Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 56 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Mindless Slave
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:06:00 -
[361]
TO wrangler, Tuxford, and the newest nerf-bat wielder Fendahl: Thank you for listening to the community. Samurel (sp?) had a good idea in Khanid MK II and the community as a whole supported it. Unlike alot of MMO companies you guys actually saw an eloquent answer to problems that plagued amarr and took it. I appluad that.
The Nos thing is good too, it will of course require some monitoring and fine tuning, but with this new guy(CCP Fendahl) on the team I am confident you guys can do it.
|
Arkios Odymei
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:06:00 -
[362]
Edited by: Arkios Odymei on 31/07/2007 09:07:06 Im loving these changes, both Nos and Khanid!
And all the whiners need to stop whining. All they did was make nos so it is no longer idiot proof. Now it needs a little thinking to function properly (just as it should be with any module, there should be no works-at-all-times-insta-pwn button)
Note: I fly both a Curse and a Pilgrim regularly. ------------------------------------------------------------------
|
VunnaX
Cardshark Influence
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:07:00 -
[363]
This patch is good, but not for the curse, the curse are specialy on nos , why nerf her specialist ? Change the nos system ok fait ship abuse it, but not for the curse, its her specialist, if you change it , change all specialist of all recon...
|
Artemis Dragmire
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:07:00 -
[364]
Gonna have to think on these NOS changes, NOS is overpowered, I'll give you that, but the changes suggested and implemented on the test server seem a little over the top... though I have no argument for an alternative or why it should be changed at this point, so I'll refrain from further comments until I put more thought into it.
|
Ovno ConSyquence
Amarr The Plebians
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:07:00 -
[365]
Am I the only person who thinks the nos change buffs the amarr?
Take an apoc for example...
Fit 2 x lar IIs and 6 x mega pulse IIs and you'll find your cap sits around zero after a couple of cycles (might need a mwd in there to really gimp your cap)
Once in this capless state you can use your 2 heavy nos to your hearts content
Then add a cap injector probably to make sure you can still fight if theres no cap available for you to nos (probably with 400's instead of 800's so your cap doesn't go too high)
And there we go a nice short ranged nos gank and tank ship...
Or have I got it wrong somehow? |
Mindless Slave
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:08:00 -
[366]
Edited by: Mindless Slave on 31/07/2007 09:08:25 Oh and BTW, don't listen to the babies who are loosing their I-win button. You guys have the vision that is eve so go with it. Listening to the whiners pre-release/nerf will only end up with craptastic results (i.e. myrmidon's 125 M3 drone bay... wtf man???)
|
Santa Anna
Caldari Blackguard Brigade
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:11:00 -
[367]
Originally by: Belial02 NOS nerf is just another whiners victory. There were counters to it, ppl just wouldnt use em. Its gonna gimp alot of ships horribly. Oh and its gonna boost the vaga even more btw
Counters to Nos boats currently on TQ: -fly a nos boat -don't undock -bring tons of people
If a nos user knows what he's doing, the only way to beat him solo is to fly a better nos boat.
As for boosting the Vaga, fit a damn neut. It'll zap more cap than a nos. _____ CPU Love |
n0thing
omen.
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:18:00 -
[368]
Originally by: Belial02 NOS nerf is just another whiners victory. There were counters to it, ppl just wouldnt use em. Its gonna gimp alot of ships horribly. Oh and its gonna boost the vaga even more btw
Ah right.
So, what are counters? Boosters that use huge charges?
What about ships with 3 med slots?
Gimp what? 6 nosf domies? I fly one, and I am not gimped. I just refit it and make it same, riskier, but same.
---
|
Mindless Slave
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:19:00 -
[369]
Does half of eve fly Nos-boats or are the Nos-boat users really this whiny?
|
N1fty
Amarr Galactic Shipyards Inc HUZZAH FEDERATION
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:22:00 -
[370]
Edited by: N1fty on 31/07/2007 09:27:16 So the curse isn't as uber in solo 1v1 combat anymore, big deal. Sacri is wicked, Khanid changed breathe new life into Amarr!
Oh and I was on the test server last night, you know, actually testing the changes before I came and whined like a little girl on the forums.
I can tell you my Curse killed battleships and battlecruisers just like before. I fit one neut to kill my targets tank and nossed someone else to feed the neut. In this way I killed an Abaddon and then a Claymore. I used the Claymores cap against the Abaddon by using it to feed my neut. I enjoyed that. All the time I had enough cap to run my MWD, damps, tracking disrupters, and scram; I was even dual repping at one point when the Claymore got close.
This is just one example of what I did last night, there were many other examples of my supposedly nerfed Curse killing ships. It just took a bit of thought about who to nos and when.
So its not as easy as clicking orbit, then just setting all nos, ew, and drones on the target. Todays Curse pilot is forced to think . Good players will still be solo killing with any ship they turn their hand to; people with no skill will come whine on the forums about their mindless flavour of the month solo pvp ships being ruined. Oh well
EDIT: CCP, please ignore the whiners who want easy to fly solo ships. Veteran players like myself will always adapt to changes, and go kill the unadaptive forum whiners. Your NOS changes make complete logical sense, please keep them in. [This coming from a specialised Curse pilot with Talisman implants]
============================================
|
|
Daimos Bellurdan
Black Reign FATAL Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:23:00 -
[371]
Thank you ccp for the nos nerf.
Every ship out there using a rack of Nosferatus was overpowered. I just love to see the curse/pilgrim pilots going berserk because their solopwnmobile is being nerfed. Priceless!
As I see it the new nos has gained a different role. First thing is: It is useless against ships with high cap usage or ships that start fights with low cap. Im thinking about the blaster ships that have to mwd to the target while using armor repairers. You arrive with 50% cap while the target has got 100% cap, so at first you are immune against nos and you are guaranteed a few good nos cycles for yourself. Its an indirect boost to blaster setups or setups that lose cap fast.
Im sure people will adapt and come up with some very nice setups. Some may not like the way the nosferatu was changed, but one thing is definately true: A change was needed.
|
Kel Dario
Amarr M. Corp M. PIRE
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:25:00 -
[372]
Thirteen pages already.... me wonder if the devs really read everything or if any further posting is pointless. Anyway here goes....
I like most of the changes to the Khanid ships except one, locking their missile bonus to one specific weapon system is just bad for so many reasons, the Damnation one the most obvious.
And the nosferatu changes is stupid, when you now fix 3 ships out of 4 you also make the 3 good amarr ships that was made for it useless; Pilgrim, Curse, Bhaalgorn.
It would make sense if the new nosferatu was based on signature radius and diminishing returns, but not this.
If you going to stay with it then at least revise the 3 amarr nos-ships first.
//Kel
|
LvxOccvlta
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:26:00 -
[373]
Edited by: LvxOccvlta on 31/07/2007 09:29:24 Edited by: LvxOccvlta on 31/07/2007 09:29:06 Edited by: LvxOccvlta on 31/07/2007 09:27:44 I remember when I was a noob, I hated NOS as well. I wished for an anti-nos, and that day came with the advent of super-charged Remote Sensor Dampeners.
You noobs who are getting nos'd in low-sec by wardec'd dominixes should try fitting an RSD sometime. They work.
CCP, please end this insanity. Continue to boost Amarr, and read this thread here:
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=566624
The solution is to limit NOS hardpoints to 1 or 2 slots on all ships, except for the curse, pilgrim, and arbitrator which are dedicated NOS boats with NOS bonuses.
|
Parallax Error
Amarr Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:27:00 -
[374]
Ok, basically a repost of points I've put in other threads, but seeing as this is the discussion thread now:
Point 1. Nos needs a change, but this current proposal is overly complicated and hits the actual NOS ships (Curse/Pilgrim/Blood Raider) too hard. Yes there are other setups that can be used, but this change has suddenly made nos a very occasional module.
The biggest single complaint I keep seeing is with large nos being an I-win button against smaller ships. If thats the case, use the sig radius suggestion and limit the ability of larger nos to hit smaller ships.
Point 2 HAM's have too short a range. The Standard HAM has only 18% of the range of a Heavy Missile, compare this to the large launchers where Torps have 68% of the range of Cruise. Even the small launchers where Rockets have 24% of the range of Light missiles. I suggest upping the base flight time of T1 and Faction HAM's to 6 seconds.
There is a very good reason why people are not using HAM's on TQ at the moment. Their range is far too short (note i'm not talking about Javelin HAM's here).
Point 3 Damnation needs the bonuses to all missile types. It's a slow ship and is using HAM's on it (even if given a longer range) will not be common or useful.
Point 4 The Malediction does not need a lock range reduction. 24 km scramblers are common today, your going to introduce a change that will make a tackling ship unable to utilise one of its primary modules to full effect. Why? Give the new Malediction it's old lock range back and whilst your at it give the Claw a better lock range as well. They shouldn't be hamstrung like that in this day and age.
~fin
|
Belial02
Amarr The Collective Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:28:00 -
[375]
Originally by: n0thing
Originally by: Belial02 NOS nerf is just another whiners victory. There were counters to it, ppl just wouldnt use em. Its gonna gimp alot of ships horribly. Oh and its gonna boost the vaga even more btw
Ah right.
So, what are counters? Boosters that use huge charges?
What about ships with 3 med slots?
Gimp what? 6 nosf domies? I fly one, and I am not gimped. I just refit it and make it same, riskier, but same.
Yes cap booster is one of em, ECM, speed and using your brain are others.
And no I wasnt thinking about domi, I was thinking about curse. So do me a fevour and stfu.
Originally by: Omeega diplomacy is f1, f2, f3, really...
|
Tronm
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:28:00 -
[376]
As an Amarr pilot, I say no thanks to the Khanid mk2 changes. I trained Amarr for the lasers. If I wanted to use missiles I would train up Caldari. This change is stupid. Give Amarr a boost to lasers instead.
|
Rodj Blake
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:30:00 -
[377]
Originally by: LordVodka Some people are suggesting that people now use neuts instead of nos, I don't know if they realized severall amarr ship need nos to even sustain cap, try throwing a neut on there you'll last 30 seconds, cut me a break, theres no way around the fact taht this is a way over done nerf.
If you need nos to keep your guns and modules running, then the change will not affect you, since your capacitor will typically be lower than your opponent's.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Rodj Blake
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:33:00 -
[378]
Originally by: Tronm As an Amarr pilot, I say no thanks to the Khanid mk2 changes. I trained Amarr for the lasers. If I wanted to use missiles I would train up Caldari. This change is stupid. Give Amarr a boost to lasers instead.
Caldari pilots have to train both hydrids and missiles to get the full benefit of all of their ships.
Why shouldn't the Amarr have some variety in their shiptypes?
And if you don't want to train up missiles, you'll still have the majority of Amarrian ships to play with.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
N1fty
Amarr Galactic Shipyards Inc HUZZAH FEDERATION
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:34:00 -
[379]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
Originally by: LordVodka Some people are suggesting that people now use neuts instead of nos, I don't know if they realized severall amarr ship need nos to even sustain cap, try throwing a neut on there you'll last 30 seconds, cut me a break, theres no way around the fact taht this is a way over done nerf.
If you need nos to keep your guns and modules running, then the change will not affect you, since your capacitor will typically be lower than your opponent's.
Flogging a dead horse there mate, they dont want to hear about how High Cap usage ships are getting a huge boost here. People need to go away, play on the test server for a few hours, then come back and say well done to CCP.
============================================
|
Xeron Silverblade
Esthar Industries
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:37:00 -
[380]
t2 frigs will be trained next and since those changes i know exactly which frig to bring to 5 ;-) vengenance will be loads of fun als t2 rocket kessy which never has been stable enough for anything serious. as well as the malediction will do fine as a hawk-counterpart. i like those changes to the frigs, 'though i can not comment on the hac/cs as i'm too far away from flying them with my skills.
regarding the nos change: i don't think it will make much of a change since people will simply mix neuts/nos on draining-setups and switch them on/off as needed. what i would have liked more to see is a drainage depending on the targets total cap, f.e. 10% of total cap transfered per cycle
target ship hast 500 cap, is drained with a nos which can drain 10% of total cap, but not more than 100 in total, so it drains 50 per cycle while
target ship has 5000 cap it will drain the 100 which is its maximum.
it would still make it possible to suck a ship's cap empty but not that fast which would mean a real chance for close range ceptors/af -- (This space intentionally left blank for now) |
|
Gabriel Karade
Quam Singulari M. PIRE
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:37:00 -
[381]
I endorse this product. "Ruuunaaawayy!!! Run Nos-Jockeys!! Run for your Liveeesss!!!!..."
I keep seeing people ask, "ZOMG!!! how R u supposed to kill an inty in a BS now!!111??"
Well, I've not used Nosferatu on any of my Blasterthron setups for 2 years.
Either: Get them in web range and vaporise them in one volley, or don't and just ignore them - you are not supposed to be able to fit one setup to effortlessly kill everything out there...
Oh and the people moaning about the Curse/Pilgrim, ask yourselves; are you really supposed to be able to solo the big ships? You want to solo, risk something bigger, or use the Recon's in their proper place - as part of a mixed gang, a wingman in a HAC for example.
----------
Video - 'War-Machine' |
Sailon
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:39:00 -
[382]
Originally by: n0thing
Originally by: Belial02 NOS nerf is just another whiners victory. There were counters to it, ppl just wouldnt use em. Its gonna gimp alot of ships horribly. Oh and its gonna boost the vaga even more btw
Ah right.
So, what are counters? Boosters that use huge charges?
What about ships with 3 med slots?
Gimp what? 6 nosf domies? I fly one, and I am not gimped. I just refit it and make it same, riskier, but same.
theres module called remote sensor dampener it reduces locking range and locking time
|
Yukiyo
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:41:00 -
[383]
A sig based change would have made sense, making a Large Nos on a BS as effective as a Small Nos on a Frigate for example, regardless of how much cap each ship has. If you really want to level the playing field so a large Nos type does not disadvantage a smaller ship.
Quite why the hell one ship should alwalys be on a level field with another class altogether is beyond me.
What irks me is how contrived and artificial all these changes are. CCP really have a great old history of fiddling and mucking about with things to 'balance.'
Personally the game is so unrecognizable to the good old days i am getting fed up of it. Tbh, were it not for the real time skills system i would have bailed a long time ago.
|
Sniser
4S Corporation Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:51:00 -
[384]
i like a lot nosf and khanid changes.
But i have a few concerns:
Malediction: Why we got em bonus damage? em bonus already sucks on armor, so intys usually only fit plate or dc. if we fight vs another inty and i have to chose em rocket i would be doing less damage than if i use my explosive rocket vs any inty any day.
Also there is another problem with malediction. It need to fly over web range or you gonna be toast in matter of seconds.
I would change the 5 rockets damage to 10 rocket damage. And add flight time or velocity to rockets in the free bonus.
Although i have say HAM bonus for sacri and damn are good. Since i guess if not we would had EM bonus damage instead and that sucks. There is one problem with HAM missiles and its their very very short range. With max skills a HAM missile can travel to 15km. The difference between max range rocket and max range ham are only 5km but when you compare vs torpedos (next tier short range missile) the range up until 80km. The difference is too high.
Range missiles:
rocket 10km - light missiles 40km HAM 15km - Heavy missiles 83km Torpedo 83km - Cruise missiles 166km
Each time we upgrade a tier in long range missiles they double their max range plus a few km.
So if rocket had 10km. HAM should have bewteen 22km - 25km range to be in line with the other missiles.
if you fix ham missiles then im OK with khanid changes
The last problem are curse and piligrim. Those ships should have a bonus to let them use neuts a lot more cap efficiently. So they can kill caps enemy without completly killing their own cap
|
Drunken Cajun
F.R.E.E. Explorer EVE Animal Control
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:55:00 -
[385]
Thanks for trying to help bring the prices of my curse and pilgrim down CCP
laissez les bon temps rouler |
Dadoes
The Valour United Confederation of Corporations
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:55:00 -
[386]
Edited by: Dadoes on 31/07/2007 09:58:28 Firstly I like the Khanid changes, however the NOS changes I'm not so sure about - not the fact it's being changed just that the changes seem overcomplicated and a little illogical?
My proposed change for the NOS would be as follows:
(Percentage and fixed capaciter values are just examples used to show the principle)
Small NOS: Frigate Class 2.5% leech against a fixed max capaciter value of 250.
Medium NOS: Cruiser Class 2.5% leech against a fixed max capaciter value of 1000.
Large NOS: Battleship Class 2.5% leech against a fixed max capaciter value of 5000.
The max capaciter value only comes into play if the target capaciter is larger than the max capaciter value - If the targets capaciter is smaller than the max capaciter value, its the targets capaciter value that is used (therefore no insta-drains from BS's to frigates). NOS's can continue to leech once a target has reached 0 cap, but cannot transfer more energy than is left in the targets capaciter to your own capaciter (therefore when the target is at 0 cap, you get no cap back yourself).
As the leech amount is now % this means NOS's can be stacking nerfable.
Faction mods could just have a larger fixed capaciter values.
|
MinRray
Minmatar FireTech Pure.
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:56:00 -
[387]
what about the usefullness of talisman implants ? |
ChapterMaster
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:56:00 -
[388]
** incoming rant **
I just have to say that I am shocked and disgusted to say the least, Hasn't enough been done cripple Amarr? how about you make lasers generate heat when they fire? that makes sense right? the only thing "interesting" about this change is that you found something else to hinder and hurt the Amarr.
|
IPyric
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 09:58:00 -
[389]
Can CCP move all SP's relating to Amarr over to Minmitar skills for thos that dont want to be amarr after this change ?
|
IPyric
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 10:00:00 -
[390]
CCP can shove all my Amarr acounts up their #@($ if these changes comes in.. any of them. I cant belive we pay them to come up with this crap
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 56 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |