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) |
Raimo
Gallente Wrath of Fenris
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 10:01:00 -
[121]
Edited by: Raimo on 03/04/2009 10:01:34
Originally by: Yakov Draken
In the past a sensor boosted BC could lock a Cruiser in time, a SB'd BS could lock a BC in time and each class could lock its' own class fast enough without a SB. Can we please go back to this.
OFC this is what it really boils down to, and it seems is what they're trying to accomplish. I would just prefer it if there was any other way than making ships even slower overall, taking even more fun out of *flying* an internet spaceship. (and the unneeded boost to ranged DPS again) ---
|
Mohenna
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 10:02:00 -
[122]
I really can't see how people are glad to see the game slowed down.
I totally understand the point of the gatecampers; but there must be another way. For example, calculate lag in the point mechanics, use a timestamp to see when the tackler started tackling and make the warper wait for it while invulnerable: when the timestamp message arrives, the server decides if the warper managed to warp off or not.
This leaves the game as fast as now. And there are probably other solutions too. DON'T MAKE THE GAME MORE BORING!!! Also gatecampers have to dock, undock, warp around... Why do you want to make it a pain?
|
Hun Jakuza
24th Imperial Guard
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 11:37:00 -
[123]
Finaly. The QR agility changes ruined the PvP. A simple cruiser can't caught a cuiser at gate. A BS warped out from gate when the attacker BS not used sensor booster. Maybe new era coming.
|
ShadowMaiden
Amarr Divine Radiance
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 12:00:00 -
[124]
Originally by: SecHaul Let's be honest, those that want to avoid getting pointed still can.
So by that logic, the game should be changed so that no-one can avoid being pointed?
I wish I was a 3ft doll with a watering can and heterochromatic eyes |
Darwin's Market
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 12:53:00 -
[125]
Just make sensor boosters more powerful you crazies.
|
Daan Sai
Polytrope
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 13:01:00 -
[126]
Originally by: CCP Nozh
Original Agility Change:
All ships * 0.7
No! That just isn't true. Megas ( and related blaster boats) got and *additional* agility boost at the last minute by the balancing team. So they were more like *0.65 or maybe even 0.6
*Please* don't lump them back in will all BS ships again or we will just have to debate over blaster boats all over again.
If BS are now going to be *0.8 then make megas about *0.7 or 0.75.
--------------------------------- Internet Submarines is Serious Business ---------------------------------
|
Daan Sai
Polytrope
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 13:01:00 -
[127]
Edited by: Daan Sai on 03/04/2009 13:01:28 [Edit double post]
--------------------------------- Internet Submarines is Serious Business ---------------------------------
|
SecHaul
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 13:05:00 -
[128]
Originally by: ShadowMaiden So by that logic, the game should be changed so that no-one can avoid being pointed?
It's quite easy to partly quote an answer and write a response that completely misses the point of the entire post you quoted. Since you appear to be struggling to understand the point of the thread:
1. The point of this thread, and this rebalancing, is to address the situation that ships of approximately the same size cannot target one another before the other ship cold warps off.
2. Since the post-QR issue was mostly focused upon frigate to cruiser sized hulls, CCP is rebalancing the agility numbers of those ships (with limited tweaks to larger ships)
3. The purpose of this change is to head back towards EVE being a non-consensual PvP game, i.e. if you jump blind into a system and there is an interceptor on the other side, your cruiser shouldn't be able to warp off because of the combination of game lag and quick align times.
4. Align / MWD / Cloak / insta-warp completely negates the above 3 points, since a battleship can safely enter warp before being targetted due to the same factors as above.
For everyone that is saying "yes, please fix the agility to I can solo PvP in my dominix, but please don't fix the align / MWD / cloak trick so that I can still avoid getting tackled myself" is clearly wanting to change one mechanic for their abuse, while continuing to abuse another.
And as for the comment of cloaking ruining a solo battleships lock time, try fly a Dominix and drop drones, since if you even require that lock. Or try flying around 0.0 and pop a few rats, have a look at what every single one is fitting - fitting a cloak does not provide sufficient penalties to warrant complete immunity to everything but a bubble.
|
|
CCP Nozh
C C P
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 14:32:00 -
[129]
Update - Should be on Singularity now:
Agility:
- Frigates - General - 1.0
- Frigates - Stealthbombers - 0.7 (They were aligning as fast as Battlecruisers)
- Frigates - Assault Ships - 0.8 (This brings them down to around a 4 - 4.5 second align time)
- Destroyer - General - 0.85 (Briging them a bit closer to frigates)
- Cruiser - General - 1.0
- Cruiser - HAC - 0.9
- Cruiser - HIC - 0.9
- Cruiser - Logistics - 1.0
- Cruiser - Combat Recon - 0.95
- Cruiser - Force Recon - 1.0
- Battlecruisers - 0.8
- Battleships - 0.8
Scan Resolution:
- Cruisers - General - 15% Boost
- Cruisers - HAC - 20% Boost
- Cruisers - Force Recon - 10% Boost
- Battleship - Black Ops - 10% Boost
Please check out these new values on Singularity and leave some feedback... Might be a bit inactive on the forums next week, weekend / Easter holiday. But I'll try to drop by as often as possible..
Nozh Game Designer CCP Games |
|
Zamolxiss
Amarr ROMANIA Renegades Legiunea ROmana
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 14:52:00 -
[130]
Looks interesting.. What about this Nozh? Quote: 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.
That shouldn't be delayed, a thread regarding Blasters and AC's and to some extent Artys..
|
|
Raimo
Gallente Wrath of Fenris
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 14:56:00 -
[131]
Originally by: Zamolxiss Looks interesting.. What about this Nozh? Quote: 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.
That shouldn't be delayed, a thread regarding Blasters and AC's and to some extent Artys..
Yes, I was waiting for the blaster thread already... ---
|
ChalSto
LOCKDOWN. Force Of Evil
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 15:01:00 -
[132]
Hello CCP Nozh,
how do you see the future (or the role) of blaster-ships?
How is it supposed to work? (in theory)
Do you even see a problem with blaster-ships? -If no: Go on Tranquility server...try out yourself -If yes: How do YOU (yes you, becouse YOU worked out the nano-nerf) try to fix it?
Originally by: Agmar ----------------------------------------------- "The North is so ghey that even the NPCs fly ravens." |
|
CCP Nozh
C C P
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 15:06:00 -
[133]
Originally by: Zamolxiss Looks interesting.. What about this Nozh? Quote: 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.
That shouldn't be delayed, a thread regarding Blasters and AC's and to some extent Artys..
I won't be doing a blaster thread per se, but rather a general balancing thread where players can voice their concerns on various matters. But since I'm focusing on these changes now, and a short Easter holiday is coming up I don't want to post it quite yet, as I intend to be quite active in the thread.
Nozh Game Designer CCP Games |
|
isdisco3
Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 15:11:00 -
[134]
Edited by: isdisco3 on 03/04/2009 15:13:18 again, the agility helped solo and small-gang pvp because it allowed flexibility for them to escape when the big blob showed up.
oh, and the creation of arbitrary modifiers ("hey, let's make this one .9. oh, and this one be .8. and this should totally be .95!") strikes me as ... arbitrary.
Please resize your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Navigator
|
Raimo
Gallente Wrath of Fenris
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 15:17:00 -
[135]
Originally by: CCP Nozh
Originally by: Zamolxiss Looks interesting.. What about this Nozh? Quote: 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.
That shouldn't be delayed, a thread regarding Blasters and AC's and to some extent Artys..
I won't be doing a blaster thread per se, but rather a general balancing thread where players can voice their concerns on various matters. But since I'm focusing on these changes now, and a short Easter holiday is coming up I don't want to post it quite yet, as I intend to be quite active in the thread.
Nozh, any chance you could visit This Thread?
IMO blaster boats (especially medium and to some extent the small ones) were hurt a lot by the web/ scram/ mwd changes, and the agility boost they got was not enough of a cure. As their agilities are now being tweaked they are IMO getting even more shafted, I think the long/ short point dilemma is also a big one for blaster pilots and intertwined to the agility changes in a way...
In other words, please fix the QR blaster nerf one way or another. ;)
(Me, I'm so far almost totally gallente specced but am well on my way to skilling T2 Amarr and Minnie cruisers, for variety and riding the FOTM train while it lasts) ---
|
|
CCP Nozh
C C P
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 15:29:00 -
[136]
Originally by: isdisco3 Edited by: isdisco3 on 03/04/2009 15:13:18 again, the agility helped solo and small-gang pvp because it allowed flexibility for them to escape when the big blob showed up.
oh, and the creation of arbitrary modifiers ("hey, let's make this one .9. oh, and this one be .8. and this should totally be .95!") strikes me as ... arbitrary.
Arbitrary would be me pulling the modifiers out of my ***, but they're based on calculated scanSpeed and align time for each class.
As for this effecting small-gang PVP, sure it does, but in more ways than just "not being able to run away as fast". I think it's important that players are actually able to catch other players also and that PVP does not become completely consensual. Think of it this way, sure you'll get into tight spots more often, but on the other hand you'll also be able to catch more targets yourself.
Nozh Game Designer CCP Games |
|
Mohenna
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 16:41:00 -
[137]
Edited by: Mohenna on 03/04/2009 16:45:00 Nozh, please consider the added boredom factor of less agility for everybody. This would make Eve a bit worse imho.
I just had an idea, what about making warp faster as a whole to counteract the boredom effect of having to wait more for warping? Or better yet would be to make acceleration and deceleration during warp almost instantaneous, one can't be scrambled anyway at that point.
|
Raimo
Gallente Wrath of Fenris
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 17:07:00 -
[138]
Originally by: Mohenna Edited by: Mohenna on 03/04/2009 16:45:00 Nozh, please consider the added boredom factor of less agility for everybody. This would make Eve a bit worse imho.
I just had an idea, what about making warp faster as a whole to counteract the boredom effect of having to wait more for warping? Or better yet would be to make acceleration and deceleration during warp almost instantaneous, one can't be scrambled anyway at that point.
Uh, travel times will still be totally fine after the changes, it's the overall speed of combat and combat maneuvres that many people are worried about... ---
|
spinarax
Method of Destruction Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 17:27:00 -
[139]
Edited by: spinarax on 03/04/2009 17:28:34
Originally by: CCP Nozh
As for this effecting small-gang PVP, sure it does, but in more ways than just "not being able to run away as fast". I think it's important that players are actually able to catch other players also and that PVP does not become completely consensual. Think of it this way, sure you'll get into tight spots more often, but on the other hand you'll also be able to catch more targets yourself.
THIS.
post QR, everybody is dieing less and, both the hunter and the prey. with these changes, ppl have to commit to their fights, more exploding ships on both side which is [borat]very nice![/borat]
|
Ephemeron
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 18:06:00 -
[140]
Originally by: Raimo
Originally by: Mohenna Edited by: Mohenna on 03/04/2009 16:45:00 Nozh, please consider the added boredom factor of less agility for everybody. This would make Eve a bit worse imho.
I just had an idea, what about making warp faster as a whole to counteract the boredom effect of having to wait more for warping? Or better yet would be to make acceleration and deceleration during warp almost instantaneous, one can't be scrambled anyway at that point.
That could be addressed by undoing the Great Speed Nerf
Uh, travel times will still be totally fine after the changes, it's the overall speed of combat and combat maneuvres that many people are worried about...
|
|
RedSplat
Heretic Army
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 18:22:00 -
[141]
Originally by: spinarax Edited by: spinarax on 03/04/2009 17:28:34
Originally by: CCP Nozh
As for this effecting small-gang PVP, sure it does, but in more ways than just "not being able to run away as fast". I think it's important that players are actually able to catch other players also and that PVP does not become completely consensual. Think of it this way, sure you'll get into tight spots more often, but on the other hand you'll also be able to catch more targets yourself.
THIS.
post QR, everybody is dieing less and, both the hunter and the prey. with these changes, ppl have to commit to their fights, more exploding ships on both side which is [borat]very nice![/borat]
Yes.
Originally by: CCP Mitnal
I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
|
Raimo
Gallente Wrath of Fenris
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 18:43:00 -
[142]
Originally by: Ephemeron Edited by: Ephemeron on 03/04/2009 18:30:24
Originally by: Raimo
Uh, travel times will still be totally fine after the changes, it's the overall speed of combat and combat maneuvres that many people are worried about...
That could be addressed by undoing the Great Speed Nerf
I couldn't agree more! But that is most likely out of the question, tbh I'd just like to see overall speeds (acceleration) not go down even more... ---
|
Artemis Dragmire
Veto. Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 19:18:00 -
[143]
The latest update looks promising. I like that HACs are getting the biggest boost to scan res - it always seemed odd to me that an expensive combat cruiser didn't actually have any better sensors than it's t1 counterpart.
Yea, gonna make small gangs a little bit less mobile, but should make catching targets and finding fights a little bit easier.
I can't remember the last time I had a nice, small gang vs small gang fight. Those usually come about because one member of one gang gets caught and the rest come to help.. those are some of the most fun fights I've ever had in EVE and I miss them.
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 20:50:00 -
[144]
Originally by: Raimo
Originally by: Ephemeron Edited by: Ephemeron on 03/04/2009 18:30:24
Originally by: Raimo
Uh, travel times will still be totally fine after the changes, it's the overall speed of combat and combat maneuvres that many people are worried about...
That could be addressed by undoing the Great Speed Nerf
I couldn't agree more! But that is most likely out of the question, tbh I'd just like to see overall speeds (acceleration) not go down even more...
I don't see why people keep bringing this up. The entire game design system was built up around a particular envelope of speed: gun tracking, missile velocity, explosion velocity, ranges, lock times, ship mass, etc. etc. etc.. The devs never intended for cruisers to be flying 10km/sec+. It was game breaking and they fixed it.
Why can't you people (everyone who keeps asking for it back) see that? Did you simply not play Eve before the nano fad existed? Was that the only Eve you knew until it was changed? If so then I can see why you don't understand. If not, then you have no excuse.
That being said, these agility changes aren't going to 'ruin travel times' or 'OMG THE BLOB IS GOING TO WIN'. Is everyone who is complaining about the reduced agility REALLY THAT STUPID? These are small changes. We're splitting hairs here, literally, to fine tune the small window of time between time to lock and time to warp. THAT'S IT.
If you run into a blob, you're probably dead regardless of existing agility or not. After the changes the results won't be much different, if at all. Most of the people complaining are 0.0 pilots anyway, where bubbles dictors and HICs abound. Again, I don't know why those people are even worried about it. The changes generally won't affect combat in an appreciable way except for a few specific cases, most notably blaster ships.
The amount of time difference in acceleration that results due to the changes with respect to travel times is microscopic when compared to your overall travel time. Somehow there is some perceived slight against 'speed' players, and that just isn't the case.
To all of you fearing this change: are you the killer or the victim? If you're a loser and get killed all the time, then you're probably going to get killed MORE after the change because it will be slightly easier to tackle you. If you're NOT A TOTAL LOSER and are the one doing the hunting, then you should be overjoyed that this imbalance is being addressed.
Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Isil Rahsen
Gallente Ferrum Superum
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 21:43:00 -
[145]
I find myself agreeing with Bellum on these changes. Being able to catch ships on gates has been frustrating at best since QR where I didn't have a problem before and if I ran into a blob after QR I still died like I would have pre-QR. These changes will just bring things back in-line. Looking forward to the general balance thread because several weapon systems need looking at badly.
|
5pinDizzy
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 21:48:00 -
[146]
<3 Nozh.
Now back to normal programming where we listen to bitter old nanopilots.
if you disagree with me then you should probably post a response and stop reading my signature. |
Roemy Schneider
BINFORD
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 22:18:00 -
[147]
HACs +20% scan res..? then +20% scan res on logis! i'm primarily targeting other logis, baby dics and frigs here!!!
and no bonus/help/plus for force recons... have these guys pay for their cov cloak. for everythign else, there's combat recons.
and btw; gj on screwing AFs out of their new found role since the weight-loss. although AB tanking still isnt an option in 0.0 even for them, the guys in low-sec will stop using these "new" bricks, too. - putting the gist back into logistics |
ShadowMaiden
Amarr Divine Radiance
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 22:22:00 -
[148]
Originally by: SecHaul Edited by: SecHaul on 03/04/2009 13:22:02
Originally by: ShadowMaiden So by that logic, the game should be changed so that no-one can avoid being pointed?
It's quite easy to partly quote an answer and write a response that completely misses the point of the entire post you quoted. Since you appear to be struggling to understand the point of the thread:
1. The point of this thread, and this rebalancing, is to address the situation that ships of approximately the same size cannot target one another before the other ship cold warps off.
2. Since the post-QR issue was mostly focused upon frigate to cruiser sized hulls, CCP is rebalancing the agility numbers of those ships (with limited tweaks to larger ships)
3. The purpose of this change is to head back towards EVE being a non-consensual PvP game, i.e. if you jump blind into a system and there is an interceptor on the other side, your cruiser shouldn't be able to warp off because of the combination of game lag and quick align times.
4. Align / MWD / Cloak / insta-warp completely negates the above 3 points, since a battleship can safely enter warp before being targetted due to the same factors as above.
For everyone that is saying "yes, please fix the agility to I can solo PvP in my dominix, but please don't fix the align / MWD / cloak trick so that I can still avoid getting tackled myself" is clearly wanting to change one mechanic for their abuse, while continuing to abuse another.
And as for the comment of cloaking ruining a solo battleships lock time, try fly a Dominix and drop drones, see if you even require that lock. Or try flying around 0.0 and pop a few ratters, have a look at what every single one is fitting - fitting a cloak does not provide sufficient penalties to warrant complete immunity to everything but a bubble.
Is it as easy as spouting a tl;dr diatribe like you're some kind of psuedo developer?
lol, internet spaceships
I wish I was a 3ft doll with a watering can and heterochromatic eyes |
Goatface Man
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 22:40:00 -
[149]
Originally by: CCP Nozh
As for this effecting small-gang PVP, sure it does, but in more ways than just "not being able to run away as fast". I think it's important that players are actually able to catch other players also and that PVP does not become completely consensual. Think of it this way, sure you'll get into tight spots more often, but on the other hand you'll also be able to catch more targets yourself.
With the current system, I can use a stiletto to lock and tackle a light drone in under a second and a half with a single sig amp and a scripted signal booster, and my interceptor skill are pretty weak. If you can show me a viable ship build that can align and warp out in under 1.5 seconds, I would be interested in seeing it. |
Ephemeron
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 22:53:00 -
[150]
Quote: I don't see why people keep bringing this up. The entire game design system was built up around a particular envelope of speed: gun tracking, missile velocity, explosion velocity, ranges, lock times, ship mass, etc. etc. etc.. The devs never intended for cruisers to be flying 10km/sec+. It was game breaking and they fixed it.
Why can't you people (everyone who keeps asking for it back) see that? Did you simply not play Eve before the nano fad existed? Was that the only Eve you knew until it was changed? If so then I can see why you don't understand. If not, then you have no excuse.
First, you should also keep in mind that entire game design was build on catching your target. It's a very important part of the game. It's never enough to simply lock and fire. You need to do something people refer to as "tackle" - the primary tools for that are webs and scramblers.
if you don't ignore that important part of the game, then all the nanoships, even the super extreme ones that reach 10km/s are actually easy to kill once they are tackled. The main difficulty was getting that tackle, it wasn't about weapons missing and not doing enough damage to kill them.
The people who argue against nanoships like to bring up these 4+ billion isk ships that reach 10+km/s speeds as the basis on which they build their arguments. And it may have been valid if their solutions addressed only those particular ships. Less than 1% of ships in PvP actually fell into the 10km/s speed category. Yet the final solution involved changing 100% of the pvp ships, even the ones that never broke 3 km/s
Then there's the argument of excessive speed being "game breaking". I seen Crows fly at 15 km/s, Vagabonds do 10 km/s, and the game didn't crash, server didn't crash. The movement of those ships on my screen remained smooth, frame rate not dropping under 15 fps. All my modules could still activate. There wasn't a single instance of where those speeds have caused anything "game breaking" - that I am aware of.
All of this has been discussed and mentioned already. Yet people continuously refuse to even remember those arguments. Of course we won't get anywhere if people have to explain the same thing over and over again, to those who are blind to see.
Reason lost, personal likes/dislikes won.
|
|
|
|
|
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 |