|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
0
   |
Posted - 2011.10.08 05:08:00 -
[1] - Quote
Some good points, but I may be alone in hoping the changes are not so substantial, I would prefer moderate balancing rather than a complete overhaul with further balancing in the summer if required, I believe it is just too short a time to test and balance such substantial changes.
Realistically what I expect is an improvement in the fitting requirements of Hybrids, most of my fits include a ACR as it is and if this rig slot can be freed up hopefully with enough power grid left over for a Hybrid rig to boost performance then thats a double win for me.
I also expect an ammo balance; you are almost always better using Antimatter (except for Null and Spike for range) at any range, if further cap and tracking bonuses were introduced for the longer range ammo then pilot could choose between low DPS good hits or in your face Antimatter DPS.
Javelin is terrible and needs changing.
|
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 23:37:00 -
[2] - Quote
I like your ammo proposals, it's freaky I had been thinking about proposing a reversal of the kin therm ratio for half the ammo's. |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.11 23:42:00 -
[3] - Quote
Oh and how about 5 bandwidth and drone bay per level for the CPU subsystem for the proteus.
Should not be overpowered as you have to sacrifice probing, increased sensor strength or scram range to get the full bandwith for 5 heavies.
Plus one mId minus one high would also be nice. |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.16 11:49:00 -
[4] - Quote
I support a lot of the ideas in this thread, Pattern can you please confirm that text in your first post is up to date with your current thinking as there are so many posts now itGÇÖs hard to keep track.
Will you be proposing it as an all or nothing idea or do you think you can get CCP to pick up parts of it?
Regarding the rig changes, I would support this over the current position but how would you feel about changing shield and armour to active and passive rig sets.
Passive - decrease speed or agility as proposed
All armour and shield extension/resistance rigs
Active - increase sig radius
All armour and shield rigs affecting active tanking
May need a week omni passive resist rig in this group
This may help active armour compete with shield buffer nano fits.
How would you feel about this, too drastic a change would it affect too many fits and make armour and shield to similar? Just throwing it out there. |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 11:54:00 -
[5] - Quote
Winter is certainly fast approaching; an update from CCP on the direction they might take would sure be appreciated. (Hint Hint)
Regarding the warfare link changes, I certainly have no problem with the proposal but at the bare minimum if the assault warfare links are a no go then at least doubling the effect of the ECCM command mod and having the Electronic Superiority mod affect the positive boosting modules such as Tracking Comps/Links, ECCM and sensor boosters may mitigate this to an extent.
Regarding the third link.
Crazy ideas with the theme of information warfare may be as follows : -
- Increase D-Scan range
- Increase Probe strength
- Reduce the range a ship can be warped to on grid
But if you are going this far then perhaps the Assault Warfare proposal would be better. |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 22:13:00 -
[6] - Quote
I agree regarding the ammo, I will take a flat boost to weapon tracking but really thought an ammo rebalance would see the use of more ammo types.
I having playing around with fitting tools and with the fitting reductions you can get some good fits even for the Thorax, Deimos and it definitely helps with fitting 425GÇÖs on the battleships. Still struggle to fit any hybrid rigs on top though.
I am unsure about the whole speed agility nerf thing, the Deimos speed change was listed at around 20m/s which makes a good amount of difference but for the rest of the ships gaining 5/10 m/s just does not seem like a good trade especially since you still gimp your speed if you fit armour rigs.
The cap change makes a surprising difference and should really help keep those microwarpdrives running. I may even be tempted to carry lead for emergencies with its reduced cap usage it could really help keep the guns running when pressured by neuts.
|
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 09:42:00 -
[7] - Quote
I am not so sure there certainly seems a lot of pessimism in the dev blog feedback thread.
For me the major wins are the fitting improvements and the cap reduction, playing around with fitting tools and some GÇ£ahemGÇ¥ rough calculations gives some much improved fits and the cap change seems to be adding a good portion of a minute to cap time depending on the fit.
That just leaves us with the issue of speed (when armour fit) and needing to scram an opponent really to gain control of the fight, has anyone worked out the potential speed increases with a microwarpdrive? That said the shield gank fits seem increasingly powerful with bigger guns ,more speed and more cap to play with, not sure how I feel about this.
Not sure if it is really that much of a buff to battleship guns although again the real payoff is in the fittings and I was really hoping for some form of ammo revision.
|
|
|
| |
|