EVE Search - CCP Nerf Something For Someone! What We Nerf Next

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

CCP Nerf Something For Someone! What We Nerf Next

» 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 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
knifeplay	Posted - 2004.12.17 12:27:00 - [31] Originally by: Oveur - Missile Overhaul - EW Overhaul - Fix some of the projectile turrets - Tech Level 2 Missiles, Launchers, Drones and EW. - Increased Hitpoints on all ships - Tech Level 2 ships and tweaks to them Well thanks for sharing the agenda with us, hopefully when people read this it will stop the mass flood of "Missiles are too powerful against inty" posts that I have been seeing a lot of since the last patch. Least we know now. --- In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.
knifeplay	Posted - 2004.12.17 12:27:00 - [32] Originally by: Oveur - Missile Overhaul - EW Overhaul - Fix some of the projectile turrets - Tech Level 2 Missiles, Launchers, Drones and EW. - Increased Hitpoints on all ships - Tech Level 2 ships and tweaks to them Well thanks for sharing the agenda with us, hopefully when people read this it will stop the mass flood of "Missiles are too powerful against inty" posts that I have been seeing a lot of since the last patch. Least we know now. --- In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.
Laendra	Posted - 2004.12.17 13:27:00 - [33] How about "When are you going to get the missing Tech 1 BPO in the game?" -------------------
Laendra	Posted - 2004.12.17 13:27:00 - [34] How about "When are you going to get the missing Tech 1 BPO in the game?" -------------------
Scorpyn	Posted - 2004.12.17 13:36:00 - [35] Anybody got a link to that old 13 page or something long post about the suggested EW changes a while back?
Scorpyn	Posted - 2004.12.17 13:36:00 - [36] Anybody got a link to that old 13 page or something long post about the suggested EW changes a while back?
Viceroy	Posted - 2004.12.17 14:52:00 - [37] Nerf instajumps! Yeeeha! -
Viceroy	Posted - 2004.12.17 14:52:00 - [38] Nerf instajumps! Yeeeha! -
X'Alor	Posted - 2004.12.17 14:54:00 - [39] set the wasted defender orbit at 3km and not 50m so BS can move.
X'Alor	Posted - 2004.12.17 14:54:00 - [40] set the wasted defender orbit at 3km and not 50m so BS can move.
Leitari	Posted - 2004.12.17 15:11:00 - [41] Ovie baby, Increasing hitpoints on all ship = r0x0r. But you'll need to check into this Logging off right under your nose thingie. Those cases will increase where people simply log off and have their ships dissapear when they're beeing scrambled and they know they're pretty much screwed. Their ship poofs into thin air. Not good. Get the drift? It will take people longer to kill stuff. 3 cruisers vs a battleship should be no problem for those 3 cruisers. etc. Here, Only the silent survive.
Leitari	Posted - 2004.12.17 15:11:00 - [42] Ovie baby, Increasing hitpoints on all ship = r0x0r. But you'll need to check into this Logging off right under your nose thingie. Those cases will increase where people simply log off and have their ships dissapear when they're beeing scrambled and they know they're pretty much screwed. Their ship poofs into thin air. Not good. Get the drift? It will take people longer to kill stuff. 3 cruisers vs a battleship should be no problem for those 3 cruisers. etc. Here, Only the silent survive.
Kurenin	Posted - 2004.12.17 15:13:00 - [43] \o/ yay. ----- [22:02] <Kurenin> anyhow, on a more serious note, what did you think of those ideas? [22:02] <Hammerhead> we can't do anything that requires programming Inactivity wins you.
Kurenin	Posted - 2004.12.17 15:13:00 - [44] \o/ yay. ----- [22:02] <Kurenin> anyhow, on a more serious note, what did you think of those ideas? [22:02] <Hammerhead> we can't do anything that requires programming Inactivity wins you.
