Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 41 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 19 post(s) |
Ban Doga
|
Posted - 2010.09.21 06:14:00 -
[1141]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis a quick update - the first set of balance changes to rockets should end up on sisi next week (possibly earlier but at the very least next week). For now as we mentioned previously, none of the changes should be too surprising, the explosion velocity got a boost along with the overall damage (RoF decreased whilst rocket damage increased) alongside increase in clip size). Specific numbers and detailed info on the changes will be posted next week in a sticky thread here in this forum at the to get the testing and feedback kicked off.
And it took you how many months to tell "it has to fit into the bigger picture" and "it's not just changing some numbers" and then go and do exactly what had been suggested hundreds of times already?
|
yani dumyat
Minmatar Black Storm Cartel The Orca Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.09.21 07:31:00 -
[1142]
_______
Trolls and Tribulations A story of eve, trolls, world domination and dogfighting against starlings in a tiny dramiel. |
Dzajic
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.09.21 09:48:00 -
[1143]
Everyone predicted that a silly broad buff to rockets was certain after entire :18months: thing. CCP as expected completely missed the point that rocket issues were used as a symbol of general "balance" status of game.
By buffing all aspects of rockets you will of course make rocket specialized frigs and dictors silly OP.
So, a year from now all frigate engagements will be Caldari T3 frig with a rocket fit, vs the Angel Ships. :CCP:
Polished content =/= broken and unbalanced content. |
Yankunytjatjara
Amarr Blue Republic
|
Posted - 2010.09.21 12:35:00 -
[1144]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis a quick update - the first set of balance changes to rockets should end up on sisi next week (possibly earlier but at the very least next week). For now as we mentioned previously, none of the changes should be too surprising, the explosion velocity got a boost along with the overall damage (RoF decreased whilst rocket damage increased) alongside increase in clip size). Specific numbers and detailed info on the changes will be posted next week in a sticky thread here in this forum at the to get the testing and feedback kicked off.
OMFG YES darnit I was actually starting to get out of this spaceships habit
And don't forget the tactical overview option for solo/small gangs: Ship Velocity Vectors |
Wildcard Trek
Caldari Corp 54 Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.09.21 14:30:00 -
[1145]
Edited by: Wildcard Trek on 21/09/2010 14:35:48
Giving Rockets a damage bonus and reducing the rate of fire is about the same thing as doing nothing, rockets are not instant damage like every other weapon system out there, rockets / missiles do not get a damage bonus to the spec skills like every other weapon system out there, instead they get a rof bonus, which means little to nothing in the grand scheme of things.
Buff rockets, really buff rockets, give them a damage increase that is comparable to gunnery, dont lessen the rof, add more capacity to rocket launchers 100% more than now, and change the rocket / missile spec skills to reflect a damage bonus like every other weapon system out there.
Basic gunnery skill 5% damage per level Basic missile skill 5% damage per level Gunnery Support Skill Rapid fire skill 4% rof per level
Spec gunnery skill 2% damage per level ( Instant damage ) Spec missile skill 2% rof per level ( worthless ) Missile Support Skill Rapid launch skill 3% rof per level ( again less than gunnery, make it 4% as well )
If your gonna buff then go ahead and buff and not tease about a buff.
Change missile damage to be comparable to gunnery make the damage per level in the spec skill the same as gunnery and make the rof skill the same as gunnery.
Why do rockets / missiles have to suck, they dont. But since they do I quit using them over 2 years ago since they are so horrible, and never looked back. Wasted 12 some Mil SP.
|
steave435
Caldari SniggWaffe GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2010.09.21 14:51:00 -
[1146]
Quote: Giving Rockets a damage bonus and reducing the rate of fire is about the same thing as doing nothing
That completely depends on how much those stats change. For example, if rof is cut in half but damage is multiplied by 10, then the dps has gone up 5x.
|
Zach Donnell
Ghost-Busters
|
Posted - 2010.09.21 15:29:00 -
[1147]
Originally by: Wildcard Trek Edited by: Wildcard Trek on 21/09/2010 14:35:48
Giving Rockets a damage bonus and reducing the rate of fire is about the same thing as doing nothing, rockets are not instant damage like every other weapon system out there, rockets / missiles do not get a damage bonus to the spec skills like every other weapon system out there, instead they get a rof bonus, which means little to nothing in the grand scheme of things.
Buff rockets, really buff rockets, give them a damage increase that is comparable to gunnery, dont lessen the rof, add more capacity to rocket launchers 100% more than now, and change the rocket / missile spec skills to reflect a damage bonus like every other weapon system out there.
Basic gunnery skill 5% damage per level Basic missile skill 5% damage per level Gunnery Support Skill Rapid fire skill 4% rof per level
Spec gunnery skill 2% damage per level ( Instant damage ) Spec missile skill 2% rof per level ( worthless ) Missile Support Skill Rapid launch skill 3% rof per level ( again less than gunnery, make it 4% as well )
If your gonna buff then go ahead and buff and not tease about a buff.
Change missile damage to be comparable to gunnery make the damage per level in the spec skill the same as gunnery and make the rof skill the same as gunnery.
Why do rockets / missiles have to suck, they dont. But since they do I quit using them over 2 years ago since they are so horrible, and never looked back. Wasted 12 some Mil SP.
The whine is strong in this one.
Isn't decreasing the ROF going from say 2s to 1.5s? Maybe I'm wrong, but maybe you should wait and see what they actually do before you start *****ing :) -------------------------------------------------
"Bustin' makes me feel good!" |
Alexeph Stoekai
Stoekai Corp
|
Posted - 2010.09.21 16:00:00 -
[1148]
Originally by: Izuru Hishido
That said!
If CCP were to create another server, (Space based operations on Tranquility, Space based testing on Singularity, and ambulation on a completely different server, and maybe call it Relativity or something like that) THEN and only then ambulation would be possible and very, very feasible. I really do appreciate that you want to see your character from a third person omniscient standpoint or even from a first person limited standpoint, but right now, it simply cannot happen all on the same server.
Ever since they started working on WiS, CCP has made it clear that it will be running on its own nodes. it was one of the main reasons cited for not being able to see things outside of the station through windows.
You're raging over nothing, mate. And you're incredibly off-topic. -----
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.09.21 16:10:00 -
[1149]
Edited by: Hirana Yoshida on 21/09/2010 16:10:53
Originally by: Wildcard Trek Giving Rockets a damage bonus and reducing the rate of fire is about the same thing as doing nothing..
Very much depends on what else they do.
My hope is that they make them into miniature HAMs. Much higher damage output than lights but requiring tackle/TP for maximum efficiency.
To do that they have to increase damage by a factor of 3 as well as decrease RoF by about 1.5 (to get around 3.5s RoF or so). After that all that is needed are small tweaks to Exp.velocity/radius to drop damage to light level unless aforementioned tackle/TP are applied.
Looking forward to seeing what they are doing at any rate, getting a little bored using gun toting Vengeances
|
Duchess Starbuckington
|
Posted - 2010.09.21 16:46:00 -
[1150]
Quote: My hope is that they make them into miniature HAMs. Much higher damage output than lights but requiring tackle/TP for maximum efficiency.
Umm, what? Have you been reading this thread at all? The fact they need full tackle + TP to be properly effective is why they're completely ****ed. _________________________________
ROCKET STATUS: NOT FIXED |
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.09.21 16:54:00 -
[1151]
Originally by: Duchess Starbuckington Umm, what? Have you been reading this thread at all? The fact they need full tackle + TP to be properly effective is why they're completely ****ed.
Note that I did not use the '+' sign and used current HAMs as example.
Problem you run into if you do not make tackle/TP a requirement is the Caldari ships with range bonuses. With rigs you can get a damn good range on rockets and if dps is increased without accounting for this then a ship like the Crow will not only come out from its mothballed status but it will utterly **** all competitors.
Non-range bonus ships have to be in scram/web range anyway so they will not be significantly/adversely affected by it.
|
Deva Blackfire
Viziam
|
Posted - 2010.09.21 17:11:00 -
[1152]
Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 21/09/2010 17:14:47 As far as i remember crow IS a combat interceptor - and probably one of worst of them. Crusader/Taranis eats it alive, claw is kinda worse but still decent. Crow is behind the flock. With rocket boost it should still die to crusaders and rail ranises but will have decent chances against blaster ranis. Dunno about claw, i dont fly them (my small AC "skill" comes solely from sabre piloting).
The only rocket ship i would be worried about is kestrel as it is kinda nasty already.
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.09.21 17:24:00 -
[1153]
Originally by: Deva Blackfire ...The only rocket ship i would be worried about is kestrel as it is kinda nasty already.
Kinda? Done right they are well beyond nasty
Kestrel is one of the reasons I want tackle/TP to be mandatory. Basically forces it to go tank at the cost of dps or vice versa ..
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2010.09.21 18:03:00 -
[1154]
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida My hope is that they make them into miniature HAMs. Much higher damage output than lights but requiring tackle/TP for maximum efficiency.
To do that they have to increase damage by a factor of 3 as well as decrease RoF by about 1.5 (to get around 3.5s RoF or so). After that all that is needed are small tweaks to Exp.velocity/radius to drop damage to light level unless aforementioned tackle/TP are applied.
Tripling the damage, that's crazy talk! And such a weapon system would not scale well - it would be hard to use solo, but a frigate gang with sufficient tackle available would be insane to use any other weapon.
Sod "mini-HAMs", just give us rockets that aren't crippled by the first afterburner and that aren't so massively reliant on webbing the opponent.
|
yani dumyat
Minmatar Black Storm Cartel The Orca Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.09.21 19:01:00 -
[1155]
Something that worries me slightly is that Chronotis didn't mention DRF.
I'll wait till they hit sisi before making any judgments but if the DRF hasn't been modified then a boost to Ev will do very little in terms of reducing the need for a web. _______
Trolls and Tribulations A story of eve, trolls, world domination and dogfighting against starlings in a tiny dramiel. |
Hawk TT
Caldari Bulgarian Experienced Crackers Circle-Of-Two
|
Posted - 2010.09.21 22:36:00 -
[1156]
k Originally by: Izuru Hishido
If walking in stations happens, then most of the 1500 people who were in that fight would be unable to replicate that ever again in the future just because of the sheer amount of server resources dedicated to each person in each room wandering around rendering the hair, the eyes, the clothes, and the character picking their nose while outside the station people are trying to fight.
Tranquility is not a single server, but a cluster of many, many blade-servers, known as "nodes". With the recent system architecture changes there are different roles assigned to different nodes - SOL Nodes (space simulation), Character Nodes (market, evemail etc.). Ambulation a.k.a Walking in Stations a.k.a. Incarna will be hosted on different type (dedicated) of nodes, that's for sure!
One more thing - rendering hair, eyes, clothes will be performed by your EVE Client, i.e. on each player's PC. Tranquility has nothing to do with visual rendering. Of course, some players complain even now that Incarna would require serious PC resources (DirectX 10 GPU, I suspect), but that's optional game aspect, isn't it?
Originally by: Izuru Hishido
Walking in stations and 1500 man fights (and Tranquility could barely support that then, and certainly can't support it now) simply cannot be supported without CCP inventing some phenomenal new server that could support it. No MMO can handle that. Not now, anyway. Maybe in five or ten years, but not right now.
a) Incarna will be separated by the 1500 man flights, at least in the first iterations. So, don't worry - there will be no direct influence on big fights. b) Jita recently managed to support 2023 playes + many hundreds of CONCORD ships + frenetic market & chat acitivity.
SS01: 1997 Players @ 60FPS / Gate View SS02: 2003 Players @ 55FPS / Outside 4-4 Station View SS03: 2025 Players @ 41FPS / Outside 4-4 Station View SS04: 1979 Players @ 20FPS / Outside 4-4 Station - Concord Fight SS05: 1992 Players @ 24FPS / Outside 4-4 Station - Concord Overview SS06: Windows 7 x64 - Resources @ 5 EVE Clients
That said!
P.S. I KNOW JITA MASS TEST WAS NOT A FIGHT SIMULATION, BUT INCARNA WILL BE A DIFFERENT TYPE OF SIMULATION AS WELL! ___________________________________ Science & Diplomacy Manager @ BECKS Circle-of-Two |
OT Smithers
|
Posted - 2010.09.21 23:47:00 -
[1157]
Originally by: Zach Donnell
Isn't decreasing the ROF going from say 2s to 1.5s? Maybe I'm wrong, but maybe you should wait and see what they actually do before you start *****ing :)
A decrease in the rate of fire means that it is firing less often. A change from 2sec to 1.5 seconds would be an increase in the rate of fire.
|
OT Smithers
|
Posted - 2010.09.21 23:54:00 -
[1158]
Originally by: Wildcard Trek Edited by: Wildcard Trek on 21/09/2010 14:35:48
Giving Rockets a damage bonus and reducing the rate of fire is about the same thing as doing nothing, rockets are not instant damage like every other weapon system out there, rockets / missiles do not get a damage bonus to the spec skills like every other weapon system out there, instead they get a rof bonus, which means little to nothing in the grand scheme of things.
We need to see what the actual numbers are. But yeah, I understand your point.
Quote: Buff rockets, really buff rockets, give them a damage increase that is comparable to gunnery, dont lessen the rof, add more capacity to rocket launchers 100% more than now, and change the rocket / missile spec skills to reflect a damage bonus like every other weapon system out there.
Basic gunnery skill 5% damage per level Basic missile skill 5% damage per level Gunnery Support Skill Rapid fire skill 4% rof per level
Spec gunnery skill 2% damage per level ( Instant damage ) Spec missile skill 2% rof per level ( worthless ) Missile Support Skill Rapid launch skill 3% rof per level ( again less than gunnery, make it 4% as well )
If your gonna buff then go ahead and buff and not tease about a buff.
Change missile damage to be comparable to gunnery make the damage per level in the spec skill the same as gunnery and make the rof skill the same as gunnery.
Why do rockets / missiles have to suck, they dont. But since they do I quit using them over 2 years ago since they are so horrible, and never looked back. Wasted 12 some Mil SP.
ItÆs Caldari.
Caldari are SUPPOSED to suck for PvP -- their ships and weapons are designed that way.
|
Zach Donnell
Ghost-Busters
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 01:09:00 -
[1159]
Originally by: OT Smithers
Originally by: Zach Donnell
Isn't decreasing the ROF going from say 2s to 1.5s? Maybe I'm wrong, but maybe you should wait and see what they actually do before you start *****ing :)
A decrease in the rate of fire means that it is firing less often. A change from 2sec to 1.5 seconds would be an increase in the rate of fire.
Fair enough, however I dislike the ambiguity in the statement.
Originally by: OT Smithers
ItÆs Caldari.
Caldari are SUPPOSED to suck for PvP -- their ships and weapons are designed that way.
Why do people continue to perpetuate this myth? -------------------------------------------------
"Bustin' makes me feel good!" |
OT Smithers
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 02:24:00 -
[1160]
Originally by: Zach Donnell Why do people continue to perpetuate this myth?
Probably 'suck' is too strong a word but that's okay.
|
|
Braitai
Ice Fire Warriors
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 05:44:00 -
[1161]
Originally by: yani dumyat Something that worries me slightly is that Chronotis didn't mention DRF.
I'll wait till they hit sisi before making any judgments but if the DRF hasn't been modified then a boost to Ev will do very little in terms of reducing the need for a web.
Quoted for importance.
Without order nothing can exist. Without chaos nothing can evolve. |
Duchess Starbuckington
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 07:16:00 -
[1162]
Quote: ItÆs Caldari. Caldari are SUPPOSED to suck for PvP -- their ships and weapons are designed that way.
Quoted for amusing levels of stupidity. _________________________________
ROCKET STATUS: NOT FIXED |
OT Smithers
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 13:32:00 -
[1163]
Originally by: OT Smithers Caldari are SUPPOSED to suck for PvP -- their ships and weapons are designed that way.
Quoted for.... wait wat?
|
OT Smithers
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 14:43:00 -
[1164]
Originally by: Duchess Starbuckington
Quote: ItÆs Caldari. Caldari are SUPPOSED to suck for PvP -- their ships and weapons are designed that way.
Quoted for amusing levels of stupidity.
This sentiment is expressed regularly on pretty much every eve forum and subforum: that Caldari are a good (though perhaps not ultimately the best) choice for PvE, and a poor choice for PvP. People say it because it's self evident. Nor is there any reason to assume that this was anything other than a design / balance decision on the part of the devs.
|
Agent Unknown
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 14:54:00 -
[1165]
Originally by: OT Smithers
Originally by: Duchess Starbuckington
Quote: ItÆs Caldari. Caldari are SUPPOSED to suck for PvP -- their ships and weapons are designed that way.
Quoted for amusing levels of stupidity.
This sentiment is expressed regularly on pretty much every eve forum and subforum: that Caldari are a good (though perhaps not ultimately the best) choice for PvE, and a poor choice for PvP. People say it because it's self evident. Nor is there any reason to assume that this was anything other than a design / balance decision on the part of the devs.
I dunno...the Falcon/Drake/40km blaster Rokh really don't seem that bad to me. Did I mention 100 man drake fleets? 500 dps + a decent buffer + logistics is nothing to laugh at. I forgot to mention that you are in fact reading something that is called a signature. |
Duchess Starbuckington
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 15:44:00 -
[1166]
Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington on 22/09/2010 15:55:33
Quote: This sentiment is expressed regularly on pretty much every eve forum and subforum: that Caldari are a good (though perhaps not ultimately the best) choice for PvE, and a poor choice for PvP. People say it because it's self evident.
Caldari are fine for PVP. Do you do nothing but RR battleship blobs or have you just not played since 2006?
Quote: Nor is there any reason to assume that this was anything other than a design / balance decision on the part of the devs.
Please link me to the CCP post saying they actively decided to make Caldari bad at PVP (and if they did say that, they evidently didn't try very hard.)
Quote: I dunno...the Falcon/Drake/40km blaster Rokh
See also: Scorpion, Raven, Ferox (no, seriously, it's surprisingly workable for its price with some fitting creativity) Rook, Cerberus, Onyx, Caracal, Moa, Blackbird, Harpy, Merlin, Basilisk, Kestrel, Kitsune and whatever else I've missed.
Many reading this will already be quoting one or more of the ships listed there along with a but with a decent fitting they're all workable. _________________________________
ROCKET STATUS: NOT FIXED |
yyyyxorp
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 16:08:00 -
[1167]
Originally by: OT Smithers
Originally by: Wildcard Trek Edited by: Wildcard Trek on 21/09/2010 14:35:48
Giving Rockets a damage bonus and reducing the rate of fire is about the same thing as doing nothing, rockets are not instant damage like every other weapon system out there, rockets / missiles do not get a damage bonus to the spec skills like every other weapon system out there, instead they get a rof bonus, which means little to nothing in the grand scheme of things.
We need to see what the actual numbers are. But yeah, I understand your point.
Quote: Buff rockets, really buff rockets, give them a damage increase that is comparable to gunnery, dont lessen the rof, add more capacity to rocket launchers 100% more than now, and change the rocket / missile spec skills to reflect a damage bonus like every other weapon system out there.
