| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 |
1. Removal of passive resist bonus on shield/armour hardeners - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Viceran Phaedra wrote: TL;DR people read the bold paragraph. CCP I honestly think you should discuss this change further, at more 'morning meetings' (when clearly everybody is at their mental peak for the day...). The most important posts I ...
- by CCP Greyscale - at 2013.02.04 15:05:00
|
2. Removal of passive resist bonus on shield/armour hardeners - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Zhilia Mann wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote: We discussed this again at our morning design meeting today, and we're still of the opinion that this is the correct change to make in this case. Obviously we're keeping an eye on this thread to make s...
- by CCP Greyscale - at 2013.01.29 22:57:00
|
3. Removal of passive resist bonus on shield/armour hardeners - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
We discussed this again at our morning design meeting today, and we're still of the opinion that this is the correct change to make in this case. Obviously we're keeping an eye on this thread to make sure there isn't something we've missed, but as...
- by CCP Greyscale - at 2013.01.29 10:20:00
|
4. Removal of passive resist bonus on shield/armour hardeners - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
tl;dr yes, this has been removed, because we felt that for a number of reasons it wasn't a function we wanted on active hardeners This bonus came to the top of our work due to a defect, which prompted us to discuss whether we even wanted this fe...
- by CCP Greyscale - at 2013.01.28 13:23:00
|
5. Titan changes - update - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
MisterAl tt1 wrote: Quote: Ships Titans can now lock a maximum of three targets. XL turrets have had their signature resolution set to 2000m. Capital Turrets that are fitted to titans now have a new damage-scaling attribute; targets with a ...
- by CCP Greyscale - at 2012.04.23 16:47:00
|
6. Titan changes - update - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Tehg Rhind wrote: Bouh Revetoile wrote: Thread is gingo round in circles though... Yes but the question is CAN WE TRACK IT. I have to admit, I laughed pretty hard at this.
- by CCP Greyscale - at 2012.04.23 10:19:00
|
7. Titan changes - update - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
I'm Down wrote: Greyscale states that double the sig has the exact same effect in the tracking formula. He's an idiot. Doubling the signature resolution is the same as halving the tracking. My math isn't brilliant but I asked one of our math...
- by CCP Greyscale - at 2012.04.20 10:55:00
|
8. Titan changes - update - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
I'm honestly reluctant to push this change any further at this point, and we're reasonably hopeful that the combination of the locked-targets reduction, the damage reduction and the tracking nerf will give people enough wiggle room to fly a dictor...
- by CCP Greyscale - at 2012.04.18 17:05:00
|
9. Titan changes - update - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Cid Tazer wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote: CynoNet Two wrote: Hi Greyscale! After some testing we've found that dictors are still hilariously vulnerable to being picked off, especially since the tracking and target painter situations are unch...
- by CCP Greyscale - at 2012.04.18 14:31:00
|
10. Titan changes - update - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
CynoNet Two wrote: Hi Greyscale! After some testing we've found that dictors are still hilariously vulnerable to being picked off, especially since the tracking and target painter situations are unchanged. Current supercap fleet setups can sti...
- by CCP Greyscale - at 2012.04.18 14:06:00
|
11. Titan changes - update - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Kralin Ignatov wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote: Raivi wrote: Greyscale, any chance you can let us know what formula the current iteration uses for the damage reduction? Saves us the effort of reverse engineering it on sisi. :) Simple area c...
- by CCP Greyscale - at 2012.04.17 17:31:00
|
12. Titan changes - update - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Raivi wrote: Greyscale, any chance you can let us know what formula the current iteration uses for the damage reduction? Saves us the effort of reverse engineering it on sisi. :) Simple area comparison: damage is multiplied by sig_radius^2/n...
- by CCP Greyscale - at 2012.04.17 16:59:00
|
13. Titan changes - update - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
CCP Greyscale wrote: CynoNet Two wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote: Example: the "one tower per corp per day per system" rule is in principle hugely exploitable by having lots of corps anchor towers and then join the alliance. In practice and AF...
- by CCP Greyscale - at 2012.04.17 15:36:00
|
14. Titan changes - update - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
CynoNet Two wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote: Example: the "one tower per corp per day per system" rule is in principle hugely exploitable by having lots of corps anchor towers and then join the alliance. In practice and AFAIAA, it didn't get abus...
- by CCP Greyscale - at 2012.04.17 11:07:00
|
15. Titan changes - update - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
So: - The reason I'm asking about whether the x-instinct/halo setup is an actual problem is that, while it's often the case that EVE players will abuse any mechanical loopholes to the fullest extent possible, it's not always the case. Example: th...
- by CCP Greyscale - at 2012.04.17 10:45:00
|
16. Titan changes - update - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
MisterAl tt1 wrote: Bubanni wrote: Dreads were never supposed to be used for such things, that you been able to PVE with dreads for so long has just been an advantage for you... be happy about it, and deal with the future changes, if it's s...
- by CCP Greyscale - at 2012.04.16 17:44:00
|
17. Titan changes - update - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Ampoliros wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote: Battleships and sig radius: our current thinking is that all those sig radius penalties are there for sound balance reasons, and the only thing they really open up a vulnerability to right now is cap shi...
- by CCP Greyscale - at 2012.04.16 17:06:00
|
18. Titan changes - update - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
pmchem wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote: In either case though, it seems like a lot of effort to go to just to force people to fit target painters to their supercarriers; furthermore, the decision we've made is based partly on a desire to avoid sp...
- by CCP Greyscale - at 2012.04.16 16:25:00
|
19. Titan changes - update - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
pmchem wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote: Battleships and sig radius: our current thinking is that all those sig radius penalties are there for sound balance reasons, and the only thing they really open up a vulnerability to right now is cap ships....
- by CCP Greyscale - at 2012.04.16 15:53:00
|
20. Titan changes - update - in Ships and Modules [original thread]
Battleships and sig radius: our current thinking is that all those sig radius penalties are there for sound balance reasons, and the only thing they really open up a vulnerability to right now is cap ships. Ignoring them for the purposes of cap sh...
- by CCP Greyscale - at 2012.04.16 15:34:00
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |