| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
justin666
   |
Posted - 2010.09.22 12:03:00 -
[1]
anyone noticed the new penatly? :)
hope to god ccp dont put this on tq
|
Tarin Majagh
Caldari
Eclipse Industrials
Quantum Forge
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 12:59:00 -
[2]
Can't say I noticed a penalty.
My cerb seems to actually be putting out more DPS with the missiles than before the patch.
Haven't tried the Drake yet. What exactly is the penalty you're talking about?
-- Quantum Forge |
Duchess Starbuckington
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 13:17:00 -
[3]
What exactly has changed?
_________________________________
ROCKET STATUS: NOT FIXED |
Zeyena
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 13:23:00 -
[4]
The t2 damage missiles all seem to have picked up a negative capacitor recharge bonus. Seems to be cumulative across the launchers.
|
Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 13:31:00 -
[5]
That rounds for at least -37.5% cap regen speed.
More for T2 rockets :/
It's not possible to have DPS Vengeance even close to cap stable any more. (It's already a certain pain, now it's just not possible)
--
Thanks CCP for cu |
VanNostrum
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 13:31:00 -
[6]
 Originally by: Zeyena
The t2 damage missiles all seem to have picked up a negative capacitor recharge bonus. Seems to be cumulative across the launchers.
Ooo what a blow to all those passive tanked drakes with SPRIIs, they won't have any cap to warp anywhere lol!
|
Tarin Majagh
Caldari
Eclipse Industrials
Quantum Forge
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 13:36:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Tarin Majagh on 22/09/2010 13:37:09
I hope this isn't part of some CCP idea for making the Drake less omnipotent? Hope not, its the only decent Caldari ship worth flying...
-- Quantum Forge |
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 13:47:00 -
[8]
relax folks, it's a test server and like we reported previously with other issues, there is lots of funky stuff going on right now due to us switching static branches and the updates to that static are messed up. Stuff that was previously deleted has been re-added all over the place so you will no doubt see lots of strange things for a while before the fix is applied.
As ever, remember the crystal ball before jumping to conclusions. None of the actual rocket changes are on sisi yet and as soon as they are, we'll post a new thread about it describing the changes in detail so you will know what to expect and what would be bugged.
|
|
Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
|
Posted - 2010.09.22 14:01:00 -
[9]
hehe, I have my own :P
Don't mind, we're just discussing.
--
Thanks CCP for cu |
RagnarRox
|
Posted - 2010.09.24 07:27:00 -
[10]
I will have a little girl ***** fit where I cry all over my little girls blouse if missiles get nerfed using Cap...We oly have 1 Viable PVP ship IMO and its the Drake, The rest of the ships have horribad fitting issues:
Hawk Cant fit MWD, Buffer and Missiles
Cara Basically same thing very tight fitting, and cant even fit Hams is basically only a big slow Frig.
Drake needs PDS/Imps For Hams and MWD/Buffer
And the list goes on, without AWU 5 you are screwed as a cald pilot, if this stays and goes to TQ I will commit suicide, I already cant join Hac gangs, BS gangs, Frig Gangs, Inty Gangs, Pirate ship Gangs....Omg I better stop now im so damned depressed anyways, LOl Cald should get a Buff not a Nerf.
If you think about way FOTM goes its really Calds turn, Since 04 They have never been the "Best PVP" Race EVER...Amarr had Scorch Era, before that Minni had Nano Era, Before that Gal ruled Hard with the Asatrte and other Crazy tough ass ships, But Cald was always 3rd best, Never quite the worst but never even close to having pilots l;ike other races scramble to train Cald except lousy PVE...Weak Sauce. 
Take what you Can, when you can. |
|
|
Shana Matika
|
Posted - 2010.09.24 07:53:00 -
[11]
Yeah caldari are sooo weak in pvp - Blackbird/Falcon are useless, Scorpion a ship no fleet ever would take along their supportsquads, poor torpravens for POS bashing.
I agree caldari sucks.
Who finds sarcasm can keep it.
|
Tarin Majagh
Caldari
Eclipse Industrials
Quantum Forge
|
Posted - 2010.09.24 12:39:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Shana Matika
Yeah caldari are sooo weak in pvp - Blackbird/Falcon are useless, Scorpion a ship no fleet ever would take along their supportsquads, poor torpravens for POS bashing.
I agree caldari sucks.
Who finds sarcasm can keep it.
Sure, there's some good Caldari support ships, but very little in the way of viable solo PVP vessels.
-- Quantum Forge |
Suitonia
Gallente
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
|
Posted - 2010.09.24 14:32:00 -
[13]
AML Caracal, Rook, Drake, Raven, Rokh(Blasters), Tengu all work well solo.
---
|
Liang Nuren
Parsec Flux
War.Pigs.
|
Posted - 2010.09.24 17:44:00 -
[14]
So the thing that's confusing is why this would even be considered in the first place. I'm hoping its only half of a change, or there's some super solid reasoning for it. Otherwise: Confirming T2 missile ammo is totally overpowered. 
-Liang
--
Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire
On Twitter
Blog
|
Douglass Bryant
|
Posted - 2010.09.24 17:52:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Suitonia
AML Caracal, Rook, Drake, Raven, Rokh(Blasters), Tengu all work well solo.
Don't necessarily agree with all of the above, but they certainly won't anymore if that change stays.
Yes, let's make it even harder to fit a decent tank on a Caldari ship with the requisite PvP midslot equipment. With Cal, you get gank or tank, well, now you'd get neither. 
That being said, I can't imagine they'd be so out of touch as to nerf Cal pvp.
|
Corellian Smuggler
|
Posted - 2010.09.24 19:33:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Corellian Smuggler on 24/09/2010 19:33:24
If T2 Missiles give a cap penalty.... wow. That will hurt ALOT of caldari ships like the drake and raven. They are allready cap hungry enough... that would just suck so bad.
|
Saman Ayan
Minmatar
Lazy.
|
Posted - 2010.09.25 01:11:00 -
[17]
Wow, way to miss what Chronotis is saying. Basically, CCP moved sisi over to a different, maybe older, build and messed up copying the data, which is why you see weird stuff like 200km/s SB's, AOE DD with 3m damage and missiles working as if they're before the nano nerf. It would be really unlikely for this to go through I bet the cap recharge penalty is a result of this.
|
Liang Nuren
Parsec Flux
War.Pigs.
|
Posted - 2010.09.25 01:21:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Saman Ayan
Wow, way to miss what Chronotis is saying.
Sure, I have no doubt that things are a bit whack ATM... but its still really hard for me to imagine why it would have ever been suggested in the first place. At any rate, I am comforted by the fact that the dev team has been showing remarkable knowledge of the game lately. I have no doubt they had some reason to have suggested such a course of action... maybe back during QR before they settled on the new missile formula.
/shrug
-Liang
--
Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire
On Twitter
Blog
|
Lady Spank
Amarr
Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta
|
Posted - 2010.09.25 09:36:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Sure, I have no doubt that things are a bit whack ATM... but its still really hard for me to imagine why it would have ever been suggested in the first place.
It's a test server, for testing stuff. Perhaps it was part of a test? |
Usul Atreides
|
Posted - 2010.09.25 12:25:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Usul Atreides on 25/09/2010 12:27:49
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
relax folks, it's a test server and like we reported previously with other issues, there is lots of funky stuff going on right now due to us switching static branches and the updates to that static are messed up. Stuff that was previously deleted has been re-added all over the place so you will no doubt see lots of strange things for a while before the fix is applied.
As ever, remember the crystal ball before jumping to conclusions. None of the actual rocket changes are on sisi yet and as soon as they are, we'll post a new thread about it describing the changes in detail so you will know what to expect and what would be bugged.
To explain, I think he's talking about SVN branches. If, for instance, you are working on a new feature you copy the trunk to a new branch so you have two identical copies - then you modify your feature branch of the source code. When the feature is completed and you are ready to release it, you merge the branch (bit complicated sometimes) back into the trunk. Usually you merge in any changes from the trunk every week or so into your branch to keep it up to date.
By static I guess they've merged in a branch that hasn't been kept up to date with the trunk. All sorts of funkiness will indeed creep up if that's the case. Why, however, their branches aren't kept up to date from the trunk I don't know.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |