Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 18 post(s) |
|
CCP Fallout
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 10:59:00 -
[1]
CCP Chronotis's new dev blog details, well, cool stuff happening with EVE Online: Incursion. Read all about it here.
Fallout Associate Community Manager CCP Hf, EVE Online Contact us |
|
Tyleritus
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 11:01:00 -
[2]
Thats pretty awesome cant wait. 60 Day GTC's |
|
Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises Otherworld Empire
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 11:07:00 -
[3]
nice nice
Secure 3rd party service | my in-game channel 'Holy Veldspar' |
|
Makko Gray
Nexus Aerospace Corporation The Volition Cult
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 11:08:00 -
[4]
Good stuff! Looking forward to trying out the T2 ammo changes.
|
Gold Monkey
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 11:14:00 -
[5]
Logged on sisi and found there were faction ships in market great idea. We can finally get proper price ranges for them :)
|
dischordia
Gallente wiggle Tech.
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 11:17:00 -
[6]
2 good points about the faction ships,
1 in therory they will be seeded on sisi now? 2 the end of the contract scams for faction ships?
|
Donn Gwuan
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 11:18:00 -
[7]
Looks great, would of rather seen Rage Torps up there than Javs tho. Explosion sig on those are huge...
Still, can't wait for the changes.
|
Kanatta Jing
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 11:20:00 -
[8]
So...
Stealth blaster boost
Stealth supercarrier nerf to return the fleet Apoc to the field.
Neato
|
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 11:23:00 -
[9]
It all sounds good to me.
|
Alex Harumichi
Gallente Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 11:27:00 -
[10]
"We are focusing on the short range versions of the Tech II ammo such as Gleam, Conflagration, Hail, Quake, Void and Javelin."
That last one should probably be Rage, right?
|
|
Loki Nahat
Skyforger Tactical Narcotics Team
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 11:30:00 -
[11]
Hurrah!
This is the most promising thing i've heard in ages, congratulations on fixing these, seriously.
*hands kudos to CCP*
time to dust off the sniper boats methinks
Loki
|
|
CCP Navigator
C C P C C P Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 11:43:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Alex Harumichi "We are focusing on the short range versions of the Tech II ammo such as Gleam, Conflagration, Hail, Quake, Void and Javelin."
That last one should probably be Rage, right?
It is actually hybrid Javelin ammo. You can see the current stats at this EVElopedia link.
Navigator Senior Community Representative CCP Hf, EVE Online
|
|
DTson Gauur
Caldari The Littlest Hobos Dead Terrorists
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 11:44:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Alex Harumichi "We are focusing on the short range versions of the Tech II ammo such as Gleam, Conflagration, Hail, Quake, Void and Javelin."
That last one should probably be Rage, right?
No, it's correct, T2 short range Railgun ammo is called Javelin.
|
Deva Blackfire
Oblivion Shield Oblivion United
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 11:52:00 -
[14]
1. You forgot about larger clip sizes in rocket launchers (unless that change was reverted).
2. How do new FBs work now? Like normal turrets (tracking/sig)? Like missiles (exploV, exploR)? Could you drop their stats here please (just the ones needed for damage).
|
Double Dee
Perkone
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 11:56:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Kanatta Jing Stealth blaster boost
hardly. all t2 short range ammo is getting booster which means blaster boats will still be utter **** compared to the rest of short range weapon platforms. nothing is changing for blasters sadly.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 12:00:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Double Dee
Originally by: Kanatta Jing Stealth blaster boost
hardly. all t2 short range ammo is getting booster which means blaster boats will still be utter **** compared to the rest of short range weapon platforms. nothing is changing for blasters sadly.
ànot to mention we don't quite know what the new drawbacks will be.
10 ISK on them putting a speed drawback on Void, just because "it would be too awesome otherwise" ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Malcanis
Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 12:10:00 -
[17]
Originally by: DTson Gauur
Originally by: Alex Harumichi "We are focusing on the short range versions of the Tech II ammo such as Gleam, Conflagration, Hail, Quake, Void and Javelin."
That last one should probably be Rage, right?
No, it's correct, T2 short range Railgun ammo is called Javelin.
Heh I totally forgot about that stuff.
Anyway, I see lots of good things in that blog, especially the T2 ammo stuff.
Hmmm will worthwhile T2 damage ammo be a stealth mission runner nerf? (Lower LP demand?)
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
Zagdul
Gallente Shadowed Command Fatal Ascension
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 12:12:00 -
[18]
First page!!!
This is looking to be one of the best expansions ever :).
Keep the bug hunting/fixing going. Things look amazing so far.
|
Franga
NQX Innovations
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 12:24:00 -
[19]
I'm starting to gain interest in this expansion. T2 ammo that's useful, I like that.
|
Ishina Fel
Caldari Terra Incognita Black Star Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 12:25:00 -
[20]
I hope that the rebalancing of the Tech2 ammo vs. faction will take into account the price differences between the two. It would be a pity if worthless T2 ammo becomes useful again, yet at the same time faction ammo becomes worthless ;)
Signature? What signature? |
|
Myxx
Gallente Risen Angels
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 12:29:00 -
[21]
*goes and puts 1m units of rockets into the oven*
Woot. --
My opinion is my own and nothing but my own. Before putting words in my mouth, it might help to ask for clarification if you are confused. |
David Hassan
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 12:31:00 -
[22]
Interesting. I might actually use void now. Well that is until I get done training T2 Autocannons, since blasters are obsolete.
Can somebody poke the Gallente weapon engineers with a stick and get them back in the war? ;p
I'm liking the focus of polishing existing content with this patch.
Another 4 or 5 like this back to back, and that CSM backlog wont look as long as the bible.
|
H3llHound
Capital Construction Research Pioneer Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 12:31:00 -
[23]
You forgot to mention that all T2 dmg missiles get nerfed CCP Chronotis
Recruiting │3rd Party Service |
Rocius
Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 12:37:00 -
[24]
Quote: SCC approves addition of faction ships to the market The SCC has been persuaded to relax their stringent hold on the market and will, with Incursion, allow the trade of all faction ships. This is pretty cool for those of you looking for pimp rides to show off whilst cruising around Yulai with more bling bling.
Who cruises around Yulai anymore???
|
Fade Toblack
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 12:44:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Ishina Fel I hope that the rebalancing of the Tech2 ammo vs. faction will take into account the price differences between the two. It would be a pity if worthless T2 ammo becomes useful again, yet at the same time faction ammo becomes worthless ;)
That's current prices based on current demand. If T2 ammo becomes the best, then demand and pricing will increase.
|
Duchess Starbuckington
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 12:44:00 -
[26]
Quote: No, it's correct, T2 short range Railgun ammo is called Javelin.
I think it kinda says it all that a lot of people don't know Javelin ammo for rails exists _________________________________
ROCKET STATUS: FIX IN PROGRESS... |
Xituqtra
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 12:45:00 -
[27]
does this mean that the fighterbomber torps can't be smartbombed now that they work like turrets?
|
Rhok Relztem
Caldari CGMA Synergist Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 12:46:00 -
[28]
This expansion is beginning to approach the AWESOME category with all of the fixes and re-balancing getting packed into it along with the new stuff. I just KNEW you all had it in you!
Three thumbs-up for CCP! (Three?!? Not sure where that extra one came from but may as well use it.)
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 12:47:00 -
[29]
Did I read Yulai? Shouldn't it be Jita?
Good changes though. Long overdue ammo changes, yay yay! Also much loved SCC market change - I bet they were ****ed off that they earned only so few isk from all those contract trades |
cBOLTSON
Reaction Theory Talos Coalition
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 12:48:00 -
[30]
Quote - 'Fighter Bombers will be much less effective against sub-capital class ships now and in this scenario you should switch to using fighters.'
Oh thankyou ccp!! Let those bitter vets once again feel the rath of the noob blob of battleships!! TO ARMS COMRADES!
|
|
Fade Toblack
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 12:51:00 -
[31]
Oh yeah, I meant to ask. On the T2 ammo changes the drawbacks are being removed from short-range variants (if I read the blog correctly) - how about the long-range variants?
|
amarian arch
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 12:51:00 -
[32]
whats going to be done with conflag? I currently see no difference between the one on tranquility and the one on singularity?
|
Merqurius
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 12:58:00 -
[33]
Real nice seeing this improvements coming to Incursions I do all races but Gallente seems to need the boost more urgent than the other races (or rather hybrids).
Lazors = Good range and dps. No ammo cost, fast switching. Perfect for POS bashing. Projectiles = Can't be neuted and good range. Missiles = Perfect for PvE
|
Schmell
Russian Thunder Squad Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 13:01:00 -
[34]
I want my phoon with ****^W rage torpedoes nowwwww!
Little concerned about faction ammo tho, dont make it completely obsolete plz
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 13:06:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Deva Blackfire 1. You forgot about larger clip sizes in rocket launchers (unless that change was reverted).
2. How do new FBs work now? Like normal turrets (tracking/sig)? Like missiles (exploV, exploR)? Could you drop their stats here please (just the ones needed for damage).
1. Didn't forget, just did not list every single change in the blog but the gist of the main changes.
2. Similar to turrets now, so tracking speed is being used to balance their effectiveness versus sub-caps (for eg, they will no longer be able to hit battlecruises in most scenarios). Their raw stats are lower to reflect the damage spread in hit quality which affects actual damage.
|
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 13:09:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Rocius
Who cruises around Yulai anymore???
It's where the cool kids hang, you hippies all went to jita. The scotch and gentleman's lounge is at yulai.
|
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 13:10:00 -
[37]
Originally by: H3llHound You forgot to mention that all T2 dmg missiles get nerfed CCP Chronotis
you need to check again, most likely you saw the tail end of when we switched static branches on sisi and things were borked for a week or two.
|
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 13:11:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Xituqtra does this mean that the fighterbomber torps can't be smartbombed now that they work like turrets?
correct, although given their velocity, not really effective beforehand either.
|
|
Schmell
Russian Thunder Squad Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 13:11:00 -
[39]
Ah, btw, do you consider later revamping all missile weapon types to turret like mechanic?
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 13:14:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Fade Toblack Oh yeah, I meant to ask. On the T2 ammo changes the drawbacks are being removed from short-range variants (if I read the blog correctly) - how about the long-range variants?
The short range ammo were the ones which had ship effects on them. The rest affected your turrets themselves rather than the ship. The ship effects were the ones which were removed.
The definitely will make them directly competitive with the faction variants for sure.
These changes are not on sisi yet, a thread will appear in test server feedback forum when they hit there for specific feedback.
|
|
|
Dar Wento
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 13:16:00 -
[41]
Thank you for restoring my faith in you, bit by bit. These changes are definetly worth waiting for. Keep up the good work CCP!
/Dar.
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 13:19:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Schmell Ah, btw, do you consider later revamping all missile weapon types to turret like mechanic?
Not quite in this manner but yes it is talked about a lot (note talked!). This was a bandaid due to the extreme but focused nature of the problem. Eventually we desire to not use turret effects as such but make it so missiles are truly "fake" but still behave like missiles today. It would be and is a massive project though so not something on the horizon as such.
We have made a lot of advancements in tech we can utilize like new particle systems and such which will help with this in the future but very much not yet planned for any release whatsoever currently.
|
|
Loki Nahat
Skyforger Tactical Narcotics Team
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 13:19:00 -
[43]
Great feedback here,
Random sudo-off topic question:
Will there ever be stats published about the amount of tax the SSC generates from market sales/PI im/export/construction or concord structure maintenance fees or indeed empire corp tax?
Because (I think) these are never included in the Economic reports, would be (slightly) interesting to see the 'profit' said NPC organisations reap from the capsuleer economy. (alternative a rough figure would suffice)
/end random
Loki
|
Catari Taga
Centre Of Attention Middle of Nowhere
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 13:21:00 -
[44]
Good stuff. Keep the fixes coming. --
|
Deva Blackfire
Oblivion Shield Oblivion United
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 13:24:00 -
[45]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Originally by: Fade Toblack Oh yeah, I meant to ask. On the T2 ammo changes the drawbacks are being removed from short-range variants (if I read the blog correctly) - how about the long-range variants?
The short range ammo were the ones which had ship effects on them. The rest affected your turrets themselves rather than the ship. The ship effects were the ones which were removed.
The definitely will make them directly competitive with the faction variants for sure.
These changes are not on sisi yet, a thread will appear in test server feedback forum when they hit there for specific feedback.
When we are at conflagration - can you make it deal, say, more EM damage than EMP ammo? Something similiar to scorch damage profile. Its weird that for EM race (which amarr is) they can be easily outmatched in EM damage type department by minmatar or caldari (obvious).
|
adriaans
Amarr Ankaa. Focused Intentions
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 13:26:00 -
[46]
SWEET!!! This expansion is getting good
--signature-- F.CS boost: Here Vid: Link |
Grideris
Gallente Fleet Coordination Commission
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 13:29:00 -
[47]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Originally by: Rocius
Who cruises around Yulai anymore???
It's where the cool kids hang, you hippies all went to jita. The scotch and gentleman's lounge is at yulai.
Here here!
|
Zarnak Wulf
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 13:33:00 -
[48]
It's been so long since I even looked at Quake I had to pull up EFT to get a comparison. My Tempest would have it's alpha go from 9940 to 10084 if I switched from RF Fusion to Quake. It would lose half it's optimal and 25% tracking - which probably would negate much more then that 184 alpha gain. I'll hold judgement until I see the final product but the faction ammo still would appear more attractive even w/o the cap or speed penalties.
|
Tester128
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 13:51:00 -
[49]
you should nerf the freaking supers, not boost them. and please remove any possibility of fbs scoring a perfect hit on subcapitals. also would be nice to have fbs blow up on critical miss
|
Nareg Maxence
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 13:55:00 -
[50]
Spike and Javelin names are the wrong way around. Spike should be short range and Javelin should be long range.
|
|
Trebor Whettam
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 14:11:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Nareg Maxence Spike and Javelin names are the wrong way around. Spike should be short range and Javelin should be long range.
Even better, either the hybrid Javelins or missile Javelins need a name change. It'd be nice to just have to say Javelin and have everyone know what you're talking about. I'd vote for renaming the hybrid javs, because people have actually used the missile javs, so people will assume a missile context.
|
LegendaryFrog
Caldari GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 14:26:00 -
[52]
The fighterbomber rebalance is a good first step toward making battleships useful again, keep it up!
|
Makko Gray
Nexus Aerospace Corporation The Volition Cult
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 14:52:00 -
[53]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Originally by: Fade Toblack Oh yeah, I meant to ask. On the T2 ammo changes the drawbacks are being removed from short-range variants (if I read the blog correctly) - how about the long-range variants?
The short range ammo were the ones which had ship effects on them. The rest affected your turrets themselves rather than the ship. The ship effects were the ones which were removed.
The definitely will make them directly competitive with the faction variants for sure.
These changes are not on sisi yet, a thread will appear in test server feedback forum when they hit there for specific feedback.
Considering the tracking penalty for short range T2 ammos (particularly short range weapon one - I'd like to see it reduced myself) and not huge difference in damage might be nice to have some other tactical descisions for T2 ammos. Perhaps ideas like increasing damage but with rate of fire penalty (or the inverse) so the damage over time remains similar to the equivalent faction ammos but one has the potential for higher alpha or less cap or ammo usage.
Still I'm just speculating in the anticipation of seeing it on the test server.
|
Indeterminacy
THORN Syndicate Controlled Chaos
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 14:56:00 -
[54]
I see that you are making changes to short range T2 ammo but I see nothing regarding T2 short range missiles (precision missiles). Those missiles have specific drawbacks on a ship which loads them making them very undesirable in combat. Have they been overlooked in this blog post? Or are they not being looked at in this T2 ammo re-work? If the later, why?
|
ChrisIsherwood
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 15:07:00 -
[55]
Thank you for the info and the changes. It will take a very skilled QQ to find anything to complain about in this!
The faction market changes were a very pleasant surprise. I greatly prefer to see the history from EVE Central/metrics/markets/etc. More stuff on market please.
Originally by: Trebor Whettam
Even better, either the hybrid Javelins or missile Javelins need a name change. It'd be nice to just have to say Javelin and have everyone know what you're talking about. I'd vote for renaming the hybrid javs, because people have actually used the missile javs, so people will assume a missile context.
While your changing database entries anyway, this would make sense.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 15:10:00 -
[56]
So, no comment about Scorch L yet?
|
H3llHound
Capital Construction Research Pioneer Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 15:17:00 -
[57]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Originally by: H3llHound You forgot to mention that all T2 dmg missiles get nerfed CCP Chronotis
you need to check again, most likely you saw the tail end of when we switched static branches on sisi and things were borked for a week or two.
Phew. thx for clearing that up
Recruiting │3rd Party Service |
Gogela
Freeport Exploration
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 15:25:00 -
[58]
Edited by: Gogela on 18/10/2010 15:27:56
Quote: ...allow the trade of all faction ships.
Does this change include unique ships like the Guardian Vex, Freki, Mimir, Adrista, Interbus Shuttle, etc... and odd balls like the Gurristas Shuttle, Apothiosis, Zephyr, Civ Shuttles, etc...?
------------------------------------
"A hungry man will tell you anything if you give him a cookie." |
DJWiggles
Gallente Eve Radio Corporation
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 15:34:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Gogela Edited by: Gogela on 18/10/2010 15:27:56
Quote: ...allow the trade of all faction ships.
Does this change include unique ships like the Guardian Vex, Freki, Mimir, Adrista, Interbus Shuttle, etc... and odd balls like the Gurristas Shuttle, Apothiosis, Zephyr, Civ Shuttles, etc...?
currently the "odd balls" are not on there that i can see but the freki etc are Ships 1 ships 2
also the ships are aranges in a much smaller layout so faster to look stuff up imho ships 3 ships 4
Now with added extra Wigglyness and a big white fluffy bunny suit with a BLUE BOW TIE on Mondays 19:00 - 22:00 GMT on EvE-Radio. |
John Zorg
Caldari Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 15:54:00 -
[60]
Nice Blog post!
Two requests/questions please regarding Super Carriers. Could you please make the Drone bay a bit bigger for the Aeon and the Wyvern. We cannot fit a full rack of fighters and Fighter Bombers + other smaller drones. Just another 15 000m3 please.
Will we be seeing the completion of the fix to the bonus of the Hel this expansion? It was promised with the last expansion and we were told it is under review? Still nothing said about it...
n1 on the Bomber lag fix!
|
|
Shadow's Caress
Lone Sword Production Soldiers of Solitude
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 16:17:00 -
[61]
Originally by: Gypsio III So, no comment about Scorch L yet?
Scorch is a long range pulse laser crystal. To my knowledge, it doesn't have any ship penalties. It is therefore outside the scope of the upcoming changes.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 16:31:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Shadow's Caress
Originally by: Gypsio III So, no comment about Scorch L yet?
Scorch is a long range pulse laser crystal. To my knowledge, it doesn't have any ship penalties. It is therefore outside the scope of the upcoming changes.
I'll just leave this here and stand well back...
|
RLCHANCE
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 16:36:00 -
[63]
Originally by: dischordia 2 the end of the contract scams for faction ships?
i dunno there will be that 1 dude that wont no and will buy a scam contract and after find out that its on the market
|
Aineko Macx
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 16:41:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Ishina Fel I hope that the rebalancing of the Tech2 ammo vs. faction will take into account the price differences between the two. It would be a pity if worthless T2 ammo becomes useful again, yet at the same time faction ammo becomes worthless ;)
At least for crystals you also have to consider that the faction variant lasts 4 times longer than T2.
/me hopes scorch doesn't get nerfed...
Good changes all around. ________________________ CCP: Where fixing bugs is a luxury, not an obligation. |
Liang Nuren
Parsec Flux War.Pigs.
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 16:44:00 -
[65]
Originally by: Gypsio III So, no comment about Scorch L yet?
I know... that tracking penalty on Scorch really needs to go. The ridiculously low damage is nerf enough!
As to the blog itself - thanks for the heads up! I'm a bit unenthused about the rocket changes since It think the damage itself is way way too low... but I could be pleasantly surprised. The T2 ammo changes I reserve judgment about until I see the stats. It could be awesome... it could really suck. Either way WTB Void M BPO? :)
-Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
|
DeadDuck
Amarr Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 16:52:00 -
[66]
So no changes to tec2 missiles. The sacrilege is the only hac that cannnot fire at more then 30km using the ships bonus. All the other ships can do it.
Since you are messing with ships and tec2 ammo you could entend the sacrilege bonus to Heavy Missiles or review the side effects/range of Javelin Missiles.
God is my Wingman |
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 16:58:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Loki Nahat Great feedback here,
Random sudo-off topic question:
Will there ever be stats published about the amount of tax the SSC generates from market sales/PI im/export/construction or concord structure maintenance fees or indeed empire corp tax?
Because (I think) these are never included in the Economic reports, would be (slightly) interesting to see the 'profit' said NPC organisations reap from the capsuleer economy. (alternative a rough figure would suffice)
/end random
Loki
A freebie, last 24hrs transaction stats for a selection of faucets and sinks - as you can see, Concord is a very generous organisation!
Trade Total
* Market Transaction 5,848,221,406,963
Faucets * Bounty Prizes 876,039,478,466 * Agent Mission Reward 68,923,141,163 * Agent Mission Time Bonus 63,450,447,585 * Insurance Payouts 111,942,877,603
Sinks * Sales Tax 6,227,911,218 * Brokers fee 6,733,818,276 * PI Construction Costs 7,575,185,000 * PI Import Tax 290,289,843 * PI Export Tax 3,355,153,925 * Insurance Cost 43,021,823,156 * Clone Activation 20,197,210,000 * Sovereignty Bill 59,332,000,000 * LP Store 135,343,150,000
Note - that is only a snapshot of some of the stats, others like NPC orders are not there and such. Consider this a freebie until a future QEN and no, we won't provide more or derail the blog!
|
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 16:58:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Nareg Maxence Spike and Javelin names are the wrong way around. Spike should be short range and Javelin should be long range.
Oddly enough CCP Hammer mentioned this in his review, might well happen!
|
|
Liang Nuren
Parsec Flux War.Pigs.
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 17:10:00 -
[69]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis ...
WOW! Thanks for the info! I took a moment to make a thread in Missions&Complexes to discuss this information windfall! Man, I <3 you forever! CCP give this man a raise! Etc. :P
Thread: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1401580&page=1#1
-Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
|
Kragaar
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 17:16:00 -
[70]
Good stuff, is there any plan in the future to add faction modules to the market along with the faction ships?
|
|
French Farmer
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 17:33:00 -
[71]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Sinks * Sales Tax 6,227,911,218 * Brokers fee 6,733,818,276 * PI Construction Costs 7,575,185,000 * PI Import Tax 290,289,843 * PI Export Tax 3,355,153,925 * Insurance Cost 43,021,823,156 * Clone Activation 20,197,210,000 * Sovereignty Bill 59,332,000,000 * LP Store 135,343,150,000
CSPA? Or ... I guess that's negligible.
|
Snowmann
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 18:37:00 -
[72]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Oddly enough CCP Hammer mentioned this in his review, might well happen!
What? I though CCP Hammer only walked around "trying" to look busy while trying to not trip on things as he typed on his I-Phone. I remeber hearing that somewhere.
Good call though. Javlin should mean "longer" range.
|
Denuo Secus
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 18:40:00 -
[73]
I'm very happy about the rocket changes :)
Besides: does Incursion contain some of the new ship designs announced in the Art Dev Blog a while ago? -
Save the missiles from the glowing blob :S
R ----------> * A --------> * V --------> * E -------> * N ---------> *
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 18:42:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Kragaar Good stuff, is there any plan in the future to add faction modules to the market along with the faction ships?
There is, it will naturally take longer to do since there is so many of them and with some modules *lots* of variations. For now, we just wanted the best stuff up there which was the most requested, being the other ships you can all fly.
|
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 18:48:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Denuo Secus I'm very happy about the rocket changes :)
Besides: does Incursion contain some of the new ship designs announced in the Art Dev Blog a while ago?
We're not THAT fast The contest only closed a few days ago and there are many excellent entries where deviantart have to pick the finalists then CCP will pick from those as per the guide here.
This is outside of my area of expertise, creating the 3D model ready for ingame use all depends on the size of the asset and how much animation is involved. A small frigate takes around a month or so up to the rorqual which is our most complex model at around 6 months iirc to create the 3D asset from concept.
|
|
Vidar Kentoran
Minmatar Eighty Joule Brewery
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 18:56:00 -
[76]
These ammo types still have huge tracking and range penalties(except for Conflagration, which has the same range as faction short range ammos, for some reason).
Not really sure how you'd expect someone to ever use short-range ammo that has a tracking penalty, to begin with :P That doesn't really make any sense.
If you want these ammo types to be a reasonable alternative to Faction, they can't have -50% to -75% range penalties AND -25%+ tracking penalties on them at the same time. They are stuck having to deal with more tracking issues due to shorter range, and thus they need to take an even higher penalty on top of that?
It's fine if they have a bit less range and are thus somewhat inferior, say... -25%... OR if they have worse tracking...(again, -25% would be OK) but both makes them extremely inferior and not a real alternative at all.
|
Xituqtra
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 18:57:00 -
[77]
After hopping on sisi I Also noticed the faction/deadspace/officer items now got little special tags in the corner....... \O/ FINALLY thank you CCP no longer looking at all the names of those damn modules
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 19:08:00 -
[78]
More corner-tags eh?
Now, onto that meta-level inventory column everyone has been begging forà ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Bomberlocks
Minmatar CTRL-Q
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 19:34:00 -
[79]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Originally by: Denuo Secus I'm very happy about the rocket changes :)
Besides: does Incursion contain some of the new ship designs announced in the Art Dev Blog a while ago?
We're not THAT fast The contest only closed a few days ago and there are many excellent entries where deviantart have to pick the finalists then CCP will pick from those as per the guide here.
This is outside of my area of expertise, creating the 3D model ready for ingame use all depends on the size of the asset and how much animation is involved. A small frigate takes around a month or so up to the rorqual which is our most complex model at around 6 months iirc to create the 3D asset from concept.
I really beg you guys to consider more than one ship for inclusion into the game. There are a number of ships that are not only excellent, but that provide capabilities that would very possibly enhance game play. Examples would be the examples listed for all the races in the Tornado entry and the mini-carriers listed for all races elsewhere.
|
ceaon
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 19:34:00 -
[80]
OMFG some one should save Jita local files this chatlogs are part of eve history, this is the death of caldari navy drake
Originally by: CCP Adida The male thread was locked because the discussion turned into transsexuals and man boobs.
|
|
Borgh Brainbasher
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 20:24:00 -
[81]
Edited by: Borgh Brainbasher on 18/10/2010 20:32:02
Originally by: ceaon OMFG some one should save Jita local files this chatlogs are part of eve history, this is the death of caldari navy drake
"for you my friend, I have something truly special, you can't even find this on the market"
yup, I can see it happening.
also, I noticed you guys made the MWD icon have a little blue sometyhing to differintiate it from the AB. I daon't fly dualprop much but I know this is a welcome change for those who do.
|
Alara IonStorm
Agent-Orange
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 20:30:00 -
[82]
The expansion looks great, as someone who started halfway throu dominion I always wanted to be there for a great expansion, and I like everything I have read so far!
One thing the Hawk is getting better fitting...
Any comments on the Omen?
-- They took my Rifle! |
Yuki Kulotsuki
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 20:49:00 -
[83]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Originally by: Deva Blackfire 2. How do new FBs work now? Like normal turrets (tracking/sig)? Like missiles (exploV, exploR)? Could you drop their stats here please (just the ones needed for damage).
2. Similar to turrets now, so tracking speed is being used to balance their effectiveness versus sub-caps (for eg, they will no longer be able to hit battlecruises in most scenarios). Their raw stats are lower to reflect the damage spread in hit quality which affects actual damage.
This expansion just went from meh to f-yeah.
Originally by: CCP Lemur THIS IS GOD: ... IF YOU HAVE ANY MORE REQUESTS I'M AVAILABLE SUNDAY FROM 10:30 TO 12:00 TO RECEIVE YOUR PRAYERS.
|
John Zorg
Caldari Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 21:03:00 -
[84]
Originally by: John Zorg Nice Blog post!
Two requests/questions please regarding Super Carriers. Could you please make the Drone bay a bit bigger for the Aeon and the Wyvern. We cannot fit a full rack of fighters and Fighter Bombers + other smaller drones. Just another 15 000m3 please.
Will we be seeing the completion of the fix to the bonus of the Hel this expansion? It was promised with the last expansion and we were told it is under review? Still nothing said about it...
n1 on the Bomber lag fix!
|
Siz'Rael
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 22:07:00 -
[85]
To reiterate and belabor a point I was dissapointed to see only brought up once, and even afterwards apparently ignored... for sake of convenience, I will use Conflag for a specific example here.... I personally couldn't care that much about them using more cap on per cycle to use them... the combined drawbacks of short range, and tracking penalties, is the reason I don't use these crystals. Having them use less cap is not going to make them more worthwhile for me to use... the fact that they basically don't hit anytying is why I don't use them. So, if you want to see me using T2 short range ammo, make them actually capable of hitting targets!
|
Malcanis
Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 22:09:00 -
[86]
Originally by: John Zorg
Originally by: John Zorg Nice Blog post!
Two requests/questions please regarding Super Carriers. Could you please make the Drone bay a bit bigger for the Aeon and the Wyvern. We cannot fit a full rack of fighters and Fighter Bombers + other smaller drones. Just another 15 000m3 please.
Will we be seeing the completion of the fix to the bonus of the Hel this expansion? It was promised with the last expansion and we were told it is under review? Still nothing said about it...
n1 on the Bomber lag fix!
I think that is a deliberate design choice. You see how that resist bonus makes your supers have enormously more EHP and tank? Yeah, that's what you're buying with your "small" drone bay.
Drop 1 damb fighter and have all the utility drones you could reasonably need.
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
Alice Celadon
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 23:34:00 -
[87]
Originally by: Malcanis
I think that is a deliberate design choice. You see how that resist bonus makes your supers have enormously more EHP and tank? Yeah, that's what you're buying with your "small" drone bay.
Drop 1 damb fighter and have all the utility drones you could reasonably need.
I think the point is that Pre-Incursion those FBs could hit BCs and HICs, so a full load of Fighters wasn't critical. Post-Incursion, a full load of Fighters is critical. Thus this would constitute a nerf to Aeons and Wyverns.
|
Alara IonStorm
Agent-Orange
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 23:57:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Alice Celadon I think the point is that Pre-Incursion those FBs could hit BCs and HICs, so a full load of Fighters wasn't critical. Post-Incursion, a full load of Fighters is critical. Thus this would constitute a nerf to Aeons and Wyverns.
Don't nerf Super Carriers they are so underpowered!
With out a full rack of fighters the Aeon willl have to reley on it's 50million EHP and the ability to PWN and Capital or Battleship in seconds!
I bet no one will ever fly it again!
-- They took my Rifle! |
Frug
Omega Wing
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 01:50:00 -
[89]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Originally by: Schmell Ah, btw, do you consider later revamping all missile weapon types to turret like mechanic?
Not quite in this manner but yes it is talked about a lot (note talked!). This was a bandaid due to the extreme but focused nature of the problem. Eventually we desire to not use turret effects as such but make it so missiles are truly "fake" but still behave like missiles today. It would be and is a massive project though so not something on the horizon as such.
We have made a lot of advancements in tech we can utilize like new particle systems and such which will help with this in the future but very much not yet planned for any release whatsoever currently.
How about in 18 months? - - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - If you think I'm awesome say BOOO BOOO!! - Ductoris Neat look what I found - Kreul Whisper/PrismX 4 emperor |
Noun Verber
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 02:56:00 -
[90]
Is there a tier rebalance in the backlog?
By this I'm not asking for a 'we're doing it soon' just 'eventually' (or SoonÖ).
|
|
VonKolroth
Gallente Anarchist's Anonymous
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 02:59:00 -
[91]
Originally by: Alex Harumichi "We are focusing on the short range versions of the Tech II ammo such as Gleam, Conflagration, Hail, Quake, Void and Javelin."
That last one should probably be Rage, right?
Considering javelin's drawback after turret stacking is essentially decreasing your ships top speed to 5km-15km, it seems it needs a change to make it not completely pointless to actually use. ~
A man with a Domi analyzes every problem in the terms of drones. |
VonKolroth
Gallente Anarchist's Anonymous
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 03:11:00 -
[92]
Holy Sh*t, did a dev answer over ten questions in one thread.
/emote VonKolroth rubs his eyes. ~
A man with a Domi analyzes every problem in the terms of drones. |
Bomberlocks
Minmatar CTRL-Q
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 03:28:00 -
[93]
Could one of the devs please answer this question: On Sisi, the show info panel on microwarpdrives now show them as having a maximum cap penalty. Why was this done and are you aware of the effect it will have on an extremely large part of the game without any benefit that I can see right now? Minmatar ships especially, with the much lower cap than other ships, but also Amarr due to laser cap consumption are going to suffer because of this.
Please explain?
|
Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 04:08:00 -
[94]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Originally by: Kragaar Good stuff, is there any plan in the future to add faction modules to the market along with the faction ships?
There is, it will naturally take longer to do since there is so many of them and with some modules *lots* of variations.
Didn't you missed a word "fake" before "variations"? As there's enough module variations that differs only by name, being the same in essence. -- Thanks CCP for cu |
VonKolroth
Gallente Anarchist's Anonymous
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 05:00:00 -
[95]
Originally by: Bomberlocks Could one of the devs please answer this question: On Sisi, the show info panel on microwarpdrives now show them as having a maximum cap penalty. Why was this done and are you aware of the effect it will have on an extremely large part of the game without any benefit that I can see right now? Minmatar ships especially, with the much lower cap than other ships, but also Amarr due to laser cap consumption are going to suffer because of this.
Please explain?
The best explanation would likely be that they are exactly the same way on the Tranquility server, and have been for quite some time. I believe they had the penalty even before the speed-nerf. ~
A man with a Domi analyzes every problem in the terms of drones. |
Carribean Queen
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 05:07:00 -
[96]
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE for the love of all that is holy and good, make a notable difference between a BPO and a BPC.
As someone who makes a LOT of copies, it is impossible to tell in the hangar which is which. And thus, having to get info on hundreds of BP's...
ARRRRRRGGHHHHHHHH... (maybe make copies yellow, or green or something, or put a left corner icon thingy to make it easily discernible which is which).
Please and Thank You.
|
Tiger's Spirit
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 05:09:00 -
[97]
Edited by: Tiger''s Spirit on 19/10/2010 05:14:20 Edited by: Tiger''s Spirit on 19/10/2010 05:13:08
Originally by: CCP Fallout "which penalize your ship itself and also stack per hardpoint loaded with the ammo. This means the ammo will be a good alternative to the faction ammo and, without such focused and sometimes crippling drawbacks, will be much more useful."
No, will not. Just try T2 rockets on Vengeance.
Who will change the factions ammo to T2, when the damage difference so minimal. No one.
Lets check Vengeance which has just 4 weapon slot and get horrible ship penalty effects from t2 ammo/weapon hardpoint.
Speed with faction ammo (Dread g.): 2265 m/s With T2 penalty effect : 1658 m/s
With 4 weapon penalty added to ship almost 30%. Dont forget this is just 4 weapon hardpont penalty effect and bring 5 dps different. And not just at small ship, but at the battleships too.
Check Abaddon with two heat sink: Imperial navy ammo 1025 DPS Dark Blood ammo : 1060 DPS Conf. ammo: 1030 DPS
Please tell to us, who will change when DB is better than or Imperial navy ammo to conflagration ammo bring +5 dps change , if his ship suffering horrible penalty from slots ???
No one.
No, but no thx. CCP guys if you want to do real changes, clear all penalty from T2 ammos or this is just a cosmethical change, but noone will using the T2 ammos again after changes.
|
SwissChris1
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 05:45:00 -
[98]
You are buffing the Hawk and fixing rockets...this will be my favorite expansion to date!
Thanks CCP!!
|
DOOM2K
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 06:54:00 -
[99]
Edited by: DOOM2K on 19/10/2010 06:55:59 Scorch nerf was mentioned as a possibility alongside the Tier 2 short range ammo changes in the Rocket feedback thread. Any heads up on where you're headed with Scorch?
|
Ulair Memmet
ORIGIN SYSTEMS Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 07:04:00 -
[100]
Edited by: Ulair Memmet on 19/10/2010 07:05:18 Good stuff
Quote: This is pretty cool for those of you looking for pimp rides to show off whilst cruising around Yulai with more bling bling.
Seriously, do you guys even play the game??? --------------------------------------------------
|
|
Theron Gyrow
Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 07:12:00 -
[101]
Originally by: VonKolroth
Originally by: Bomberlocks Could one of the devs please answer this question: On Sisi, the show info panel on microwarpdrives now show them as having a maximum cap penalty.
The best explanation would likely be that they are exactly the same way on the Tranquility server, and have been for quite some time. I believe they had the penalty even before the speed-nerf.
Oh yes. Actually, fitting a MWD used to drop your cap and shields by 25%, so you young whippersnappers have it easy. ------------------------------------------------------- Electus Matari Forum |
Rip Minner
Gallente ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 07:17:00 -
[102]
Originally by: Siz'Rael To reiterate and belabor a point I was dissapointed to see only brought up once, and even afterwards apparently ignored... for sake of convenience, I will use Conflag for a specific example here.... I personally couldn't care that much about them using more cap on per cycle to use them... the combined drawbacks of short range, and tracking penalties, is the reason I don't use these crystals. Having them use less cap is not going to make them more worthwhile for me to use... the fact that they basically don't hit anytying is why I don't use them. So, if you want to see me using T2 short range ammo, make them actually capable of hitting targets!
I have to have the answer too. I hope they dont think less cap will get people using this stuff other then to play with it again for a short time and fig out why the realy stoped using it. As it dont hit targers so all the damg+ in the world dont matter when it dont hit. Short range Higher cap no tracking pen thats what ya need and then we can use it.
Is it a rock? Point a Lazer at it and profit. Is it a ship? Point a Lazer at it and profit. I dont realy see any differnces here. |
Alex Harumichi
Gallente Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 07:20:00 -
[103]
Originally by: Aineko Macx
/me hopes scorch doesn't get nerfed...
I actually hope it does, and I'm saying this as someone who uses it. It's just a bit too good, honestly.
|
Freyya
Advanced Planetary Exports Intergalactic Exports Group
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 08:18:00 -
[104]
Originally by: Alice Celadon
Originally by: Malcanis
I think that is a deliberate design choice. You see how that resist bonus makes your supers have enormously more EHP and tank? Yeah, that's what you're buying with your "small" drone bay.
Drop 1 damb fighter and have all the utility drones you could reasonably need.
I think the point is that Pre-Incursion those FBs could hit BCs and HICs, so a full load of Fighters wasn't critical. Post-Incursion, a full load of Fighters is critical. Thus this would constitute a nerf to Aeons and Wyverns.
besides, 19 fighters x 30 SC's..Yup, way underpowered and that last fighter is soooooooo critical. Yes i'm sure CCP doesn't mean for you to have to get carrier fighter/utility support since the SC is basicly OMGWTFPWNALL and wants it to stay that way. An SC that can't hit BC and HIC's anymore with boomboomdead FB's. SHOCK! ___________
NOW COLLECTING ISD AND CCP AUTOGRAPHS It'll be worth something someday. -Rauth Pink is the color of passion xxx Shadow |
Duchess Starbuckington
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 09:51:00 -
[105]
Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington on 19/10/2010 09:54:26 Seriously though in terms of fixing broken stuff in-game, I was pleasantly surprised to see they were tackling more than just the rocket fix this expansion.
Not getting my hopes up for a rework of some currently underwhelming t1 ships but the t2 ammo change is awesome.
Quote: I actually hope it does, and I'm saying this as someone who uses it. It's just a bit too good, honestly.
Lasers = Autocannons >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hybrids. A scorch nerf would just turn it into Autocannons >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hybrids = Lasers.
Yeah, I can see how fun that'd be. More projectile Amarr ships, anyone? _________________________________
ROCKET STATUS: FIX IN PROGRESS... |
|
CCP Nepthys
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 10:37:00 -
[106]
Originally by: Tippia More corner-tags eh?
Now, onto that meta-level inventory column everyone has been begging forà
I suggest that you check Sisi, you might pleasantly surprised
|
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 10:40:00 -
[107]
Originally by: CCP Nepthys
Originally by: Tippia More corner-tags eh?
Now, onto that meta-level inventory column everyone has been begging forà
I suggest that you check Sisi, you might pleasantly surprised
♥♥♥ ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Louis deGuerre
Gallente Amicus Morte Dead Muppets
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 10:50:00 -
[108]
All these changes are good and long (sometimes VERY long) in coming.
Nevertheless...the lag monsta that was fighterbombers should have been anticipated light years away. Somewhere at CCP someone deserves a spanking for not doing stress tests BEFORE releasing this "excellent" quality. It should not have been 'broken' to start with.
Now please fix the goddamn text editors. *tap* *tap* Fixed yet ? *tap* *tap* how about now ?
Sol: A microwarp drive? In a battleship? Are you insane? They arenÆt built for this! Clear Skies - The Movie
|
Hasnpbeard
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 12:58:00 -
[109]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis The ship effects were the ones which were removed. This definitely will make them directly competitive with the faction variants for sure.
Uhm, sorry CCP Chronotis, but you are completely mistaken.
T2 short-range (turret) ammo is so bad because of its TRACKING PENALTY. The ship effects were just additional inconvenience, but certainly not a deciding factor.
Take Megathrons as an example. There is a reason that people fit tracking ENHANCERS to it for close-range engagements, and that ship already comes with a tracking bonus. Quite logical they would NEVER fit ammo that is contradicting these efforts without getting OTHER REWARDS.
(I.e. long-range T2 ammo (Null) is used sometimes, because the range bonus can outweigh the -25% tracking penalty, especially since tracking becomes also less of an issue at farther ranges)
Im telling you here, because if you just remove the ship effects and keep everything else as is, this is exactly the kind of feedack you will get on 20 pages
-------------- Suggestions:
SO, if the plan is to make T2 short-range ammo competitive, you would want to either
- keep tracking penalty but compensate with a BONUS, like cap use BONUS, damage BONUS etc. or - give it a tracking BONUS, compensated by ship effects PENALTY, damage PENALTY, whatever or - same tracking as faction, but balanced BONI and PENALTIES (dmg vs cap use, shield penalty vs alpha (same DPS),..whatever works
-------- More suggestions =)
I think ship effects are a GOOD and original idea, but they need to have more impact
as an example (please dont quote me on this), you COULD make the T2 ammo affect the fitting choices, i.e. a Void fitted ship would have quite a bit more damage, but needs to fit cap injector to be remotely usable, or needs more plates to compensate EHP penalty, or wants a nano-fit to compensate severe speed penalty, whatever.
<3
|
Hasnpbeard
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 13:12:00 -
[110]
And while i am already in typing mood, off topic: Look what happened to faction drones. Everyone was excited to see them coming to the game, but CCP made them worse in every (relevant) aspect compared to T2s, so combined with their pricetag all the work that went into their design was a complete waste of time.
I am VERY happy with Incursion, all the little changes to UI etc., dont get me wrong.
|
|
Loki Nahat
Skyforger Tactical Narcotics Team
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 13:49:00 -
[111]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis [ Consider this a freebie until a future QEN and no, we won't provide more or derail the blog!
An Interesting sentance, and a belated thanks for the stats (Only just logged to the forums)
With all the upgrades and updates to existing content Incursion is looking very promising so far.
Loki
|
Lord Matrix
Flying Banana Squad
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 15:11:00 -
[112]
Edited by: Lord Matrix on 19/10/2010 15:12:43 I like the new ammo changes. I never used Gleam because of -75% range penalty. Bringing it back to -50% would be great.
Scorch is a major thing that keeps Amarr combat at least somewhat balanced with other races. Keep it as it is. We already pay with high fitting requirements and cap usage, for which we lose a ship bonus.
3/4 pure lunatic, 1/4 absolute genius |
Sgt Napalm
SiN. Corp Daisho Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 15:17:00 -
[113]
Sweet! It no longer requires cap to miss my target at 3,000M's webbed! Best blaster buff to date.
|
Hordi LaGeorge
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 16:24:00 -
[114]
Originally by: CCP Nepthys
I suggest that you check Sisi, you might pleasantly surprised
Plesae please please let me check Sisi! The Mac client for Sisi has been broken for a week now!
(Bug report 102019)
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente Imperial Tau Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 17:52:00 -
[115]
THis i awesome. IF you deliver all you have promiced, incursio will surpass apocrypha. PS: please have a look at null.
|
Diomedes Calypso
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 19:35:00 -
[116]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
A freebie, last 24hrs transaction stats for a selection of faucets and sinks - as you can see, Concord is a very generous organisation!
Trade Total
* Market Transaction 5,848,221,406,963
Faucets * Bounty Prizes 876,039,478,466 * Agent Mission Reward 68,923,141,163 * Agent Mission Time Bonus 63,450,447,585 * Insurance Payouts 111,942,877,603
Sinks * Sales Tax 6,227,911,218 * Brokers fee 6,733,818,276 * PI Construction Costs 7,575,185,000 * PI Import Tax 290,289,843 * PI Export Tax 3,355,153,925 * Insurance Cost 43,021,823,156 * Clone Activation 20,197,210,000 * Sovereignty Bill 59,332,000,000 * LP Store 135,343,150,000
Note - that is only a snapshot of some of the stats, others like NPC orders are not there and such. Consider this a freebie until a future QEN and no, we won't provide more or derail the blog!
Wow thanks for that information! It really gives a sense of the economyÆs structure I could only guess atà especially the absolute and relative value of the faucets.
ONE QUESTION please.
Is thisis a moderately typical day ? I mean , you wouldnÆt give us a day where insurance payouts are 2 + times insurance costs if most days itÆs a 1 to 1 ratio, would you?
If you could squint at the data again a few times and just confirm that those numbers arenÆt some anomaly it would be great even without giving us any other numbers
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 19:53:00 -
[117]
Originally by: John Zorg
Originally by: John Zorg Nice Blog post!
Two requests/questions please regarding Super Carriers. Could you please make the Drone bay a bit bigger for the Aeon and the Wyvern. We cannot fit a full rack of fighters and Fighter Bombers + other smaller drones. Just another 15 000m3 please.
Will we be seeing the completion of the fix to the bonus of the Hel this expansion? It was promised with the last expansion and we were told it is under review? Still nothing said about it...
n1 on the Bomber lag fix!
Class balancing was out of scope for the fighter bomber fix which was laser focused on achieving a single goal of fixing the load they cause. Your suggestions aren't unreasonable and we'll look into it. No promises on delivery though yet!
|
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 19:57:00 -
[118]
Originally by: Vidar Kentoran These ammo types still have huge tracking and range penalties(except for Conflagration, which has the same range as faction short range ammos, for some reason).
Not really sure how you'd expect someone to ever use short-range ammo that has a tracking penalty, to begin with :P That doesn't really make any sense.
If you want these ammo types to be a reasonable alternative to Faction, they can't have -50% to -75% range penalties AND -25%+ tracking penalties on them at the same time. They are stuck having to deal with more tracking issues due to shorter range, and thus they need to take an even higher penalty on top of that?
It's fine if they have a bit less range and are thus somewhat inferior, say... -25%... OR if they have worse tracking...(again, -25% would be OK) but both makes them extremely inferior and not a real alternative at all.
The tracking penalty was reduced, we forgot to mention that but has not disappeared with the others. Originally before the LP store and before faction ammo was so easy to come by, the tech 2 variants were widely used. The low tracking versions were designed with a purpose of attacking larger ship classes (where tracking matters less) and as a consequence do more damage to those targets. Removing that drawback completely would be somewhat overpowered so, a reduced penalty but it has not disappeared.
|
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 20:03:00 -
[119]
Originally by: Bomberlocks Could one of the devs please answer this question: On Sisi, the show info panel on microwarpdrives now show them as having a maximum cap penalty. Why was this done and are you aware of the effect it will have on an extremely large part of the game without any benefit that I can see right now? Minmatar ships especially, with the much lower cap than other ships, but also Amarr due to laser cap consumption are going to suffer because of this.
Please explain?
I don't see any changes to MWDs besides their icon changing to the new MWD icon, perhaps check again?
|
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 20:16:00 -
[120]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Originally by: Bomberlocks Could one of the devs please answer this question: On Sisi, the show info panel on microwarpdrives now show them as having a maximum cap penalty. Why was this done and are you aware of the effect it will have on an extremely large part of the game without any benefit that I can see right now? Minmatar ships especially, with the much lower cap than other ships, but also Amarr due to laser cap consumption are going to suffer because of this.
Please explain?
I don't see any changes to MWDs besides their icon changing to the new MWD icon, perhaps check again?
As others have mentioned, nothing has changed ù Bomberlocks has probably just missed that MWDs already have this penalty. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
|
Jag Kara
Dirty Work Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 21:20:00 -
[121]
Originally by: Hasnpbeard Edited by: Hasnpbeard on 19/10/2010 13:19:08
Originally by: CCP Chronotis The ship effects were the ones which were removed. This definitely will make them directly competitive with the faction variants for sure.
Uhm, sorry CCP Chronotis, but you are completely mistaken.
T2 short-range (turret) ammo is so bad because of its TRACKING PENALTY. The ship effects were just additional inconvenience, but certainly not a deciding factor.
Try flying a minmatar ship mate. You'll find that, with their speed, you can easily kite a target to negate the tracking penalty, but having 8 guns with each one causing -5%(hail l)/-7%(hail m)/-10%(hail s)/-12%(quake l)/16%(quake m)/-25%(quake s) cap regen, which stack, (without penalty I might add) makes it near impossible to survive in cap warfare or make a mission capable ship. For that reason I alway use faction or the range ammo to not take the hit.
Just for a number breakdown: 1 gun = 5.0/7.0/10.0/12.0/16.0/25.0 reduced cap regen 2 gun = 9.8/13.5/19.0/22.6/29.4/43.8 reduced cap regen 3 gun = 14.3/19.6/27.1/31.9/40.7/57.8 reduced cap regen 4 gun = 18.5/25.2/34.4/40.0/50.2/68.4 reduced cap regen 5 gun = 22.6/30.4/41.0/47.2/58.2/76.3 reduced cap regen 6 gun = 26.5/35.3/46.9/53.6/64.9/82.2 reduced cap regen 7 gun = 30.2/39.8/52.2/59.1/70.5/86.7 reduced cap regen 8 gun = 33.7/44.0/57.0/64.0/75.2/90.0 reduced cap regen
I dont know about you, but a 90% reduction in cap on my ship is quite a bit bigger of a loss than 50% of my tracking on a gun that is already the best at tracking.
The same argument could be made for the other ammos, but I think this one is the most clear on why this change is being done. In Soviet Russia, carebears gank YOU! |
Patri Andari
Caldari Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
|
Posted - 2010.10.20 01:23:00 -
[122]
Edited by: Patri Andari on 20/10/2010 01:30:30 I must admit i have not been on sisi to check this out but i have a questions:
All short range missiles (rockets, hams and torps) have a penalty to either ship speed (javlin) or ship signature radius (terror & rage) yet non of them were mentioned in the blog.
Will these be considered in the up coming T2 ammo boost or only turret ammo?
If not why?
Patri
I'll Roshambo You For That Titan! |
Nova Fox
Gallente Novafox Shipyards
|
Posted - 2010.10.20 06:03:00 -
[123]
I take it that with the 'fake' missile projectors considerations for use on player ships also hopefully led to a discussion about possibly adding missile turrets as models in the game since the two will no longer hargarble each other's faces anymore.
Also any possibility that negative effects get similar diminishing returns that alot of positive effects earn? this may make tech 2 ammos abit more desirable with ships with multiple weapon slots.
Finally with the fake missile additions to drones, can we finally see defender missile drones or possibly a fix to defender missiles since they dont have to actually act like a missile and could probably get away acting like a gun with its own special launcher? Pre-order your Sisters of ≡v≡ Exploration ship today, Updated 1SEPT10
|
Etil DeLaFuente
|
Posted - 2010.10.20 06:07:00 -
[124]
Edited by: Etil DeLaFuente on 20/10/2010 06:08:42
Quote: The side effect of this is that fighter bombers are the "spawn of evil" in server performance terms. Team Gridlock who are leading the war on lag effort identified them as a major contributor to fleet fight lag as is demonstrated below. Not only are they drones which usually come in packs of 20 per ship but they fire missiles which all have to be tracked in the inventory and physical scene within the game.
I'd like to know what's ccp internal process when it comes to give us new features, especially in terms of performance, server side impact etc.. It looks like no one in charge to me. This major drawback about SC could have been detected at design time.
What about regular fighters and/or drones ? Do they have the same kind of issue or is it just the fact that fighter bombers fire missiles ? |
Mara Rinn
|
Posted - 2010.10.20 06:25:00 -
[125]
Originally by: Alara IonStorm Any comments on the Omen?
We already have the Zealot and Omen Navy Issue - with the latter you can take a week-old character, stick them in a cruiser with battle-cruiser-sized firepower. The Omen is awesome just as it is - you just have to pick between tank or gank.
-- [Aussie players: join ANZAC channel] |
Alara IonStorm
Agent-Orange
|
Posted - 2010.10.20 06:54:00 -
[126]
Originally by: Mara Rinn
Originally by: Alara IonStorm Any comments on the Omen?
We already have the Zealot and Omen Navy Issue - with the latter you can take a week-old character, stick them in a cruiser with battle-cruiser-sized firepower. The Omen is awesome just as it is - you just have to pick between tank or gank.
Unlike the Thorax, Vexor, Rupture, Moa and Stabber who all can do both.
New players should be able to fit out an Omen the same way Gallente, Minmatar and Calsari can fit there turret boats. The Arby is a great drone platform but it doesn't lead to Harbinger the way the Omen should. As for a new player flying Faction... be nice and buy them a plex!
-- I am now on a Crusade to Fix the Omen!
For Great Justice!
|
FlameGlow
Rebellion Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.10.20 08:32:00 -
[127]
Originally by: Alara IonStorm
New players should be able to fit out an Omen the same way Calsari can fit there turret boats.
By same way you mean with fitting mod to get even guns to fit? And 2 or more if you want MWD and tank with those guns? |
Zanaraxtarus
|
Posted - 2010.10.20 09:19:00 -
[128]
Originally by: Rhok Relztem
Three thumbs-up for CCP! (Three?!? Not sure where that extra one came from but may as well use it.)
That third one isn't a thumb... Thumbs are up a bit higher... --Zan--
Hmm.. Nothing new to ***** about in my sig.. We all know rockets STILL need work and all the bugs are more than well known... But hey, at least we get new content! 8-P |
BeanBagKing
Terra Incognita Black Star Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.10.20 14:42:00 -
[129]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Originally by: Kragaar Good stuff, is there any plan in the future to add faction modules to the market along with the faction ships?
There is, it will naturally take longer to do since there is so many of them and with some modules *lots* of variations. For now, we just wanted the best stuff up there which was the most requested, being the other ships you can all fly.
WOOHOO! Can't wait to be able to sell everything on the market!
|
|
CCP Masterplan
C C P Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.10.20 17:10:00 -
[130]
Originally by: Etil DeLaFuente Edited by: Etil DeLaFuente on 20/10/2010 06:08:42
Quote: The side effect of this is that fighter bombers are the "spawn of evil" in server performance terms. Team Gridlock who are leading the war on lag effort identified them as a major contributor to fleet fight lag as is demonstrated below. Not only are they drones which usually come in packs of 20 per ship but they fire missiles which all have to be tracked in the inventory and physical scene within the game.
I'd like to know what's ccp internal process when it comes to give us new features, especially in terms of performance, server side impact etc.. It looks like no one in charge to me. This major drawback about SC could have been detected at design time.
What about regular fighters and/or drones ? Do they have the same kind of issue or is it just the fact that fighter bombers fire missiles ?
I can't speak about the original design process of Super-carriers, as I wasn't here at the time. However I am on Team Gridlock, which identified the specific load issues caused by Fighter-Bombers. The main reason FBs are so expensive is the way their load scales: One SC can launch 20 of them, each of which fires a torpedo every 15 seconds. Each torpedo has quite a long flight time. The end result is a small number of players can generate a disproportionately large number of items that must be tracked through the physics/inventory/damage systems. (Skills/modules can push the numbers even further, which has knock-on effects for load) Regular fighters/drones don't scale in this way: Firstly their damage mechanism is an instantaneous effect that has little load on the physics system (it mainly needs just distance and transversal data). Secondly they don't add extra entities into space. Thirdly (in the case of regular drones) you can't launch so many of them.
This is actually the first example of Gridlock pushing the design team to make content changes aimed at reducing load. Everything else that we have released so far is behind-the-scenes optimisations which shouldn't have gameplay changes. Those kind of improvements are great due to the fact we can roll them out with minimal red-tape. There are some longer-term changes we are pushing, but those might require work from art, design, gameplay/UI programmers to complete to a releasable standard. Naturally this means a longer lead-time, but for potentially the greatest gains.
As for new brand-new features, our team makes sure that others are aware of load implications for their new ideas. Sometimes we'll ask them to go back and rethink a proposal. Combine this with the fact we can now do pre-emptive load-testing (thanks to the thin-client tech) and we hope to catch and prevent issues earlier.
|
|
|
Xpaulusx
Intergalactic Syndicate Galactic Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.10.20 17:39:00 -
[131]
Agree's with Supercaps needing a mega nerf.
|
Hasnpbeard
|
Posted - 2010.10.20 19:24:00 -
[132]
Edited by: Hasnpbeard on 20/10/2010 19:34:19 Edited by: Hasnpbeard on 20/10/2010 19:28:32 Well thanks for being active in replies, much appreciated.
Originally by: CCP Chronotis The tracking penalty was reduced, we forgot to mention that
fair enough
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
The low tracking versions were designed with a purpose of attacking larger ship classes (where tracking matters less) and as a consequence do more damage to those targets.
IF the ammo WOULD do more damage, yes. Then we would have a tradeoff, disadvantage vs. advantage (what i suggested in my post). But it does not, and therefore the design purpose was never met.
T2 short-range does 1.5% more damage than the Faction equivalent. You can hardly call that "more damage" without kidding yourself. (didnt check all but seems 1.5% across the board).
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Removing that drawback completely would be somewhat overpowered so, a reduced penalty but it has not disappeared.
RepFleetEMP: Damage: 27.6 Optimal -50%
Hail: Damage: 28.0 (theres the 1.5% again) Optimal -50% Falloff -50% Tracking -50% (going lower) CapRech +7% (going away)
Please elaborate how, even without ANY cap/tracking penalty, would this ammo possibly be OVERPOWERED ? I am very curious.
Please forgive that i am getting a bit rough, but with the info provided so far the suggested change is just making it "less bad". Hardly a design goal i think you would be satisfied with yourself.
I hope there are other changes you did not put on this board for some reason and will wait until it hits SiSi before causing more unrest.
--------------
Originally by: Jag Kara .... a 90% reduction in cap on my ship is quite a bit bigger of a loss......
I never actually tried it, but in EFT my common passive Tempest fit with all modules running is going from 1m17s to 1m14s (yes that's 3 seconds) if i change ammo from Faction to Hail.
So whats correct ?
|
Riftin
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 02:43:00 -
[133]
Edited by: Riftin on 21/10/2010 02:44:43 If the below is remotely close to what tech 2 ammo will look like I will still use RepFleet ammo all the time and never use tech 2. Why? -50% falloff in a mini ship for 1.5% damage increase are you kidding me? You are reducing your survival chances significantly by accepting that penalty.
RepFleetEMP M: Damage: 27.6 Optimal -50%
Hail M: Damage: 28.0 (theres the 1.5% again) Optimal -50% Falloff -50% Tracking -50% (going lower) CapRech +7% (going away)
|
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 12:28:00 -
[134]
Edited by: Raimo on 21/10/2010 12:32:44
TBH a better idea to balance Hail and Void would be to remove the tracking hit (and reduce the falloff hit) and *keep* the cap hit/ whatever you're now planning to remove, while upping the damage a bit...
Alternatively, do what you're doing now, but make falloff hit also smaller (and tracking hit significantly smaller) and up damage by, say, 5-10%.
Otherwise faction short range ammo will stay as the sane choice nearly everytime. ---------- www.eve-arena.com
|
Gun Gun
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 15:34:00 -
[135]
It would be cool if you fixed a bug in probing window where when you change the filter after a scan result, no dots show up so you have to close that window and reopen it.
|
Hentes Zsemle
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 16:31:00 -
[136]
Edited by: Hentes Zsemle on 21/10/2010 16:32:00 If you don't make T2 ammos better at at least something, let it be tracking or damage whatever, than the faction ones, you will accomplish nothing with this change. Note that this could also be a good opportunity to make blasters less suck.
|
Deva Blackfire
Oblivion Shield Oblivion United
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 16:51:00 -
[137]
Small idea Chronotis for t2 ammo:
damage +15-20% over faction ammo (so around 32-34 on Hail M) 50-75% tracking penalty
Here you go - situational, anti "larger target size" ammo. Similiar to missiles Rage/Fury progression (normal -> +15% -> navy -> +15% -> rage/fury).
Otherwise if it remains 1% better than faction but WITH penalties it will still be useless.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 18:32:00 -
[138]
Originally by: Deva Blackfire damage +15-20% over faction ammo (so around 32-34 on Hail M) 50-75% tracking penalty
Here you go - situational, anti "larger target size" ammo. Similiar to missiles Rage/Fury progression (normal -> +15% -> navy -> +15% -> rage/fury).
You'd need to add an extra 0 to that damage bonus to make it worthwhile.
Just for the record, a 50% tracking penalty against a 1:1 tracking target means a reduction in DPS of ~85%. A 75% tracking penalty against a similar target means a DPS reduction of roughly 100%.
Also, the idea of "larger target size" ammo kind falls flat where a blaster fix is needed the most: in battleships. If you want to follow the missile progression, where furies do more damage at the cost projecting it worse, the tracking penalty should be somewhere in the region of 15û20%, not 50û75%.
It might work for projectiles and lasers, but certainly not for blaster ammo. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Twisted Mister
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 18:43:00 -
[139]
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Deva Blackfire damage +15-20% over faction ammo (so around 32-34 on Hail M) 50-75% tracking penalty
Here you go - situational, anti "larger target size" ammo. Similiar to missiles Rage/Fury progression (normal -> +15% -> navy -> +15% -> rage/fury).
You'd need to add an extra 0 to that damage bonus to make it worthwhile.
Just for the record, a 50% tracking penalty against a 1:1 tracking target means a reduction in DPS of ~85%. A 75% tracking penalty against a similar target means a DPS reduction of roughly 100%.
Also, the idea of "larger target size" ammo kind falls flat where a blaster fix is needed the most: in battleships. If you want to follow the missile progression, where furies do more damage at the cost projecting it worse, the tracking penalty should be somewhere in the region of 15û20%, not 50û75%.
It might work for projectiles and lasers, but certainly not for blaster ammo.
Right now nothing would work for blasters if they got any penalties on it.
|
Deva Blackfire
Oblivion Shield Oblivion United
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 19:30:00 -
[140]
Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 21/10/2010 19:35:46
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Deva Blackfire damage +15-20% over faction ammo (so around 32-34 on Hail M) 50-75% tracking penalty
Here you go - situational, anti "larger target size" ammo. Similiar to missiles Rage/Fury progression (normal -> +15% -> navy -> +15% -> rage/fury).
You'd need to add an extra 0 to that damage bonus to make it worthwhile.
Just for the record, a 50% tracking penalty against a 1:1 tracking target means a reduction in DPS of ~85%. A 75% tracking penalty against a similar target means a DPS reduction of roughly 100%.
Which part of "situational" you dont understand? Engaging double webbed (gang fight/rapier/whatever) target is enough to bring tracking back to its respective level. So would be engaging oversized targets (cruiser hulls in frigs, BS hulls in cruisers, caps in battleships). And 20% damage boost means around 200dps boost to most battleships, circa 100-150dps on cruiser/bc hulls and around 40dps on frig hulls. I wouldnt say that its small number.
Quote:
It might work for projectiles and lasers, but certainly not for blaster ammo.
It would work for all guns. Blasters too if pilot is smart enough to use "keep at 2500m" range button and gets enough webs on target (same target) OR engages larger sized targets. Plus afaik it is called "t2 shortrange ammo fix" not "blaster fix". In current version (proposed in blog) it doesnt help either: ammo sucks, blasters stay where they were.
|
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 19:34:00 -
[141]
Originally by: Deva Blackfire It would work for all guns. Blasters too if pilot is smart enough to use "keep at 2500m" range button and gets enough webs on target. Plus afaik it is called "t2 shortrange ammo fix" not "blaster fix". In current version (proposed in blog) it doesnt help either: ammo sucks, blasters stay where they were.
The point is, it would work worse for blasters than for anything else, making them fall even farther behind. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Deva Blackfire
Oblivion Shield Oblivion United
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 19:36:00 -
[142]
Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 21/10/2010 19:37:51
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Deva Blackfire It would work for all guns. Blasters too if pilot is smart enough to use "keep at 2500m" range button and gets enough webs on target. Plus afaik it is called "t2 shortrange ammo fix" not "blaster fix". In current version (proposed in blog) it doesnt help either: ammo sucks, blasters stay where they were.
The point is, it would work worse for blasters than for anything else, making them fall even farther behind.
And whats the problem to balance it respective to weapons? -50% tracking on blasters, -75% on lasers (just a number from my ass, as i said its just idea not exact numbers)? You are creating problems where they dont exist/where they can be easily balanced between gun types.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 19:51:00 -
[143]
Originally by: Deva Blackfire And whats the problem to balance it respective to weapons? -50% tracking on blasters, -75% on lasers (just a number from my ass, as i said its just idea not exact numbers)? You are creating problems where they dont exist/where they can be easily balanced between gun types.
You were the one who created this particular problemà
Tracking is one of those stats you need to be very careful with, because the effects of even very small changes are quite drastic. As such, it's not a good choice to use as a balancing mechanic because chances are you will bork it. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Deva Blackfire
Oblivion Shield Oblivion United
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 19:54:00 -
[144]
When you want to create turret ammo that works only against bigger targets you can ONLY use tracking to enforce target selection.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 20:16:00 -
[145]
Originally by: Deva Blackfire When you want to create turret ammo that works only against bigger targets you can ONLY use tracking to enforce target selection. And as my general idea was: 'more damage vs bigger targets' there arent many options to discuss except damage and tracking.
There's also signature resolutionà but that amounts to the same thing.
But again, the "bigger targets" idea becomes an issue when you consider that you quickly come to a point where there is no bigger target.
If we're tossing ideas, I'd like to see high rof ammo ù less damage per shot, but vastly higher rate of fire, so you do tons more DPSà but only in, say, 30s bursts before it's time to reload. It would look sweet for ACs too ù just one single massive long burst instead of a lot of small onesà ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Deva Blackfire
Oblivion Shield Oblivion United
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 20:24:00 -
[146]
It can be done without touching rof (lag inducing, small ROF numbers are kinda bad) but by giving huge damage + increasing volume. Same effect, same DPS, same reload times. Problems? You still need to decide on effective DPS (including reload time). If it remains same as with other ammo - its kinda pointless. If it gets larger - you run into risk of said ammo being always used instead of navy (aka: obsoleting it).
And idea itself was discussed somewhere around rocket fix (yeh that was one of rocket change ideas). Still, better than current "fix".
|
Hasnpbeard
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 21:34:00 -
[147]
To balance two same ranged ammo types by tracking/damage - without making one obsolete like now - is very difficult if not impossible.
This is bound to fail and its not CCPs fault, its just how the formulas work.
So, whats left ? You could take range to the extreme, 1000m optimal, 0m falloff, +15% damage over faction. Notice the increase in damage, because thats really the only option you have left to play the balancegame with. It can be balanced vs. anything you can imagine, e.g. severe ship effects, that cause the ammo to be used situational, like extreme cap use but +15% damage and +20% optimal. Which seemed the initial design approach which sadly was not implemented very good, but was an excellent idea.
In any situation players deem the ammo to be USEFUL, the ammo WILL BE BETTER than its counterpart. Balancing is the process to control which situations these can be. This requires actual understanding of how the game works and it requires some real brainstorming and effort by CCP.
|
Deva Blackfire
Oblivion Shield Oblivion United
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 21:51:00 -
[148]
Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 21/10/2010 21:55:49
Originally by: Hasnpbeard
In any situation players deem the ammo to be USEFUL, the ammo WILL BE BETTER than its counterpart.
This is not true. Both navy ammo and rage ammo are used in PvP yet one is not better than the other. They might be better in one situation or another but you can not just say "this one is always better" because it will be a lie. They are just finely balanced against each other.
Similiar situation happens with autocannons - at some ranges there is a tie between barrage/close range ammos. With lazors its kinda different - scorch is always superior till you swap to Xray ranges (i think... forgot which close range ammo has similiar damage to scorch). But difference is kinda obvious: AC ammo has much more to it except range/damage. It also has different damage types and tracking bonuses (for mid-type ammo) which makes most of them useful in one or another case. With blasters/lasers there arent many choices. You will always pick highest damage ammo over distance you engage at - because you cant chose damage types or tracking bonuses (they dont exist).
So if anything both energy and hybrid guns should be moved a bit towards autocannons with better variability between ammo types. otherwise it will always be 2 ammo types: long and short range (with maybe 3rd mid range in some cases). Changing t2 shortrange ammo to "more damage no penalty" will just mean that it will be used over navy ammo. Changing towards "similiar damage plus penalties" will mean it will be still useless. There needs to be something more than plain damage vs range.
And my "theorycrafting" is easily shown via practise. If you fly say raven or drake in PvP you carry quite a few ammo types. Usually CN of each flavour + kinetic rages (i actually carry CN + rage of each type, at least 2-3 reloads of each). With minnie ships its similiar. You carry 3 shortrange ammos + barrage. Sometimes mid range ammo (especially in large/medium guns as small track well enough). With amarr? Scorch and multi. With gallente? Null + antimatter (i carry only AM tho, i dont even bother with null). More variety = better.
|
Hasnpbeard
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 22:39:00 -
[149]
Edited by: Hasnpbeard on 21/10/2010 22:45:25 Edited by: Hasnpbeard on 21/10/2010 22:41:00 Im sorry Deva if i was not clear enough, this is exactly what i mean
It will of course only be better under the specific circumstances you choose to utilize it, but then "always" in this situation. A bit confusing wording on my part
Currently short-range T2 vs. faction is not situational, faction is simply better at anything. This problem will not go away with what CCP has suggested in this thread so far.
|
Twisted Mister
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 23:22:00 -
[150]
The new ammos could have a big tracking bonus tho. I don't really see any other viable alternative. There is already one for long range, the navies are for high damage, i really doubt that ccp is going to raise the damage bonus so much that its going to worth the tracking penalty(and possibly other penalties), which at extremely close range would mean no damage most of the time outside EFT.
|
|
Jag Kara
Dirty Work Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 00:11:00 -
[151]
Edited by: Jag Kara on 22/10/2010 00:13:09
Originally by: Hasnpbeard I never actually tried it, but in EFT my common passive Tempest fit with all modules running is going from 1m17s to 1m14s (yes that's 3 seconds) if i change ammo from Faction to Hail.
So whats correct ?
My numbers are correct. Perhaps it wasn't clear how I presented the ammo percents. That 90% was the extreme case of 8 small arties packing quake s in them. 6 large autos packing hail l in them only has a reduction of 26.5% (still basically cancels a cap recharger) and assuming that passive build you have is running any shield power relays, your cap regen is already going to be pitiful as it is. In Soviet Russia, carebears gank YOU! |
Astald Ohtar
New Eden Regimental Navy Rebel Alliance of New Eden
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 00:50:00 -
[152]
try to fly a sansha ship and use gleam on it ! -10%shield i almost lost my phantasm once cause if it :|] , luckily the ship had only 3 turrets , and tbh all that those silly stats on t2 ammo doesn't make them competitive with faction ammo , slightly more dmg and 2-3penalities? even normal ammo would be better
|
Floydd Heywood
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 13:37:00 -
[153]
I have a question about the upcoming Remap-for-Plex feature: What will happen to the regular, free remapping we receive once a year? I see three possible scenarios:
1. There will be no free remappings anymore, every remapping requires a PLEX.
2. Regular remappings are independent of purchased extra-remaps, so if my next regular remap is due in December and I buy a remap in November and use it, I will still have the free remap added in December.
3. Any remap resets the 'natural' counter to 12 months, so if I have a regular remap coming in December and buy and use a remap in November I would receive the next free remap not in December 2010 but in November 2011.
Which one is it?
|
Cheekybiatch
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 13:50:00 -
[154]
So no love to Blasters or Null.
Would love some attention to them if possible before the new expansion.
|
Hentes Zsemle
|
Posted - 2010.10.23 16:24:00 -
[155]
Originally by: Cheekybiatch So no love to Blasters or Null.
Would love some attention to them if possible before the new expansion.
I trained up minmatar ships and weapons, ready to start cruiser V, med projectile V as soon as the expension hits and it turns out that hybrids are not fixed or even worse than before. I can only advise to do the same...
|
Mike deVoid
Federal Defence Union
|
Posted - 2010.10.24 15:44:00 -
[156]
Originally by: Floydd Heywood I have a question about the upcoming Remap-for-Plex feature: What will happen to the regular, free remapping we receive once a year? I see three possible scenarios:
1. There will be no free remappings anymore, every remapping requires a PLEX.
2. Regular remappings are independent of purchased extra-remaps, so if my next regular remap is due in December and I buy a remap in November and use it, I will still have the free remap added in December.
3. Any remap resets the 'natural' counter to 12 months, so if I have a regular remap coming in December and buy and use a remap in November I would receive the next free remap not in December 2010 but in November 2011.
Which one is it?
AFAIK, it's number 2. -------- Is this a rhetorical question? |
Leelo dallasmultipas
|
Posted - 2010.10.25 03:53:00 -
[157]
I would be interested in seeing a small change sometime soon, or a reason why it cannot. That is that Shield extenders do not seem to take effect when in space and the ship has been boarded from a Ship Maint Array. This is frustrating as on-the-go pvp shield buffer ships are useless when stored in there, since they will have only the base shield left. This doesn't seem to make sense since the array has a fitting service, so all mods should take effect immediately.
|
Janatheth
|
Posted - 2010.10.25 14:31:00 -
[158]
Originally by: Deva Blackfire Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 21/10/2010 21:55:49
...With lazors its kinda different - scorch is always superior till you swap to Xray ranges (i think... forgot which close range ammo has similiar damage to scorch).
This is somewhat misleading since Scorch does have two drawbacks -- tracking penalty and higher cap use. Theoretically, normal ammo could be better under certain conditions. |
Patripassion
|
Posted - 2010.10.27 06:46:00 -
[159]
Blasters on battleships are for fighting on station undocks, and they excel more than any other weapon in that situation. Gnash your teeth all you want.
|
Apollo Gabriel
Brotherhood Of Fallen Angels Etherium Cartel
|
Posted - 2010.10.28 16:14:00 -
[160]
I've not yet read the whole thread, but let me say
FRACKING AWESOME!!
Thanks CCP, I for one, feel heard .. er read.
best, Apollo =============================== || Don't let the Trolls keep you from your goals. || =============================== |
|
Gabriel Karade
Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
|
Posted - 2010.10.30 10:15:00 -
[161]
Can I suggest you really try to do something different with Void this time around, as Faction AM and Void cannot co-exist when they are both doing the same thing - "MOAR D4M4GE!!!11111"
Ideally this should be part of a review of the role you see for blasters because it is a mess at the moment: Serpentis - 'old skool' solo work at 10x the price, everything else 'Meh - I'll leave it docked'. But I'm guessing that won't happen...
Oh but they're apparently "great for station games!" lol - ugh... --------------
Video - 'War-Machine' |
stu007
Controlled Chaos
|
Posted - 2010.11.01 18:27:00 -
[162]
Originally by: Patri Andari Edited by: Patri Andari on 20/10/2010 01:30:30 I must admit i have not been on sisi to check this out but i have a questions:
All short range missiles (rockets, hams and torps) have a penalty to either ship speed (javlin) or ship signature radius (terror & rage) yet non of them were mentioned in the blog.
Will these be considered in the up coming T2 ammo boost or only turret ammo?
If not why?
I'd also like to know this. Are the changes only to T2 turret ammo, or are the ship penalties being removed for T2 close range missiles? Because the huge bloom in sig radius is fairly annoying. Not that many people will start using T2 unguided missiles (HAMs, Torps, Rockets) due to other drawbacks they have, but the T2 guided missiles do get used quite frequently at the moment
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2010.11.07 12:59:00 -
[163]
An update:
Singularity will not be available for testing of these changes again till later this week as we are currently utilising the server for testing of some patches to our recent inventory 64 upgrade.
In the meantime, here is a list of a few changes since this blog was penned:
Fighter Bombers
Fighter bombers will return to doing missile damage and not turret damage as previously mentioned so the damage against capital ships will be unchanged from what it is today on Tranquillity. However, sub-capital class ships will only receive a fraction of the damage they currently receive today as mentioned originally in the blog. In addition the graphical effect has had another iteration and looks much nicer so all in all, it is a tidy package of far less load on the server and therefore in your fleet fights as well as an adjustment of the effectiveness of fighter bombers against sub-capital class ships and much better looking effects.
Tech 2 ammo
The changes here in addition to already mentioned in the blog is that the short range tech 2 ammo like void, hail and conflagration will receive a 10% damage boost whilst maintaining the tracking speed modifier (albeit at a lower penalty) so will do more damage than the equivalent faction ammo but still be penalised in tracking terms so more awesome if you have a pinned or slow moving large ship but against targets where you need higher tracking speeds then you will need to switch between ammo until you can web/warp scramble them. This will give it a good few scenarios where this ammo is a good choice over the faction variants.
|
|
Jack Gilligan
Caldari 1st Cavalry Division Circle-Of-Two
|
Posted - 2010.11.07 14:47:00 -
[164]
Edited by: Jack Gilligan on 07/11/2010 14:51:12
Originally by: CCP Chronotis An update: Tech 2 ammo
The changes here in addition to already mentioned in the blog is that the short range tech 2 ammo like void, hail and conflagration will receive a 10% damage boost whilst maintaining the tracking speed modifier (albeit at a lower penalty) so will do more damage than the equivalent faction ammo but still be penalised in tracking terms so more awesome if you have a pinned or slow moving large ship but against targets where you need higher tracking speeds then you will need to switch between ammo until you can web/warp scramble them. This will give it a good few scenarios where this ammo is a good choice over the faction variants.
Which still makes it worthless. Have you ever been in a PVP fight? There is no TIME to take 10 seconds to change ammo. Fights often last LESS than 10 seconds in toto... So instead of taking T2 short range ammo you will continue to use faction.
Could we please get someone who actually PVPs with their ships (instead of shooting rats only) put in charge of stuff like this? My point is one an actually pvp player would have brought up within 5 seconds of your proposed solution.
This also does nothing at all to help the fact that blasters are absolutely useless as well.
Remove the tracking penalties entirely. Short range=high speed= NEED for tracking. Get rid of damage bonuses if you have to but INCREASE tracking!
|
Don Pellegrino
Pod Liberation Authority HYDRA RELOADED
|
Posted - 2010.11.07 15:01:00 -
[165]
I agree that the reload time is way too long.
2.5 seconds for frigate weapons, 5 seconds for cruiser weapons and 10 seconds (current) for battleship weapons would open up a lot of new tactics and make it viable to switch ammo type during a fight. ____________________________________________
|
Rivqua
Caldari Omega Wing Snatch Victory
|
Posted - 2010.11.07 15:31:00 -
[166]
Originally by: Jack Gilligan Edited by: Jack Gilligan on 07/11/2010 14:51:12
Originally by: CCP Chronotis An update: Tech 2 ammo
The changes here in addition to already mentioned in the blog is that the short range tech 2 ammo like void, hail and conflagration will receive a 10% damage boost whilst maintaining the tracking speed modifier (albeit at a lower penalty) so will do more damage than the equivalent faction ammo but still be penalised in tracking terms so more awesome if you have a pinned or slow moving large ship but against targets where you need higher tracking speeds then you will need to switch between ammo until you can web/warp scramble them. This will give it a good few scenarios where this ammo is a good choice over the faction variants.
Which still makes it worthless. Have you ever been in a PVP fight? There is no TIME to take 10 seconds to change ammo. Fights often last LESS than 10 seconds in toto... So instead of taking T2 short range ammo you will continue to use faction.
Could we please get someone who actually PVPs with their ships (instead of shooting rats only) put in charge of stuff like this? My point is one an actually pvp player would have brought up within 5 seconds of your proposed solution.
This also does nothing at all to help the fact that blasters are absolutely useless as well.
Remove the tracking penalties entirely. Short range=high speed= NEED for tracking. Get rid of damage bonuses if you have to but INCREASE tracking!
You mean ganks don't last more then 10s. Because I PVP quite a lot,and I usually swap ammo during fights (and the tengu eats missiles so fast, it reloads 4-5 times during a fight anyway). So stopping a launcher at 1 missile left, and swapping dmg type is perfectly viable.
And blasters already track madly well, if anything, it pronounces the advantage of blasters over for example lasers, that have atrocious tracking. _________________ --- Snatch Victory - Rivqua - Omega Wing ---
|
Hasnpbeard
|
Posted - 2010.11.07 16:15:00 -
[167]
At least now it can be - technically - useful, thanks. Will see how works out in practice.
I assume small changes like these are put forward from the personal agendas of a CCP dev who is looking for things to improve beyond the scheduled work? Cheers for that.
What i find irritating that this thread left me with the impression the change had no routine quality/dev process follow up at all ? It's like you had an idea, talked to some colleagues about it over lunch-break who said "yeah cool, whatever". So only when the subscribers complained "what is this ****" you actually realized it was half-baked at best, then tweaked with this or that to come up with a compromise that doesn't look completely stupid. And that compromise is MOAR DAMAGE. Sigh.
|
Alghara
|
Posted - 2010.11.08 10:47:00 -
[168]
CCP have make a new invention with this modification.
The Machariel doomdays.
You need to make hudge modification in your weapon and range.
The railgun don't have enough dps, the blaster don't have enough range or the ship a too slow.
Now the hybrid are not good and the artillery have to much advantage. You need to re-balance that.
|
Bobbeh
Minmatar Navy of Xoc Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2010.11.09 07:58:00 -
[169]
These aren't the artillery your looking for?
|
Riedle
Minmatar MARSOC Galactic
|
Posted - 2010.11.09 16:43:00 -
[170]
Originally by: Jack Gilligan Edited by: Jack Gilligan on 07/11/2010 14:51:12
Originally by: CCP Chronotis An update: Tech 2 ammo
The changes here in addition to already mentioned in the blog is that the short range tech 2 ammo like void, hail and conflagration will receive a 10% damage boost whilst maintaining the tracking speed modifier (albeit at a lower penalty) so will do more damage than the equivalent faction ammo but still be penalised in tracking terms so more awesome if you have a pinned or slow moving large ship but against targets where you need higher tracking speeds then you will need to switch between ammo until you can web/warp scramble them. This will give it a good few scenarios where this ammo is a good choice over the faction variants.
Which still makes it worthless. Have you ever been in a PVP fight? There is no TIME to take 10 seconds to change ammo. Fights often last LESS than 10 seconds in toto... So instead of taking T2 short range ammo you will continue to use faction.
Could we please get someone who actually PVPs with their ships (instead of shooting rats only) put in charge of stuff like this? My point is one an actually pvp player would have brought up within 5 seconds of your proposed solution.
This also does nothing at all to help the fact that blasters are absolutely useless as well.
Remove the tracking penalties entirely. Short range=high speed= NEED for tracking. Get rid of damage bonuses if you have to but INCREASE tracking!
Don't be silly. It doesn't make it useless, it makes it situational. If you have a web on your ship then chances are you are going to use T2. If you (or your gangmates) do not then you don't.
If you are tackling a larger, slower ship you use the T2. If you are tackiling a ship that will try to orbit you, you use faction.
Far from useless.
|
|
Vidar Kentoran
Minmatar Eighty Joule Brewery
|
Posted - 2010.11.09 19:16:00 -
[171]
Edited by: Vidar Kentoran on 09/11/2010 19:17:52
Originally by: CCP Chronotis An update: Fighter Bombers
Fighter bombers will return to doing missile damage and not turret damage as previously mentioned so the damage against capital ships will be unchanged from what it is today on Tranquillity. However, sub-capital class ships will only receive a fraction of the damage they currently receive today as mentioned originally in the blog. In addition the graphical effect has had another iteration and looks much nicer so all in all, it is a tidy package of far less load on the server and therefore in your fleet fights as well as an adjustment of the effectiveness of fighter bombers against sub-capital class ships and much better looking effects.
I'm confused, does this mean you aren't improving the lag? Also, are you merely increasing the explosion radius of fighter bombers' torps then to make them even less effective against subcaps?
Quote: The changes here in addition to already mentioned in the blog is that the short range tech 2 ammo like void, hail and conflagration will receive a 10% damage boost whilst maintaining the tracking speed modifier (albeit at a lower penalty) so will do more damage than the equivalent faction ammo but still be penalised in tracking terms so more awesome if you have a pinned or slow moving large ship but against targets where you need higher tracking speeds then you will need to switch between ammo until you can web/warp scramble them. This will give it a good few scenarios where this ammo is a good choice over the faction variants.
This is a significant boost to HACs that are already far more powerful than battleship-class sized ships, you realize?
|
Crias Taylor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2010.11.09 19:17:00 -
[172]
Edited by: Crias Taylor on 09/11/2010 19:21:35 Ok, taking a note here. Tech 2 ammo (even more so for hybrids) still useless.
Thanks. Glad we got that cleared up.
At least ganking hulks will be cheaper.
|
Gabriel Karade
Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
|
Posted - 2010.11.18 20:33:00 -
[173]
Originally by: Gabriel Karade Can I suggest you really try to do something different with Void this time around, as Faction AM and Void cannot co-exist when they are both doing the same thing - "MOAR D4M4GE!!!11111"
Ideally this should be part of a review of the role you see for blasters because it is a mess at the moment: Serpentis - 'old skool' solo work at 10x the price, everything else 'Meh - I'll leave it docked'. But I'm guessing that won't happen...
Oh but they're apparently "great for station games!" lol - ugh...
Originally by: CCP Chronotis An update:
Singularity will not be available for testing of these changes again till later this week as we are currently utilising the server for testing of some patches to our recent inventory 64 upgrade.
In the meantime, here is a list of a few changes since this blog was penned:
Fighter Bombers
Fighter bombers will return to doing missile damage and not turret damage as previously mentioned so the damage against capital ships will be unchanged from what it is today on Tranquillity. However, sub-capital class ships will only receive a fraction of the damage they currently receive today as mentioned originally in the blog. In addition the graphical effect has had another iteration and looks much nicer so all in all, it is a tidy package of far less load on the server and therefore in your fleet fights as well as an adjustment of the effectiveness of fighter bombers against sub-capital class ships and much better looking effects.
Tech 2 ammo
The changes here in addition to already mentioned in the blog is that the short range tech 2 ammo like void, hail and conflagration will receive a 10% damage boost whilst maintaining the tracking speed modifier (albeit at a lower penalty) so will do more damage than the equivalent faction ammo but still be penalised in tracking terms so more awesome if you have a pinned or slow moving large ship but against targets where you need higher tracking speeds then you will need to switch between ammo until you can web/warp scramble them. This will give it a good few scenarios where this ammo is a good choice over the faction variants.
--------------
Video - 'War-Machine' |
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2010.11.20 21:26:00 -
[174]
So is the current graphic/mechanic of fighter bombers on SISI the most recent iteration you spoke of on this page or is there a better graphic than these four bars of white light that look incredibly dull after about 2 minutes?
|
DeMichael Crimson
Minmatar Republic University
|
Posted - 2010.11.22 11:22:00 -
[175]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis An update:
Singularity will not be available for testing of these changes again till later this week as we are currently utilising the server for testing of some patches to our recent inventory 64 upgrade.
In the meantime, here is a list of a few changes since this blog was penned:
Fighter Bombers
Fighter bombers will return to doing missile damage and not turret damage as previously mentioned so the damage against capital ships will be unchanged from what it is today on Tranquillity. However, sub-capital class ships will only receive a fraction of the damage they currently receive today as mentioned originally in the blog. In addition the graphical effect has had another iteration and looks much nicer so all in all, it is a tidy package of far less load on the server and therefore in your fleet fights as well as an adjustment of the effectiveness of fighter bombers against sub-capital class ships and much better looking effects.
I guess anything that helps reduce lag must be a good thing.
Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tech 2 ammo
The changes here in addition to already mentioned in the blog is that the short range tech 2 ammo like void, hail and conflagration will receive a 10% damage boost whilst maintaining the tracking speed modifier (albeit at a lower penalty) so will do more damage than the equivalent faction ammo but still be penalised in tracking terms so more awesome if you have a pinned or slow moving large ship but against targets where you need higher tracking speeds then you will need to switch between ammo until you can web/warp scramble them. This will give it a good few scenarios where this ammo is a good choice over the faction variants.
More Damage and less tracking? For short range high speed ammo?
Well, I hope the extensive cap drain while using that ammo is removed since we'll have to fit up Tracking Computers now just to make the ammo usable.
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.11.24 12:37:00 -
[176]
Originally by: Jack Gilligan Remove the tracking penalties entirely. Short range=high speed= NEED for tracking. Get rid of damage bonuses if you have to but INCREASE tracking!
Are you advocating that they apply logic when designing the tools we use to slap each other with? Why I never!
Would be by far the best solution as it essentially gives us two distinct options in brawls; Tracking (T2) or Damage (Faction), but alas it is not to be.
|
Patri Andari
Caldari Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
|
Posted - 2010.11.24 15:35:00 -
[177]
Edited by: Patri Andari on 24/11/2010 15:44:25 Just went on test server for a looksie and I have a few questions:
Why are T2 Missiles not included in this T2 ammo buff?
Why do Javelin Hams & Precision Heavies still slow my ship down?
Why do Rage Hams & Rage Heavies still bloom my signature?
Why would you only remove negative ship effects from short ranged turret T2 ammo and not missiles?
How is this balanced?
I am hoping I missed something and perhaps your changes were just rolled back today. If not, this is a blatant slap to Caldari and Khanid boats.
Patri
I'll Roshambo You For That Titan! |
StrikeForcer
|
Posted - 2010.12.04 21:04:00 -
[178]
Originally by: John Zorg Nice Blog post!
Will we be seeing the completion of the fix to the bonus of the Hel this expansion? It was promised with the last expansion and we were told it is under review? Still nothing said about it...
Could we please get an answer on this?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page] |