Basic gunnery skill 5% damage per level Basic missile skill 5% damage per level Gunnery Support Skill Rapid fire skill 4% rof per level
Spec gunnery skill 2% damage per level ( Instant damage ) Spec missile skill 2% rof per level ( worthless ) Missile Support Skill Rapid launch skill 3% rof per level ( again less than gunnery, make it 4% as well )
If your gonna buff then go ahead and buff and not tease about a buff.
Change missile damage to be comparable to gunnery make the damage per level in the spec skill the same as gunnery and make the rof skill the same as gunnery.
Why do rockets / missiles have to suck, they dont. But since they do I quit using them over 2 years ago since they are so horrible, and never looked back. Wasted 12 some Mil SP.
ItÆs Caldari.
Caldari are SUPPOSED to suck for PvP -- their ships and weapons are designed that way.
So true.
|
yyyyxorp
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 16:11:00 -
[1168]
Originally by: Deva Blackfire Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 21/09/2010 17:14:47 As far as i remember crow IS a combat interceptor - and probably one of worst of them. Crusader/Taranis eats it alive, claw is kinda worse but still decent. Crow is behind the flock. With rocket boost it should still die to crusaders and rail ranises but will have decent chances against blaster ranis. Dunno about claw, i dont fly them (my small AC "skill" comes solely from sabre piloting).
The only rocket ship i would be worried about is kestrel as it is kinda nasty already.
Everything you say, seems ******ed.
|
yyyyxorp
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 16:17:00 -
[1169]
Originally by: Gypsio III
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida My hope is that they make them into miniature HAMs. Much higher damage output than lights but requiring tackle/TP for maximum efficiency.
To do that they have to increase damage by a factor of 3 as well as decrease RoF by about 1.5 (to get around 3.5s RoF or so). After that all that is needed are small tweaks to Exp.velocity/radius to drop damage to light level unless aforementioned tackle/TP are applied.
Tripling the damage, that's crazy talk! And such a weapon system would not scale well - it would be hard to use solo, but a frigate gang with sufficient tackle available would be insane to use any other weapon.
Sod "mini-HAMs", just give us rockets that aren't crippled by the first afterburner and that aren't so massively reliant on webbing the opponent.
To bad battlecruisers and criusers dont generaly use, after burners, or else hams would face similiar reduction in damage (not as much though).
-die thread die
|
OT Smithers
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 16:57:00 -
[1170]
Originally by: Duchess Starbuckington
Please link me to the CCP post saying they actively decided to make Caldari bad at PVP (and if they did say that, they evidently didn't try very hard.)
I do not know that there is such a statement. That said, if one were to go to any PvP game on the internet (regardless of genre) and ask the players there to name the most desirable traits for winning, the attributes they list as important or even critical for victory could easily be used as a listing of everything the Caldari lack. Accident?
The guys at CCP are professionals. No one at CCP thought that slow ships were better than fast, less drones better than more, delayed DPS better than instant. I could go on, but donÆt need to -- you already know.
Does this mean that Caldari are hopeless or useless? Obviously not. They seem to be, as you say yourself, workable.
Quote: I dunno...the Falcon/Drake/40km blaster RokhàScorpion, Raven, Feroxàetc
Many reading this will already be quoting one or more of the ships listed there along with a but with a decent fitting they're all workable.
I think you said it yourself -- you admit that most of the community might chuckle over this list. The term you use is æworkableÆ and this sounds about right. Not the best tool for the job, but workable. And everyone knows it. The only question is whether or not CCP does. I contend that they are professionals who made the Caldari what they are by design.
Of course, if this is not the case, then it is up to CCP to correct the error. There is only one way to do that. Perhaps that is their intention with this rocket æfixÆ. Perhaps they intend to make rockets really deadly as a first step towards improving the Caldari overall. We will see.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 41 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |