Super-ratting. If carriers need to be nerfed then they need to be nerfed. But making NPCs volly 10m fighers of the field is a realy stupid way to nerf carrier income. There are so many ways thay could have nerfed carrier ratting without making it feel so dumb and punishing.
Particularly when the BS bounty is around 1mil..
It's beyond ridiculous |
Gosch Ti
Strong Arms Inc. Integritas Constans
3
|
Posted - 2017.03.07 13:52:22 -
[240] - Quote
Fighter aggro was fine before.
This just smells like a nerf to carrier ratting to close the faucet.
Just the next step to interceptors online. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |