EVE Search - What are these AC changes I keep hearing about?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

What are these AC changes I keep hearing about?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Zarnak Wulf	Posted - 2009.10.24 21:30:00 - [31] Originally by: Cpt Branko If you want to fight at range only, then you should be flying Amarr. If you want point blank damage only, then you should be flying Gallente. The idea behind projectiles is that they can essentially do both, but not so well as ships which only specialize in one thing. Plus, they can vary damage types, which is why the people who want EMP and Fusion to switch places are basically stupid. In a nutshell this.
Etho Demerzel Gallente Holy Clan of the Cone	Posted - 2009.10.25 00:08:00 - [32] Originally by: Cpt Branko Originally by: Wideen still think that projectiles are "confused". Nice dmg output; at a 1000m, then you might as well use blasters that put out even more dmg, and minnie ships don't rly thrive at such short distances, where basically any other weaponry will do better while also being in sturdier ships. It's funny how the "Minmatar fight only in falloff" crowd claims that Minmatar suck. If you want to fight at range only, then you should be flying Amarr. If you want point blank damage only, then you should be flying Gallente. The idea behind projectiles is that they can essentially do both, but not so well as ships which only specialize in one thing. Plus, they can vary damage types, which is why the people who want EMP and Fusion to switch places are basically stupid. Oh, yes, and I know the Tempest sucks. Let's try to not base every balance discussion around a ship which is essentially crap as a short range BS in today's EVE. A small correctio: If you want to still suck at both short and long range at twice the cost of the sp of any other race you fly minmatar and use projectiles, otherwise just train amarr for both short and long range. ===== "If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron...
Liang Nuren No Salvation War.Pigs.	Posted - 2009.10.25 00:40:00 - [33] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 25/10/2009 00:40:53 Originally by: Etho Demerzel A small correctio: If you want to still suck at both short and long range at twice the cost of the sp of any other race you fly minmatar and use projectiles, otherwise just train amarr for both short and long range. Sigh. I dunno. It seems like things are taking a positive turn. We may be a few nudges from pretty reasonable balance at the battleship level... mostly things like the Pest really sucking and me absolutely hating the new Scorp. -Liang Ed: I wouldn't be surprised if projectiles hold an edge up close over lasers post Dominion, and hold an edge over blasters out far. -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
Etho Demerzel Gallente Holy Clan of the Cone	Posted - 2009.10.25 01:07:00 - [34] Originally by: Liang Nuren Sigh. I dunno. It seems like things are taking a positive turn. We may be a few nudges from pretty reasonable balance at the battleship level... mostly things like the Pest really sucking and me absolutely hating the new Scorp. -Liang Ed: I wouldn't be surprised if projectiles hold an edge up close over lasers post Dominion, and hold an edge over blasters out far. Being better than pulses when really close does not cut it. Especially considering the Tempest sucks and there is no plans to change it, and the Maelstrom is not exactly good for small gangs that would benefit from an advantage at extremely close range. I reckon that Blasters and ACs are reasonably well balanced against each other, though. The problems are Pulse lasers. There will be no balance until they have their tracking substantially decreased. ===== "If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron...
Seriously Bored Minmatar	Posted - 2009.10.25 01:35:00 - [35] Originally by: Liang Nuren Sigh. I dunno. It seems like things are taking a positive turn. We may be a few nudges from pretty reasonable balance at the battleship level... mostly things like the Pest really sucking and me absolutely hating the new Scorp. I must have missed the thread...I know the Pest is going to keep sucking, but what's changing with the Scorp?
Wideen Total Mayhem. Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2009.10.25 19:14:00 - [36] Originally by: Cpt Branko Edited by: Cpt Branko on 24/10/2009 21:06:22 Edited by: Cpt Branko on 24/10/2009 21:05:47 Originally by: Wideen still think that projectiles are "confused". Nice dmg output; at a 1000m, then you might as well use blasters that put out even more dmg, and minnie ships don't rly thrive at such short distances, where basically any other weaponry will do better while also being in sturdier ships. It's funny how the "Minmatar fight only in falloff" crowd claims that Minmatar suck. If you want to fight at range only, then you should be flying Amarr. If you want point blank damage only, then you should be flying Gallente. The idea behind projectiles is that they can essentially do both, but not so well as ships which only specialize in one thing. Plus, they can vary damage types, which is why the people who want EMP and Fusion to switch places are basically stupid. Oh, yes, and I know the Tempest sucks. Let's try to not base every balance discussion around a ship which is essentially crap as a short range BS in today's EVE. yes I agree, the versatility is just mind-boggling.
Liang Nuren No Salvation War.Pigs.	Posted - 2009.10.25 20:07:00 - [37] Originally by: Seriously Bored I must have missed the thread...I know the Pest is going to keep sucking, but what's changing with the Scorp? They aren't. I just dislike the "new" scorp vs the "old" scorp. They **ed up its role and didn't bother giving it a new one. -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum *** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
Allen Ramses Caldari Typo Corp	Posted - 2009.10.25 23:06:00 - [38] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Seriously Bored I must have missed the thread...I know the Pest is going to keep sucking, but what's changing with the Scorp? They aren't. I just dislike the "new" scorp vs the "old" scorp. They ****ed up its role and didn't bother giving it a new one. -Liang What, you would rather see the navy scorp being stronger with ECM, and being just as useless as it is now in a combat deployment, except maybe an extra drone or two? The scorp sucks as a battleship, because it is incapable of battle. The navy scorp is going to be WTFPWNPIMPz on the battlefield. DPS of a raven with a tank that doesn't suck? I'll take one please! ____________________ CCP: Catering to the cowards of a cold, harsh universe since November, 2006.
Liang Nuren No Salvation War.Pigs.	Posted - 2009.10.26 01:59:00 - [39] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 26/10/2009 02:02:35 Originally by: Allen Ramses What, you would rather see the navy scorp being stronger with ECM, and being just as useless as it is now in a combat deployment, except maybe an extra drone or two? The scorp sucks as a battleship, because it is incapable of battle. The navy scorp is going to be WTFPWNPIMPz on the battlefield. DPS of a raven with a tank that doesn't suck? I'll take one please! Comments: - I said I dislike THE SCORPION post ECM nerf. They promised me a gank brawler scorp and then delivered a "fleet ecm" that sucks at fleets. Just bring more damage in for fleet work, and as a brawler it just doesn't cut the mustard. It lacks tank, gank, and now it even lacks ECM strength. - The Scorp is hardly "incapable of battle", it just took an unnecessary (IMO) nerf. Its role should have been adjusted to be more battleship-like. I'm thinking 5% ROF / 25% ECM str (no optimal/range bonuses) - I didn't say anything about the navy scorp. However, the Navy Scorp is kinda fail, having only 8.0 eff launchers to the Raven's 8.0 and the CNR's 9.33. It undoubtedly sports a better tank than the Raven, but the CNR maintains a better DPS / EHP ratio and more low slots for armor tanking (and thus will still be a better option in PVP). On top of that, the Navy Scorp will cost more. -Liang Ed: Further research reveals that the Navy Scorp has 8.0 eff launchers. It's at least more viable than it was originally supposed, but given what the costs are likely to be, I'll take a CNR. -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
Allen Ramses Caldari Typo Corp	Posted - 2009.10.26 04:48:00 - [40] Ok, I misunderstood you. Apologies. Originally by: Liang Nuren The Scorp is hardly "incapable of battle", it just took an unnecessary (IMO) nerf. Its role should have been adjusted to be more battleship-like. I'm thinking 5% ROF / 25% ECM str (no optimal/range bonuses) For that to work, it would need far more than a 4/4 layout with only six high slots. I don't think the Scorpion was EVER intended to be combatworthy. Quote: It undoubtedly sports a better tank than the Raven, but the CNR maintains a better DPS / EHP ratio ... I'll take a CNR. For each, their own. I prefer tank over gank, myself ____________________ CCP: Catering to the cowards of a cold, harsh universe since November, 2006.
Roland Thorne Dark Sun Collective Kahora Catori	Posted - 2009.10.27 17:28:00 - [41] Originally by: Allen Ramses For each, their own. I prefer tank over gank, myself Prepare to be disappointed at the killboard
Roland Thorne Dark Sun Collective Kahora Catori	Posted - 2009.10.27 17:33:00 - [42] Originally by: Liang Nuren Edited by: Liang Nuren on 25/10/2009 00:40:53 Originally by: Etho Demerzel A small correctio: If you want to still suck at both short and long range at twice the cost of the sp of any other race you fly minmatar and use projectiles, otherwise just train amarr for both short and long range. Sigh. I dunno. It seems like things are taking a positive turn. We may be a few nudges from pretty reasonable balance at the battleship level... mostly things like the Pest really sucking and me absolutely hating the new Scorp. -Liang Ed: I wouldn't be surprised if projectiles hold an edge up close over lasers post Dominion, and hold an edge over blasters out far. I'm a little confused at the close ammo having no tracking. That would have helped at close range but I suppose it fits with the BS class ships, and the smaller classes don't have much of a problem with this anyway. Btw, do ammo changes scale for RF ammo?
Alpha India	Posted - 2009.10.27 17:45:00 - [43] Originally by: CCP Nozh Thanks for all the feedback, sorry for not being active in the thread, there is tons of other work to do besides posting on the forums (and projectile balancing for that matter). You'll be able to test the second iteration of the projectile changes on Singularity tomorrow. Ammo Changes - Base Values: Long Range (1.6 range modifier - 5 damage - 5% tracking bonus): Carbonized Lead - 4 kinetic / 1 explosive Nuclear - 4 explosive / 1 kinetic Proton - 3 em / 2 kinetic Medium Range (1.0 range modifier - 8 damage - 20% tracking bonus): Depleted Uranium - 3 explosive / 3 thermal / 2 kinetic Titanium Sabot - 6 kinetic / 2 explosive Short Range (0.5 range modifier - 12 damage): EMP - 9 em / 2 explosive / 1 kinetic Phased Plasma - 10 thermal / 2 kinetic Fusion - 10 explosive / 2 kinetic Tracking Computer / Enhancer changes: Tracking Computer falloff bonus fixed. Bonus doubled Stacking nerfed Tracking links also have a falloff modifier Autocannons / Repeating Artillery Falloff increases by tier. I'm still not too happy with these, will be worked on more next iteration. Artillery Instead of increasing alpha on both weapon tiers of each size class, you now have a choice. 1200's low alpha, fast rate of fire. 1400's high alpha, slow rate of fire. Just to bring it on this side of the forums.
Cpt Branko The Scope	Posted - 2009.10.27 17:54:00 - [44] Originally by: Alpha India Originally by: CCP Nozh snip Just to bring it on this side of the forums. Well, that is certainly beautiful, and just perfect. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
AstroPhobic Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.10.27 18:24:00 - [45] New changes? Astro likey.
Kaileen Starsong Amarr Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2009.10.27 18:55:00 - [46] That's sort of nuts. I hope they won't come to nerfing Hurricane because it'll be very awesome now ^^
Cpt Branko The Scope	Posted - 2009.10.27 19:08:00 - [47] Originally by: Kaileen Starsong That's sort of nuts. I hope they won't come to nerfing Hurricane because it'll be very awesome now ^^ Well, we'll just point the other way and say "look at the Drake, it has better EHP/DPS" and it's sortof balanced with the Harb for nonsolo work which works better at range but worse up close (which is the idea, I think). 10 mil that blaster buff is next. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Seriously Bored Minmatar	Posted - 2009.10.27 19:09:00 - [48] Wow. Just wow. This is what I get for abandoning the Projectile Balancing thread. Real, selectable damage? Check. Damage parity with other weapon types? Check. A reason to use LR ammo? Check. Fusion being highest damage ammo? (Shares the spot, but check!) This could be just initial euphoria, but I might shed a rusty tear in joy. The difference between 1200mm and 1400mm is really interesting, and it's understandable that TCs and TEs will be stack nerfed. (I'm hoping ambits stay as they are, but that might not be realistic.)
Vrabac Zawa's Fan Club	Posted - 2009.10.27 19:14:00 - [49] LOL so now we come to the point where people will fit autocannons on absolutions and astartes? This is really an... interesting approach.
Roland Thorne Dark Sun Collective Kahora Catori	Posted - 2009.10.27 19:22:00 - [50] Originally by: Seriously Bored The difference between 1200mm and 1400mm is really interesting, and it's understandable that TCs and TEs will be stack nerfed. (I'm hoping ambits stay as they are, but that might not be realistic.) This killed my hope to put 1200s on a tempest, but it is a reasonable compromise for missioners. Originally by: Vrabac LOL so now we come to the point where people will fit autocannons on absolutions and astartes? This is really an... interesting approach. Both of those can out-dps minmatar ships using what they are supposed to be using!
Seriously Bored Minmatar	Posted - 2009.10.27 19:23:00 - [51] Originally by: Vrabac LOL so now we come to the point where people will fit autocannons on absolutions and astartes? This is really an... interesting approach. They'll do **** all for damage, but it probably won't stop some people. Just like the old days, right?
Liang Nuren No Salvation War.Pigs.	Posted - 2009.10.27 19:28:00 - [52] I'm going to have to play with the stack nerfed falloff, but I'm fairly sure we're going to see that being a fairly substantial nerf. -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
Vrabac Zawa's Fan Club	Posted - 2009.10.27 19:35:00 - [53] Originally by: Roland Thorne Originally by: Vrabac LOL so now we come to the point where people will fit autocannons on absolutions and astartes? This is really an... interesting approach. Both of those can out-dps minmatar ships using what they are supposed to be using! Hurricane out-dpses them both, but hey I bet you like sitting in the middle of your second falloff whining how you can't break a drake? With this change it will get idiotically long-ranged, full tracking hail. Combined with increased falloff due to tiers and TEs/TCs (which is actually just fine by itself). Say good bye to your AN MF 8km supremacy, fit some ACs instead. And blasters... just lol. I really hope ccp realize what they are doing, although it's not easy to expect given the fact they seem to model their change plans based on whines and all the whiners are thrilled with this. Oh, and I love how they still aren't fixing tempest, where actual problem exists.
Kaileen Starsong Amarr Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2009.10.27 19:36:00 - [54] Edited by: Kaileen Starsong on 27/10/2009 19:36:41 @ -Liang Depends on what you have that's boosting it, tbh. I mean, Ambit-rigged plated Hurricane will MAYBE have less falloff(depends on what are the falloff numbers for tiers of ACs). Shield Hurricane, though... 3xgyro, 2xTE, DC and it has 425s anyway, so with double bonus on TEs I bet it'll have substantially more falloff. Same goes for other ships/fits tbh.
Seriously Bored Minmatar	Posted - 2009.10.27 19:42:00 - [55] Edited by: Seriously Bored on 27/10/2009 19:46:06 Originally by: Liang Nuren I'm going to have to play with the stack nerfed falloff, but I'm fairly sure we're going to see that being a fairly substantial nerf. -Liang I'm not so sure, since the changes sound like they're doubling the effect of TCs and TEs. Ignoring Ambits (because nothing was said about them) and 800mm falloff staying the same (unlikely?)... Current (ED: Old Nozh proposal): 16KM Base * 1.25 Skill * 15% (TE) * 15% (TC) * 15%(TC) = 30.41KM New: 16KM Base * 1.25 Skill * 30% (TE) * 26.126% (1st Penalty TC) * 17.117% (2nd Penalty TC) = 38.4KM Looks like a ~26% improvement to me! The only question is the ambits, but even then, I think it might tie at the least.
Alpha India	Posted - 2009.10.27 19:52:00 - [56] I'm noticing the lack of a tracking bonus to close range ammo in this trial. But I mean, purer damage!? Possibly properly tiered guns!? Double bonus' to TE's and TC's!? I'll get over it!
Liang Nuren No Salvation War.Pigs.	Posted - 2009.10.27 19:52:00 - [57] Originally by: Kaileen Starsong @ -Liang Depends on what you have that's boosting it, tbh. I mean, Ambit-rigged plated Hurricane will MAYBE have less falloff(depends on what are the falloff numbers for tiers of ACs). Shield Hurricane, though... 3xgyro, 2xTE, DC and it has 425s anyway, so with double bonus on TEs I bet it'll have substantially more falloff. Same goes for other ships/fits tbh. You fit TEs to your shield buffer canes? -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
Roland Thorne Dark Sun Collective Kahora Catori	Posted - 2009.10.27 19:57:00 - [58] Originally by: Vrabac Originally by: Roland Thorne Originally by: Vrabac LOL so now we come to the point where people will fit autocannons on absolutions and astartes? This is really an... interesting approach. Both of those can out-dps minmatar ships using what they are supposed to be using! Hurricane out-dpses them both, but hey I bet you like sitting in the middle of your second falloff whining how you can't break a drake? Tell me, why do the optimal whiners always misunderstand the purpose of falloff, or even situational tactics? Damn near impossible to describe it to peeps who don't even know what it means, so I refuse to explain it to you.... again. Thank you for your hard work ccp. Looking forward to seeing the changes and refitting to better use them :)
Vrabac Zawa's Fan Club	Posted - 2009.10.27 20:01:00 - [59] Originally by: Roland Thorne Tell me, why do the optimal whiners always misunderstand the purpose of falloff, or even situational tactics? Damn near impossible to describe it to peeps who don't even know what it means, so I refuse to explain it to you.... again. Hurricane is my most used ship. Actually soloed a proper astarte with it recently. So I think you don't really have to explain much to me.
Kaileen Starsong Amarr Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2009.10.27 20:02:00 - [60] Edited by: Kaileen Starsong on 27/10/2009 20:03:15 Originally by: Liang Nuren You fit TEs to your shield buffer canes? Now? No. I go Ambits if I fly this thing. And 4 gyros After Dominion hits I'll fit 3xgyro, 2xTE. Then T2 ROF rig and 2xCDFE probably. Nanos/ODs are nice to have, but in most cases they do not do much, atleast for what I/my gang fights. I don't fly it as Vagacane, that's pretty meh and ineffective imo, by the time you kill something it'd die out of boredom. I instead prefer to fly it as a proper blasterboat

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: 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.