Discorporation	Posted - 2004.12.17 15:24:00 - [45] Originally by: Leitari Ovie baby, Increasing hitpoints on all ship = r0x0r. But you'll need to check into this Logging off right under your nose thingie. Those cases will increase where people simply log off and have their ships dissapear when they're beeing scrambled and they know they're pretty much screwed. Their ship poofs into thin air. Not good. Get the drift? It will take people longer to kill stuff. 3 cruisers vs a battleship should be no problem for those 3 cruisers. etc. tbh, 3 minutes logoff timer is not good in PvP combat. 15 - 20 minutes is a better option (even BEFORE hitpoint increases) [Heterocephalus glaber]
Discorporation	Posted - 2004.12.17 15:24:00 - [46] Originally by: Leitari Ovie baby, Increasing hitpoints on all ship = r0x0r. But you'll need to check into this Logging off right under your nose thingie. Those cases will increase where people simply log off and have their ships dissapear when they're beeing scrambled and they know they're pretty much screwed. Their ship poofs into thin air. Not good. Get the drift? It will take people longer to kill stuff. 3 cruisers vs a battleship should be no problem for those 3 cruisers. etc. tbh, 3 minutes logoff timer is not good in PvP combat. 15 - 20 minutes is a better option (even BEFORE hitpoint increases) [Heterocephalus glaber]
Hakera	Posted - 2004.12.17 15:38:00 - [47] Originally by: Discorporation tbh, 3 minutes logoff timer is not good in PvP combat. 15 - 20 minutes is a better option (even BEFORE hitpoint increases) far far too long, if it takes you 20mins to kill one ship you need to go back to flight school. The reasons people need to logoff are varied from saving their ship to a real life emergency or a ISP connection drop, if ships hung around for that long, anyone with a scan probe launcher would easily find them. The logoff timer of 3 minutes is fine as it is, maybe scaled to 5 minutes IF they are locked by another player and maintained at 2 minutes if against npc's. I would not mind if Oveur could say what kind of changes they have in mind. I already have some of them noted down, but nothing concrete, do ya think TomB could hit us with his good old explanation posts of old to give us something to mull over while we eat our turkey? Dumbledore - Eve-I.com
Hakera	Posted - 2004.12.17 15:38:00 - [48] Originally by: Discorporation tbh, 3 minutes logoff timer is not good in PvP combat. 15 - 20 minutes is a better option (even BEFORE hitpoint increases) far far too long, if it takes you 20mins to kill one ship you need to go back to flight school. The reasons people need to logoff are varied from saving their ship to a real life emergency or a ISP connection drop, if ships hung around for that long, anyone with a scan probe launcher would easily find them. The logoff timer of 3 minutes is fine as it is, maybe scaled to 5 minutes IF they are locked by another player and maintained at 2 minutes if against npc's. I would not mind if Oveur could say what kind of changes they have in mind. I already have some of them noted down, but nothing concrete, do ya think TomB could hit us with his good old explanation posts of old to give us something to mull over while we eat our turkey? Dumbledore - Eve-I.com
Discorporation	Posted - 2004.12.17 15:44:00 - [49] Originally by: Hakera far far too long, if it takes you 20mins to kill one ship you need to go back to flight school. Lag, solo-hunting, etc justify 15-20 minutes when the ship is webbed and scrambled. It isn't going anywhere (due to the web and scrambling) unless it times out, which sucks bunches. Originally by: Hakera [The reasons people need to logoff are varied from saving their ship to a real life emergency or a ISP connection drop, if ships hung around for that long, anyone with a scan probe launcher would easily find them. You're right. I'll clarify, 15-20 mins timeout when engaged in PvP (if you go to safe and log off, people that were fighting you deserve to use scan probes to try to find your lame behind). T Originally by: Hakera [he logoff timer of 3 minutes is fine as it is, maybe scaled to 5 minutes IF they are locked by another player and maintained at 2 minutes if against npc's. Sorry, I meant pvp only. Originally by: Hakera [I would not mind if Oveur could say what kind of changes they have in mind. I already have some of them noted down, but nothing concrete, do ya think TomB could hit us with his good old explanation posts of old to give us something to mull over while we eat our turkey? Yum, more tomb, more graphs! [Heterocephalus glaber]
Discorporation	Posted - 2004.12.17 15:44:00 - [50] Originally by: Hakera far far too long, if it takes you 20mins to kill one ship you need to go back to flight school. Lag, solo-hunting, etc justify 15-20 minutes when the ship is webbed and scrambled. It isn't going anywhere (due to the web and scrambling) unless it times out, which sucks bunches. Originally by: Hakera [The reasons people need to logoff are varied from saving their ship to a real life emergency or a ISP connection drop, if ships hung around for that long, anyone with a scan probe launcher would easily find them. You're right. I'll clarify, 15-20 mins timeout when engaged in PvP (if you go to safe and log off, people that were fighting you deserve to use scan probes to try to find your lame behind). T Originally by: Hakera [he logoff timer of 3 minutes is fine as it is, maybe scaled to 5 minutes IF they are locked by another player and maintained at 2 minutes if against npc's. Sorry, I meant pvp only. Originally by: Hakera [I would not mind if Oveur could say what kind of changes they have in mind. I already have some of them noted down, but nothing concrete, do ya think TomB could hit us with his good old explanation posts of old to give us something to mull over while we eat our turkey? Yum, more tomb, more graphs! [Heterocephalus glaber]
Demangel	Posted - 2004.12.17 16:53:00 - [51] Edited by: Demangel on 17/12/2004 16:56:11 Ok CCP, I take my hat off too you, you have noticed afteral! :) My only worry now is on time frame... and deployment. I remember stating back in the last balance change that if you guys wait for fixing the missiles and other things, we would have a mess as bad or worse than what you fixed... And here we are... My prophesy has come true. My magic 8 ball tells me that you will have the same problems if you put the fixes out in poor order again. Namely: Missiles And min turrets need fix ASAP. They needed em the last balance round, but got only partially fixed... now we are reaping that reward.... Put those as a priority and release the fixes BEFORE the rest, so to see what the effect of that is. I think some sort of Agility workaround would be adequate. Also Drones may need adressing Soon TM afterwards, as they share some of the same porblems as missiles (and this is coming from a drone user). They need far more HP's, and need to be more specialized depending on class for thier use (Lights best for frigs, mediums for cruisers, and heavies for BS's... Not Ogre > all, thats nodifferent than cruise > all as it is now. Just giving them balanced tracking math in line with the best turrets of thier intended class and more HP's would make em ideal all around I think, and no need to alter damage output (ie nerf damage output or buff it). No idea what exactly is on CCP's mind for EW, so all I can say is, I can see why it may be needed (Does anyone bother to fly a celestis these days other than for RP/Ship skill reasons?). But a word of warning, DO NOT make EW better to appease Caldari ship fans... It's not needed... HP boost? this one I love... Many thanks go to the people who decided to finaly go with this... just make sure you don't forget that shields will regen faster with higher HPs, and that since damage won't also be buffed, shield tankers might not need modules to tank... But thats a pretty obvious problem heheh. All the rest? No comment... Just get that missile fix OUT THE DOOR and do it before the spring... It's already taken TOO long, and we're all suffering for it... Galaxion > If you drove a car shaped like a thorax women would call you Demangel > Dude... I would call.. Demangel > wait that sounded g@y I bet. Galaxion > Just a bit.
Demangel	Posted - 2004.12.17 16:53:00 - [52] Edited by: Demangel on 17/12/2004 16:56:11 Ok CCP, I take my hat off too you, you have noticed afteral! :) My only worry now is on time frame... and deployment. I remember stating back in the last balance change that if you guys wait for fixing the missiles and other things, we would have a mess as bad or worse than what you fixed... And here we are... My prophesy has come true. My magic 8 ball tells me that you will have the same problems if you put the fixes out in poor order again. Namely: Missiles And min turrets need fix ASAP. They needed em the last balance round, but got only partially fixed... now we are reaping that reward.... Put those as a priority and release the fixes BEFORE the rest, so to see what the effect of that is. I think some sort of Agility workaround would be adequate. Also Drones may need adressing Soon TM afterwards, as they share some of the same porblems as missiles (and this is coming from a drone user). They need far more HP's, and need to be more specialized depending on class for thier use (Lights best for frigs, mediums for cruisers, and heavies for BS's... Not Ogre > all, thats nodifferent than cruise > all as it is now. Just giving them balanced tracking math in line with the best turrets of thier intended class and more HP's would make em ideal all around I think, and no need to alter damage output (ie nerf damage output or buff it). No idea what exactly is on CCP's mind for EW, so all I can say is, I can see why it may be needed (Does anyone bother to fly a celestis these days other than for RP/Ship skill reasons?). But a word of warning, DO NOT make EW better to appease Caldari ship fans... It's not needed... HP boost? this one I love... Many thanks go to the people who decided to finaly go with this... just make sure you don't forget that shields will regen faster with higher HPs, and that since damage won't also be buffed, shield tankers might not need modules to tank... But thats a pretty obvious problem heheh. All the rest? No comment... Just get that missile fix OUT THE DOOR and do it before the spring... It's already taken TOO long, and we're all suffering for it... Galaxion > If you drove a car shaped like a thorax women would call you Demangel > Dude... I would call.. Demangel > wait that sounded g@y I bet. Galaxion > Just a bit.
j0sephine	Posted - 2004.12.17 16:56:00 - [53] "Since there were so many threads asking for nerfs or complaining about nerfs I'm afraid I'll have to disappoint everyone. We won't be nerfing or boosting anyone until next year." Seeing how there's not even a soon(TM) i dread to ask, but... is that next year as in 'early next year', 'middle next year' or even something like 'next christmass if we don't have any delay'? ^^;;;
j0sephine	Posted - 2004.12.17 16:56:00 - [54] "Since there were so many threads asking for nerfs or complaining about nerfs I'm afraid I'll have to disappoint everyone. We won't be nerfing or boosting anyone until next year." Seeing how there's not even a soon(TM) i dread to ask, but... is that next year as in 'early next year', 'middle next year' or even something like 'next christmass if we don't have any delay'? ^^;;;
Hakera	Posted - 2004.12.17 17:24:00 - [55] Feature patches are planned for release every month with bug patches inbetween. The next patch is scehduled for mid january. I would hazard a guess, that EW/Missiles will unlikely make that patch due to the complexity of the system but perhaps finally changes to the artilleries, however items like HP increase or ship tweaking probably will make it in if they decide. Originally by: "kieron" Pre-Exodus deployment cycle was a patch roughly every month or less. There isn't going to be a patch before the end of this year due to the holidays. So, I would think mid-January would be the rough timeframe for the third Exodus patch. Dumbledore - Eve-I.com
Hakera	Posted - 2004.12.17 17:24:00 - [56] Feature patches are planned for release every month with bug patches inbetween. The next patch is scehduled for mid january. I would hazard a guess, that EW/Missiles will unlikely make that patch due to the complexity of the system but perhaps finally changes to the artilleries, however items like HP increase or ship tweaking probably will make it in if they decide. Originally by: "kieron" Pre-Exodus deployment cycle was a patch roughly every month or less. There isn't going to be a patch before the end of this year due to the holidays. So, I would think mid-January would be the rough timeframe for the third Exodus patch. Dumbledore - Eve-I.com
Lord Anubis	Posted - 2004.12.17 17:52:00 - [57] It will be funny if the proj fix dont make it in the first patch as its only been like 4 months since ccp broke them. O well better stop now or it will turn into a rant You cant beat Death But you can make the bastard work hard for it wtb Jerek Zuomi's Insignia
Lord Anubis	Posted - 2004.12.17 17:52:00 - [58] It will be funny if the proj fix dont make it in the first patch as its only been like 4 months since ccp broke them. O well better stop now or it will turn into a rant You cant beat Death But you can make the bastard work hard for it wtb Jerek Zuomi's Insignia
Semor	Posted - 2004.12.17 18:44:00 - [59] Dear Oveur. i am very sade 2 here that u / ccp will only fix the artiliry only in the next yr. coz mayself and same othere, is using only minmatar ships. i am using only that kind of ships sine i started playing eve. 6.1.03. i am at the top of the art skills also all gunnery are at the top aming 2 artiliry. but since u / ccp "fixed it" i cant like many othere use a BS in pvp or npc. still more then 6 month i cant do mach. and i dont want 2 wast time and learn 4 anthere race. why dose ccp see that as a major problme and fix it asap. Maybe ccp think that most of the ppl that use temp/typhoon ships with artiliry are old members and, there is no rish and leave eve game. we all paying this game 2 enjoe it, and i am sure as 4 me and othere we are haveing great fune. but, i think this should b ccp 1st gool 2 do fast as part of yr serves 2 yr old loyal ppl that jast want 2 be the same as othere players in there skills lvl. like when u fix othere problme that provent ppl from playing; agitn mish, frozen screen problmes... this is a very annoing isse. that should not b prospond any more. jast think that the best temp stup at the momnet is 3 nosf and 4 miss lacuher (no artiliry) p.s. i did try 2 contact u on that issu 4 about 5 month +- and i did not receve any answer.
Semor	Posted - 2004.12.17 18:44:00 - [60] Dear Oveur. i am very sade 2 here that u / ccp will only fix the artiliry only in the next yr. coz mayself and same othere, is using only minmatar ships. i am using only that kind of ships sine i started playing eve. 6.1.03. i am at the top of the art skills also all gunnery are at the top aming 2 artiliry. but since u / ccp "fixed it" i cant like many othere use a BS in pvp or npc. still more then 6 month i cant do mach. and i dont want 2 wast time and learn 4 anthere race. why dose ccp see that as a major problme and fix it asap. Maybe ccp think that most of the ppl that use temp/typhoon ships with artiliry are old members and, there is no rish and leave eve game. we all paying this game 2 enjoe it, and i am sure as 4 me and othere we are haveing great fune. but, i think this should b ccp 1st gool 2 do fast as part of yr serves 2 yr old loyal ppl that jast want 2 be the same as othere players in there skills lvl. like when u fix othere problme that provent ppl from playing; agitn mish, frozen screen problmes... this is a very annoing isse. that should not b prospond any more. jast think that the best temp stup at the momnet is 3 nosf and 4 miss lacuher (no artiliry) p.s. i did try 2 contact u on that issu 4 about 5 month +- and i did not receve any answer.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: 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.