EVE Search - Agility Changes on Singularity

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Agility Changes on Singularity

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 12 post(s)

CCP Nozh C C P	Posted - 2009.04.02 11:35:00 - [31] Originally by: Nichola Kreed damn it, another change that nerf solo and boost blob. Actually, the agility was preventing solo pvp as targets were able to warp out before getting scrambled. Nozh Game Designer CCP Games

Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.04.02 11:35:00 - [32] Originally by: CCP Nozh Unfortunately it's not that simple. The acceleration formula is based on mass and the agility modifier. Changing the warp speed threshold changes the balance between the classes drastically. I'm going to try some new values later on today: The main problem after the initial speed changes were cruiser/frigate sized ships, battleships don't need that much of a change. New values: (not yet applied to Singularity) Frigates: 1.0 Destroyers: 0.85 Cruisers: 0.9 Battlecruisers: 0.85 Battleships: 0.8 Well, a couple things- 1) I know it's not simple, I was just trying to cut to the chase and oversimplify a bit in my OP. Due to the nonlinear acceleration curves and the way mass and the agility modifier affect top speed and acceleration, you'd have to fine tune the warp threshold for each class to a particular value, and then take a look at how this base value is affected when positive or negative modifiers like plates or istabs are fit, to ensure that the new threshold numbers don't do strange things like scale wildly when istabs are fit, or make the thing take ten minutes to warp if a plate is added. Besides the obvious stuff above, what are the other downsides to changing the warp speed threshold? I'm not trying to be contrary here. I'm extremely happy that you're addressing this issue. I really am. Could we please look at the ratios between warp times and lock times per class of ship, and then each class of ship with a single sensor booster II with scan res script vs. the warp time of a ship one class smaller? Like a BS w/ SBII vs. a BC? What are our other options here? What about adding an additional 5m/sec to all blaster BS hulls? And 10m/sec to BCs and smaller? What about making exceptions for blaster ship hull agility? What other exotic non traditional options are possible that people have just dismissed out of hand because at first pass it might be construed as treating them as a special case? (which they are) Again, thanks for the attention to this huge issue! \o/ Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting

CCP Nozh C C P	Posted - 2009.04.02 11:50:00 - [33] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: CCP Nozh Unfortunately it's not that simple. The acceleration formula is based on mass and the agility modifier. Changing the warp speed threshold changes the balance between the classes drastically. I'm going to try some new values later on today: The main problem after the initial speed changes were cruiser/frigate sized ships, battleships don't need that much of a change. New values: (not yet applied to Singularity) Frigates: 1.0 Destroyers: 0.85 Cruisers: 0.9 Battlecruisers: 0.85 Battleships: 0.8 Well, a couple things- 1) I know it's not simple, I was just trying to cut to the chase and oversimplify a bit in my OP. Due to the nonlinear acceleration curves and the way mass and the agility modifier affect top speed and acceleration, you'd have to fine tune the warp threshold for each class to a particular value, and then take a look at how this base value is affected when positive or negative modifiers like plates or istabs are fit, to ensure that the new threshold numbers don't do strange things like scale wildly when istabs are fit, or make the thing take ten minutes to warp if a plate is added. Besides the obvious stuff above, what are the other downsides to changing the warp speed threshold? I'm not trying to be contrary here. I'm extremely happy that you're addressing this issue. I really am. Could we please look at the ratios between warp times and lock times per class of ship, and then each class of ship with a single sensor booster II with scan res script vs. the warp time of a ship one class smaller? Like a BS w/ SBII vs. a BC? What are our other options here? What about adding an additional 5m/sec to all blaster BS hulls? And 10m/sec to BCs and smaller? What about making exceptions for blaster ship hull agility? What other exotic non traditional options are possible that people have just dismissed out of hand because at first pass it might be construed as treating them as a special case? (which they are) Again, thanks for the attention to this huge issue! \o/ Having different warp thresholds on different classes of ships would just become confusing. My spreadsheet currently takes into account lock time vs. align time. (How long a ship takes to lock itself, and how long it takes to align and warp out). Class by class, sub-class by sub-class. About special casing blasterboats, that's not going to happen at this time. We'll have to look at the problem (if there is a problem) separately, I'll be posting another thread today where you can voice your concerns for blaster ships. But lets focus at the problem at hand for now. There will be a reboot at 14:00 which will apply the new changes. Nozh Game Designer CCP Games

Polinus Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2009.04.02 11:55:00 - [34] The boost to agility had a HUGE bennefit. They allowed fleets to warp of when titans were seen in field more easily. Now you reduce them again. And that just move the whole game again to the EVERYONE warp out always in 10 seconds regardless of speed because of the MWD cycle trick. Not a good change CCP. This just makes agility irrelevant again.

CCP Nozh C C P	Posted - 2009.04.02 11:56:00 - [35] Also I want to point out that I was going to post this yesterday, but I thought no one would take me seriously. Damn April 1. Nozh Game Designer CCP Games

Lefevre Caldari The Glenn Quagmire Finishing School for Young Ladies	Posted - 2009.04.02 11:58:00 - [36] Yet another nail in the solo coffin. pro-blob ftw - - Mind controlled by Chode Rizoum http://gigkb.skullone.net/?a=homehttp://gigkb.skullone.net/?a=home[/url][/url]
Kagura Nikon Minmatar M. Corp	Posted - 2009.04.02 11:59:00 - [37] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: CCP Nozh Unfortunately it's not that simple. The acceleration formula is based on mass and the agility modifier. Changing the warp speed threshold changes the balance between the classes drastically. I'm going to try some new values later on today: The main problem after the initial speed changes were cruiser/frigate sized ships, battleships don't need that much of a change. New values: (not yet applied to Singularity) Frigates: 1.0 Destroyers: 0.85 Cruisers: 0.9 Battlecruisers: 0.85 Battleships: 0.8 Well, a couple things- 1) I know it's not simple, I was just trying to cut to the chase and oversimplify a bit in my OP. Due to the nonlinear acceleration curves and the way mass and the agility modifier affect top speed and acceleration, you'd have to fine tune the warp threshold for each class to a particular value, and then take a look at how this base value is affected when positive or negative modifiers like plates or istabs are fit, to ensure that the new threshold numbers don't do strange things like scale wildly when istabs are fit, or make the thing take ten minutes to warp if a plate is added. Besides the obvious stuff above, what are the other downsides to changing the warp speed threshold? I'm not trying to be contrary here. I'm extremely happy that you're addressing this issue. I really am. Could we please look at the ratios between warp times and lock times per class of ship, and then each class of ship with a single sensor booster II with scan res script vs. the warp time of a ship one class smaller? Like a BS w/ SBII vs. a BC? What are our other options here? What about adding an additional 5m/sec to all blaster BS hulls? And 10m/sec to BCs and smaller? What about making exceptions for blaster ship hull agility? What other exotic non traditional options are possible that people have just dismissed out of hand because at first pass it might be construed as treating them as a special case? (which they are) Again, thanks for the attention to this huge issue! \o/ If you boost blaster speed you need to boost minmatar speed also. Because let be plain and simple, minmatar Must be the faster sicne they are the weakest on brute force. Then we startup an arms race again. I REALLY think all this will be solved when MWD is changed into a VERY high acceleration.. that can go ONLY straight until cycle ends!!! That would be a perfect module for blaster ships. On other hand AB speed could be raised a bit and minmatar would use mostly AB to kite (since you can change direction it becomes superior to kiting) ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.04.02 12:00:00 - [38] Originally by: CCP Nozh Also I want to point out that I was going to post this yesterday, but I thought no one would take me seriously. Damn April 1. It'll probably have to be next year instead of this one, but I'll buy you a beer at fanfest. ;) I'll be there with bells on to examine the new changes. \o/ And a separate thread to address blaster issues? Be still my heart! Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
Fossil Wolf omen. Gay4Life	Posted - 2009.04.02 12:01:00 - [39] So no more fleet stabbers with 0.9 align time? Furthermore by continuing this discussion we detract from the real issue many of us are having with eve online, the lack of break between signature and post content.
Polinus Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2009.04.02 12:09:00 - [40] Originally by: Fossil Wolf So no more fleet stabbers with 0.9 align time? nope.. now they will take 1.003 seconds to align.....
darkmancer	Posted - 2009.04.02 12:12:00 - [41] Edited by: darkmancer on 02/04/2009 12:12:30 Do you have to make changes to BS agilities? If you can't catch a bs your doing something wrong :) It's already a pain dragging them around it'd be nice not for them to be made even worse. --------------------------------- There's a simple solution to every problem. It is always invariably wrong
Jack Dant Minmatar The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre	Posted - 2009.04.02 12:16:00 - [42] Originally by: Lefevre Yet another nail in the solo coffin. pro-blob ftw The agility boost forces blobbing if you want to fight on gates. You can't tackle anything faster than a plated cruiser unless you have a dedicated tackler (sensor boosted frigate or interceptor). But dedicated tacklers can't kill much on their own, so you need at least one dps ship too. Then it quickly evolves into a whole gang.
Trox Aeze MILLITECH	Posted - 2009.04.02 12:20:00 - [43] Does this also apply to the yo-yo titans? With Nomad Implants and some agility mods, they are very quick to warp out.
isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.04.02 12:22:00 - [44] Edited by: isdisco3 on 02/04/2009 12:22:41 Originally by: CCP Nozh Originally by: Nichola Kreed damn it, another change that nerf solo and boost blob. Actually, the agility was preventing solo pvp as targets were able to warp out before getting scrambled. Actually, the agility was helping solo pvp because the agility allowed small hit-and-run gangs to have a chance of bailing when the inevitable blob showed up in response to gankings. Now they're going to get caught by the blobs, further hurting solo / small-gang pvp.
isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.04.02 12:25:00 - [45] Edited by: isdisco3 on 02/04/2009 12:25:26 doublepost ftl
Zamolxiss Amarr ROMANIA Renegades Legiunea ROmana	Posted - 2009.04.02 12:26:00 - [46] Edited by: Zamolxiss on 02/04/2009 12:26:36 You have a cookie for this Nozh Not for this thread in particular, but for the attitude, this should happen more often.. infact, i don't think any of us would have a problem with you guys missing an expansion for the sake of ballancig, bug fixing and general sistem overhaul.. Zulupark mentioned not so long ago the intention to rework all ships the way you did Sansha, and i think that can't happen to soon.. and you should follow up on that, even tho the amount of work is insame, we'll do our part.. just state your intentions and contributions will start pouring <3 Nozh
Kagura Nikon Minmatar M. Corp	Posted - 2009.04.02 12:43:00 - [47] Originally by: Trox Aeze Does this also apply to the yo-yo titans? With Nomad Implants and some agility mods, they are very quick to warp out. this also. PLEASE CCP. HALVE titans agility ( like in DOUBLE their warp time) ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
The Snowman Gallente Wurmz.	Posted - 2009.04.02 13:01:00 - [48] Originally by: CCP Nozh Originally by: Nichola Kreed damn it, another change that nerf solo and boost blob. Actually, the agility was preventing solo pvp as targets were able to warp out before getting scrambled. sigh I thought this was the entire point! since its a multi player pvp game, its beyond my comprehension why you would make changes to once again discourage multi playing and push the carebears back into high-sec. Your supposed to be encouraging pvp and multi-playing but you clearly have a desire to encourage solo play. Bizarre, very bizarre.
Handon Guild The Glenn Quagmire Finishing School for Young Ladies	Posted - 2009.04.02 13:04:00 - [49] Originally by: CCP Nozh Originally by: Nichola Kreed damn it, another change that nerf solo and boost blob. Actually, the agility was preventing solo pvp as targets were able to warp out before getting scrambled. Dodged that was quite well didn't you? no matter how you look at it, since you guys nerfed speed, if your gonna make an agility nerf its gonna hit the players that do small scale/solo pvp Blb-Online
RedSplat Heretic Army	Posted - 2009.04.02 13:15:00 - [50] I was rather tired of having to fit a SEBO to catch cruisers in belts that didnt want to be caught, when i was in a cruiser myself. Speaking as one of the ebil gate camping piwate fraternity it will be nice to not require a SEBO Hictor on gate with multiple RSB's on it to catch cruisers and in some cases BC's. Lag and module lag combined with the agility changes have made catching targets on gate and to a lesser extent in belts problematic without using specialized shiptypes. Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.04.02 13:37:00 - [51] Originally by: isdisco3 Edited by: isdisco3 on 02/04/2009 12:22:41 Originally by: CCP Nozh Originally by: Nichola Kreed damn it, another change that nerf solo and boost blob. Actually, the agility was preventing solo pvp as targets were able to warp out before getting scrambled. Actually, the agility was helping solo pvp because the agility allowed small hit-and-run gangs to have a chance of bailing when the inevitable blob showed up in response to gankings. Now they're going to get caught by the blobs, further hurting solo / small-gang pvp. It positively ruined my solo PVP. Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
Aylara	Posted - 2009.04.02 13:37:00 - [52] Originally by: CCP Nozh Originally by: Nichola Kreed damn it, another change that nerf solo and boost blob. Actually, the agility was preventing solo pvp as targets were able to warp out before getting scrambled. Humm, then the agility buff was not the reason for me seeing more people venturing into low-sec and even 0.0 NPC space, in small/medium ships. Strange, i thought that this was the thing that made carebears venture out of hi-sec and even try some PVP. But since you have all the statistics, I guess you know what you're talking about
Myra2007 Shafrak Industries	Posted - 2009.04.02 13:41:00 - [53] GOOD, though i would have preferred an appropriate boost to scan resolution instead, so that combat doesn't feel "slower". I remember the feeling on sisi after the speed nerf and before the agility changes - that was awful and felt like slow motion. -- Originally by: Jasper Dark I agree! Lets go back into caves and lick rocks!
The Snowman Gallente Wurmz.	Posted - 2009.04.02 13:43:00 - [54] Originally by: Bellum Eternus It positively ruined my solo PVP. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
RedSplat Heretic Army	Posted - 2009.04.02 13:53:00 - [55] Originally by: Aylara Humm, then the agility buff was not the reason for me seeing more people venturing into low-sec and even 0.0 NPC space, in small/medium ships. Strange, i thought that this was the thing that made carebears venture out of hi-sec and even try some PVP. But since you have all the statistics, I guess you know what you're talking about Post QR i saw a few more week old frigates in Lowsec, that are impossible to catch without an interceptor or dual sebo on a cruiser or sebo on a destroyer. Fair enough. Then there was the odd cruiser, just like there always has been- except now they could turn on a dime and warp before one could lock them in another cruiser and fitting a SEBO didnt guarantee catching them unless they were plated. That is and was and will still be if changes arent made, imbalanced. Following the latest patch there has been a significant increase in week old frigates, presumably 'boxxies' if you like that term. They seem to be after BS rats. All the agility changes did was make it easier for cruisers and BC's to avoid fights. Significantly easier. Did this result in more Empire dwellers in Lowsec? Not really, the reason they live in highsec is so they dont have to take risks and the rewards to Lowsec arent significant enough to appeal to the legendary greed of highsec bears. The 'Highsec' players in lowsec i'm seeing are all new players that dont know any better. Hell, last week i had someone that thought i was a rat. Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
Caldari Citizen4714	Posted - 2009.04.02 14:22:00 - [56] What about pods and shuttles? I was solocamping the highsec side of a dead end gate from lowsec into highsec (trying to catch red flashies going into empire) in an interceptor with over 3k scan res (.8s lock on a pod) and never caught a single a frigate, shuttle, or pod before it was in warp. A couple of times I control+clicked ten or 15 times before they went invulnerable due to warp and still never got a lock. - Support DISBANDING the Alliance CCP Renamed at the Alliance's Request
attitude man Viper Squad	Posted - 2009.04.02 14:24:00 - [57] how about caps and super caps??
The Snowman Gallente Wurmz.	Posted - 2009.04.02 14:24:00 - [58] Originally by: RedSplat Following the latest patch there has been a significant increase in week old frigates, presumably 'boxxies' if you like that term. They seem to be after BS rats. It doesnt take long for a boxie to get into a cruiser, several friends of mine had started the trial and they are in cruisers before the trial is over. So the benefits of agility buff for new players is equally true. Originally by: RedSplat All the agility changes did was make it easier for cruisers and BC's to avoid fights. Significantly easier. Great! Whats the problem? more newbs in low-sec, be honest, new players will make many more mistakes that have NOTHING to do with agility, they dont understand about local, or aligning, or checking sec-status, nor do they really understand the overview and lets not forget the directional scanner. Nor do they know how to judge what ships are a threat or not. I cant beleive that solo pvp'ers are only able to kill newbs because of their inability to warp off fast... if so, then they are very poor pirates indeed. Originally by: RedSplat Did this result in more Empire dwellers in Lowsec? Not really, the reason they live in highsec is so they dont have to take risks and the rewards to Lowsec arent significant enough to appeal to the legendary greed of highsec bears. I disbelieve this entirly, after talking to people in FW many many players say that they ventured into low sec more. Also remember that low sec spawns BS's so YES the reward IS more appealing. The reason they didnt venture was because they could be caught on the gate so fast. Originally by: RedSplat The 'Highsec' players in lowsec i'm seeing are all new players that dont know any better. Hell, last week i had someone that thought i was a rat. And this is what pirates want, and rebutt's my point exactly. With the influx of new players into low-sec I really am suprised to hear pirates crying about agility, I really am, but not nearly as suprised as I am to hear an actuall CCP Dev wanting to encourage solo play. Maybe someone should show him the meaning of MMO.
Cpt Cosmic	Posted - 2009.04.02 14:27:00 - [59] Edited by: Cpt Cosmic on 02/04/2009 14:27:23 1. welcome back MWD cycle trick, makes agility on heavy plated/big ships nonrelevant 2. welcome back assault ships that align like cruiser 3. welcome back slower acceleration, epic fun with blaster boats incoming :>
Beardponderer Malevolent Evolution The Church.	Posted - 2009.04.02 14:31:00 - [60] What a load of █▀█ █▀▀ █▌█ ▀█▀ █▀▀ █▀▀ █▀▀ █▐█ ░█░ ▀▀█ ▀░░ ▀▀▀ ▀░▀ ▀▀▀ ▀▀▀ Looks good ----------------------------------------------

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.