Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
|
CCP Nozh
C C P
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 20:26:00 -
[1]
Ok.
Since the bonuses were announced TomB and I have been very active crunching numbers and exchanging pretty excel sheets.
Feedback has been plenty, more is always welcome. Patience is required to test the Tech 3 ships, since itÆs very hard to actually figure out what the subsystems do. That will hopefully change very soon once we get proper names and descriptions for the subsystems.
Common questions:
Will we see a Khanid Amarr offensive subsystem?
ItÆs being considered as Subsystem 4 at the moment.
Cloaking Subsystems, for real?
This also is being considered as Subsystem 4. But weÆve a lot of other ideas for electronic subsystems.
Electronic Subsystems no longer have one subsystem with different sensor strength, was it by design? Can we have it back?
It was by design yes, do you really want it back?
Where do tech 3 ships fit in?
Most simple way I can put it: Tech 2 û Focused. Tech 3 û Broad.
WeÆre trying to allow players to play multiple roles, without overshadowing tech 2.
Maximum targets 2, by design?
No, Lemur reminds me of fixing this everyday. I'm on it.
Work since we announced the Bonuses:
òSlot layout has changed drastically û A whole new approach was taken (on Singularity since 14:00 25.02.09). òMass distributed to subsystems û WeÆll possibly use this for tweaking later on. òA lot of attributes base attributes tweaked. òDrone bandwidth and capacity added to subsystems. òAll defensive subsystems have T2 resistances. òVarious bonuses have been tweaked (Values not functionality). òProduction: Subsystems have been made much cheaper, while the hulls have been made more expensive. (Chronotis will update you further on this)
Bugfixes:
òPossible to get over 100% resistances. òEngineering Subsystems not giving hardpoints (on Singularity since 14:00 25.02.09). òHeat ship bonus not being applied.
Next Days?
òTake a closer look at fitting requirements. òTake a closer look at capacitor. òMore bonus tweaking. òFollow feedback on slot changes
I urge you to test the changes on Singularity, the new slot layouts change everything.
Nozh Game Designer CCP Games |
|
Perry
Amarr The X-Trading Company RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 20:30:00 -
[2]
IT IS GLORIOUS
thanks for this, the new stats are much better! /strokes 6/6/7 Legion with T2 resists
|
Freyya
GeoCorp. Paxton Federation
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 20:30:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Freyya on 25/02/2009 20:32:58 1ST in a CCP Thread!
Epic work and love the changes, looking forward to more balancing. Actually glad now to have a proteus with actual drone bandwith and the slot layouts are quite good aswell eventhough i can't get a 6-6-7 layout afaik
2nd actually ___________
NOW COLLECTING ISD AND CCP AUTOGRAPHS It'll be worth something someday. -Rauth
|
Finnroth
Caldari The Guardian Agency Guardian Federation
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 20:32:00 -
[4]
As for the different sensor types - hell yes, give 'em back !
As for drones, i could swear the stats loock rather random last time i checked, but i will make sure.
|
keepiru
Omega Fleet Enterprises Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 20:33:00 -
[5]
So there is light at the end of the tunnel. Hopefully its not an incoming train.
Eagerly awaiting a build that has the actual bugs wrt STRACs (cap recharge, turret hardpoints after leaving/entering ship) fixed, so that actual testing can occur. The clock is ticking. ... and I really think they should boost T2 plate HP.
|
Perry
Amarr The X-Trading Company RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 20:34:00 -
[6]
Originally by: CCP Nozh
òAll defensive subsystems have T2 resistances.
Well the Amarr Defensive Subsystem 2 has none!
|
|
CCP Nozh
C C P
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 20:34:00 -
[7]
Originally by: keepiru So there is light at the end of the tunnel. Hopefully its not an incoming train.
Eagerly awaiting a build that has the actual bugs wrt STRACs (cap recharge, turret hardpoints after leaving/entering ship) fixed, so that actual testing can occur. The clock is ticking.
Oh yeah, all those bugs are fixed also...
Nozh Game Designer CCP Games |
|
|
CCP Nozh
C C P
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 20:35:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Perry
Originally by: CCP Nozh
òAll defensive subsystems have T2 resistances.
Well the Amarr Defensive Subsystem 2 has none!
Not on Singularity yet, hopefully tomorrow or the day after.
|
|
keepiru
Omega Fleet Enterprises Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 20:37:00 -
[9]
Edited by: keepiru on 25/02/2009 20:36:54
Originally by: CCP Nozh Where do tech 3 ships fit in?
Most simple way I can put it: Tech 2 û Focused. Tech 3 û Broad.
WeÆre trying to allow players to play multiple roles, without overshadowing tech 2.
Where "Broad" currently reads as "HACs with 1 recon bonus", is that the final design?
edit: excellent news on the bugs ... and I really think they should boost T2 plate HP.
|
|
CCP Nozh
C C P
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 20:38:00 -
[10]
Originally by: keepiru
Originally by: CCP Nozh Where do tech 3 ships fit in?
Most simple way I can put it: Tech 2 û Focused. Tech 3 û Broad.
WeÆre trying to allow players to play multiple roles, without overshadowing tech 2.
Where "Broad" currently reads as "HACs with 1 recon bonus", is that the final design?
Have faith there are more subsystems to come. Even though we wont be able to deliver them on March 10th.
|
|
|
Cailais
Amarr 0utbreak KrautbreaK
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 20:40:00 -
[11]
Feedback - failure to bring in Subsystems 4 and 5 (and the massive potential these could have provided) is a bitter disappointment.
C.
Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
|
keepiru
Omega Fleet Enterprises Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 20:41:00 -
[12]
What kinda market price range are you planning for these things anyway?
We've gotten conflicting developer input on this during the course of development. ... and I really think they should boost T2 plate HP.
|
Elisabeth Dakar
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 20:43:00 -
[13]
Did you consider giving the players reasonable subsystems skills without trainingtime? I just startet a queue on my main, but until they are all up to 3 or 4 it will take a few days. I fear that till then there will be a new mirror before the skills are on a level where i would consider them ok.
|
El Yatta
Mercenary Forces
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 20:47:00 -
[14]
Good stuff to hear, I like what we've seen so far.
I have some suggestions:
1) I really really think you need to diversify using subsystems 4 and 5, in order to allow more "crossover" roles (off-racial tanking, secondary weapon systems being primary - e.g. minmatar drone bonused boat - , logistics-style bonuses), in order to differentiate from T2.
If the only opportunities turn out like existing t2 ships, why would I use the T3 ship to make a worse version? If I dock to change, I could just switch into that specialised ship!
The trick is not to make them BETTER than T2 at those roles, its to cross them over.
For example - have an engineering subsystem that has the logistics bonus to Remote rep range. Without the ability to fit large RR on a medium ship, and the cap use bonus, its NOT possible to make a better logistics (and this is good). But you COULD have a damage ship that can project a medium RR quite far, making it a versatile gunboat that can move around instead of huddling within 5k like a RR bs gang. Or an ECM/RR combo for versatile support.
No non-damage subsystem should have better/all of the bonuses of T2 (no ECM range AND strength, no logistics size, cap, and range), but you should be able to cross them over.
2) Make sure that the less "obviously good" bonused subsystems have better slots, for gods sake! If all you get is sig radius and scan res, instead of all-powerful EW, that subsystem had better be damn good to compete.
3) Off racial sensors - cant personally say I'd pick a subsystem based on that but it could be a nice trick to use.
_______________________________________________ Mercenary Forces |
Elisabeth Dakar
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 20:49:00 -
[15]
Originally by: keepiru What kinda market price range are you planning for these things anyway?
We've gotten conflicting developer input on this during the course of development.
Since T3 production is relying on a complete new material chain no one will be able to predict pices of t2 ships at the moment. The only thing which can be said is that they will be very expensive in the beginning and than get cheaper. Not even the devs can predeict how the market will be developing in the next few months.
|
keepiru
Omega Fleet Enterprises Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 20:52:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Elisabeth Dakar
Originally by: keepiru What kinda market price range are you planning for these things anyway?
We've gotten conflicting developer input on this during the course of development.
Since T3 production is relying on a complete new material chain no one will be able to predict pices of t2 ships at the moment. The only thing which can be said is that they will be very expensive in the beginning and than get cheaper. Not even the devs can predeict how the market will be developing in the next few months.
You're right of course, but since the production chain is mechanically not that different from that of invented T2 goods, educated guesses can be made by applying the same kind of production chain mark-up to the base input prices, and the income people will expect from W-Space work is easily inferred. ... and I really think they should boost T2 plate HP.
|
Janus Ovellian
Minmatar Calpolli Namtz' aar K'in
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 20:54:00 -
[17]
Yeah, I noticed some of the more "stationary gun platform" type Amarr setups are no longer possible since the grid on engineering subsystem 1 was reduced.
Which is good. You could fit 3 1600mm plates, and 6 heavy pulse II's with grid to spare for a mwd and cap injector with lvl 5 of the engineering subsystem skill and an ACR or two.
Originally by: CCP Nozh Electronic Subsystems no longer have one subsystem with different sensor strength, was it by design? Can we have it back?
It was by design yes, do you really want it back?
I quite like the idea - as long as the sensor strength is around about t1 levels. But I can't say I care too much that it's gone, sooo... w/e.
Originally by: CCP Nozh ò All defensive subsystems have T2 resistances.
I'm assuming this hasn't made it onto sisi yet. But that's a nice change.
Originally by: CCP Nozh ò Mass distributed to subsystems û WeÆll possibly use this for tweaking later on.
I'm not sure this is working as intended - the only subsystem I've found that actually adds mass does so through the "Mass" attribute rather than the "Mass Addition" attribute. (Amarr Defensive Subsystem 1)
One last point - the weapon systems layouts for the Minmatar Offensive Subsystems 2 and 3 have changed - which means that the subsystem with split bonuses no longer has an equal number of missile hardpoints.
I'll keep looking over the changes and come back with proper feedback once I've had a chance to digest it all. At first glance the slot changes look good though - especially the electronic subsystem ones.
Interesting times await... |
Laszlo Ozawa
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 20:54:00 -
[18]
hello,
a lot of action apparently happening in the 11th hour, but lets see where we can go from here. the present iteration looks a bit more reasonable in slottage placement, however the underlying ship roles are already filled by other ships, leaving us with a line-up of BCs and HACs implemented as modular ships, with a single surprise buttsex bonus in the form of electronics systems.
the extent of choice there is a predictable and obvious one, since the EW bonus is the only one truly worth using - if you're not going with EW then you go for sig radius/scan res, which makes you a little faster at locking and a bit hard to hit *shrug*
so pretty much all legions are some kind of a zealot/absolution mash up with a nos bonus, all Lokis are vagabond/sleipnir kitbashes with web bonus, all proteus are either ishtar copies or deimos/astarte pretenders with scamble bonus, and tengus are drakes or eagles with jamming.
The current implementation provides players with what is essentially a modular Tech I cruiser, for the price of a Tech II Battlecruiser. 90m isk fullerene price translates, once everything else is accounted for, to 200-250m isk retail price with the figures currently on the public test server. This is orders of magnitude too high for the class abilities and power of Strategic Cruisers. Any design of the ships capabilities must have a corresponding adjustment of the drop rates and mining rates of its production inputs in order for the retail price to be commensurate with its approximate power level.
the impression created here is that the design of t3 ship capabilities and t3 production mechanic with established volumes is occurring with somewhat limited communication.
|
Sphynx Stormlord
Gallente Federal Defence Union
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 20:57:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Elisabeth Dakar
Since T3 production is relying on a complete new material chain no one will be able to predict pices of t2 ships at the moment. The only thing which can be said is that they will be very expensive in the beginning and than get cheaper. Not even the devs can predeict how the market will be developing in the next few months.
CCP could, however, estimate the amount of player time required of competent players to build each hull/component.
And if that time is around 3 hours per hull+subsystems, then they will be of a comparable pricing to t2 ships at the moment. If it is more like 30, then they will not be worth flying.
|
Elisabeth Dakar
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 21:09:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Sphynx Stormlord
Originally by: Elisabeth Dakar
Since T3 production is relying on a complete new material chain no one will be able to predict pices of t2 ships at the moment. The only thing which can be said is that they will be very expensive in the beginning and than get cheaper. Not even the devs can predeict how the market will be developing in the next few months.
CCP could, however, estimate the amount of player time required of competent players to build each hull/component.
And if that time is around 3 hours per hull+subsystems, then they will be of a comparable pricing to t2 ships at the moment. If it is more like 30, then they will not be worth flying.
you forget resource gathering and market mechanics. only because u need X hours to build a ship doesnt mean you can predict its price, not even with a big error.
|
|
IceAero
Amarr Shadow Company
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 21:10:00 -
[21]
Still can't board a fitted T3 ship without breaking it :(
|
Perry
Amarr The X-Trading Company RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 21:11:00 -
[22]
Okay i allready found a flaw in amarr subsystem design:
The Ship Combination 11111 gives 2 med slots and 3 low slots. Although the 7 rof bonused turrets make up for a lower count on slots, this config is in no way viable for anything. This is a result of the way too harsh penalty on the whole subgroup 1, which is starving for slots, leaving the ship nothing to do besides exploding fast. I would like you to reconsider nerfing a resist bonus with less slots while the similar powerful repair boost bonus gets more slots to play with.
I would like you to tweak this a bit by giving all modules similar power and similar slottage, so there is no way to gimp the ship beyond hope. Right now the improvements are there, but still the balance is missing! ccp to the rescue!!!
|
Dwindlehop
Uninvited Guests Rote Kapelle
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 21:16:00 -
[23]
Originally by: CCP Nozh Electronic Subsystems no longer have one subsystem with different sensor strength, was it by design? Can we have it back?
It was by design yes, do you really want it back?
All we want is an option to make a ship that is tricky to jam. You're the dev: please figure out the best way to do that. :)
|
keepiru
Omega Fleet Enterprises Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 21:21:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Elisabeth Dakar you forget resource gathering and market mechanics. only because u need X hours to build a ship doesnt mean you can predict its price, not even with a big error.
Sure you can, or rather, you can easily predict its floor, because you know that people won't shift their butts to kill sleepers unless they're getting more isk than they do running 4s or ratting in nullsec (activities which have virtually no risk of shiploss unlike sleeper-killing), and you also know that miners will want more isk than they get for mining veld in highsec, and probably closer to what they get for mining ABCs in nullsec. ... and I really think they should boost T2 plate HP.
|
Elisabeth Dakar
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 21:23:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Perry Okay i allready found a flaw in amarr subsystem design:
The Ship Combination 11111 gives 2 med slots and 3 low slots. Although the 7 rof bonused turrets make up for a lower count on slots, this config is in no way viable for anything. This is a result of the way too harsh penalty on the whole subgroup 1, which is starving for slots, leaving the ship nothing to do besides exploding fast. I would like you to reconsider nerfing a resist bonus with less slots while the similar powerful repair boost bonus gets more slots to play with.
I would like you to tweak this a bit by giving all modules similar power and similar slottage, so there is no way to gimp the ship beyond hope. Right now the improvements are there, but still the balance is missing! ccp to the rescue!!!
Who said that 11111 has to be viable?
|
Laszlo Ozawa
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 21:29:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Laszlo Ozawa on 25/02/2009 21:37:33
Originally by: Elisabeth Dakar
Who said that 11111 has to be viable?
all combinations have to be at least basically viable. having a ship-creation kit which produces ship layouts that are not viable is a fundamental insult to everyone who worked on this project, and a waste of future development time spent on doing secondary balancing passes when only 2-3 versions of any t3 ship are roughly-usable, never mind viable choice by comparison to existing t1 and t2 ships. |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 21:29:00 -
[27]
Edited by: MotherMoon on 25/02/2009 21:33:01 I like them but... I think it wouldn't be cool if they did things no other ships could do.
like salvage bonuses Adding damage to webs/damps/ECM/nuets fitting bonuses to weapons/shield systems heat bonuses for high/med low? 5% heat bonus to high slot per level sort of thing. massive warp speed increase bonuses. Cargo holding space increase bonus for wormhole space. structure resistance bonuses. Sleeper tech bonuses please :( New stuff, explain why this new tech is new.
Honetly these ships should outdo tech 2. But in honor or eve, not be able to kill 2 of them. But they SHOULD be better. Even if not as focused, and if not that, they should be different and wacky.
OK I'll keep ym ideas simple ebcuase I know you guys don't have much time.
I think a nice little bonus to make tech 3 ships a little different would be 10% Resistance bonus to structure per level of racial cruiser. This would give them a built in damage control unit. And be kinda cool.
also the heat bonus should be 7.5% per level :)
other than that, thanks for your hard work, I'm sure it will be awesome. Or something.
|
IceAero
Amarr Shadow Company
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 21:36:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Perry Okay i allready found a flaw in amarr subsystem design:
The Ship Combination 11111 gives 2 med slots and 3 low slots. Although the 7 rof bonused turrets make up for a lower count on slots, this config is in no way viable for anything. This is a result of the way too harsh penalty on the whole subgroup 1, which is starving for slots, leaving the ship nothing to do besides exploding fast. I would like you to reconsider nerfing a resist bonus with less slots while the similar powerful repair boost bonus gets more slots to play with.
I would like you to tweak this a bit by giving all modules similar power and similar slottage, so there is no way to gimp the ship beyond hope. Right now the improvements are there, but still the balance is missing! ccp to the rescue!!!
This is a combination of two separate subsystem issues:
1) The Amarr Electronic Subsystem 1, It gives you the ability to use nos/neuts (or it will if it ever gets a small range bonus [PLEASE I LOVE YOU]). It gives you a high slot but you LOSE a low slot! (and a mid slot I think) And you NEED lot slots to actually use neuts, aka, you increase your cap recharge to the point of it not being stupid to fit one or two.
A 5-6 turret gun boat sporting a bonus'd neut or two? and THAT is a scary cruiser ;) But not if it will only get 1 neut cycle in before running out of cap.
Oh fit an injector you say? Well with 3 low slots you show me how to have the PG/CPU for that after TRYing to give yourself a little buffer tank. Not to mention having less then 1000 total cap after fitting an MWD.
SOLUTION: Amarr Electronic Subsystem 1 needs to not take away a low slot. Honestly, I don't think ANY electronics subsystem should modify low slots...make them modify mid slots only, unless they are bonused FOR a high slot device, like neuts or maybe a covops cloak, then it's ok if they add a high slot.
2) Amarr Engineering Subsystem 1: This is the subsystem that gives you a ton of PG with HORRIBLE cap amount/recharge. This subsystem also adds two high slots, two turrets/launchers, and takes away a low slot.
Well if you're going to give me bad cap recharge you better give me a low slot to try to help!
SOLUTION: Amarr Engineering Subsystem 1 should give you one extra low slot.
A general NOTE:
The legion, in many setups, is very low-slot-crippled, however there are many ways to give you more mid slots than you really have use for (like 5 and 6...for what? cap rechargers? I'd like another low slot pleasethanks, save the excess mid slots for gallente ships and give us the better armor tank!)
Now, there is still ONE way to get 8 low slots, and 1-2 more to get 7, but most give you 4-5-6 and 1 more mid slot than you need (unless you fit something like 1-1-1-1-1...and then you're just screwed). I think these subsystems are almost perfect, just return this Amarr ship to its rightfulness classification of "chances are, I've got more low slots than you"
Proteus can do 7-6-6 or something nuts like that...think about it. |
Lijhal
FrEE d00M Fighters
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 21:40:00 -
[29]
aside from all the bonuses (thumps up!)
is there a bug with the shader option? i have better textures and graphics at "low" as in "high" ...
|
IceAero
Amarr Shadow Company
|
Posted - 2009.02.25 21:44:00 -
[30]
Originally by: MotherMoon
also the heat bonus should be 7.5% per level :)
I'm going to quote everyone that says this, because I agree so damn much. :)
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |