|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 19 post(s) |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
44
   |
Posted - 2012.09.11 11:48:00 -
[1] - Quote
Whoo a devblog,
Now to reading, and then maybe some complaining? |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
45
|
Posted - 2012.09.11 11:58:00 -
[2] - Quote
Please ccp don't make all the attack ships some terrible kiting sheit..
Give the thorax a rep bonus or something? then it can be fast and pew close range?
Other then that everything looks brilliant, although i am not really fuzzed about the "Making every ship a mini-battleship of some sort" Its a bit of a silly statement since well.. The difference in how a cruiser and a BS flies is so wast it becomes a bit odd..
The concept art for the vaga looks brilliant though, too bad it has the same problem as all the other HAC's.. BC's are cheaper and better. |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
46
|
Posted - 2012.09.11 13:58:00 -
[3] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Garviel Tarrant wrote:Please ccp don't make all the attack ships some terrible kiting sheit..
Give the thorax a rep bonus or something? then it can be fast and pew close range?
Other then that everything looks brilliant, although i am not really fuzzed about the "Making every ship a mini-battleship of some sort" Its a bit of a silly statement since well.. The difference in how a cruiser and a BS flies is so wast it becomes a bit odd..
The concept art for the vaga looks brilliant though, too bad it has the same problem as all the other HAC's.. BC's are cheaper and better.
- Rep bonus on the thorax would make it more of a general combat than attack role. Having it in the "attack" category doesn't necessarily mean it's going to kite, but that it's going to be a fast and damaging hull. For a ship like Thorax it is suited to get close and deliver optimal damage.
- Mini-battleship statement was to explain which kind of general direction we want to take the cruisers to in term of role. It doesn't mean we're going to blind copy battleships without putting some thought on how this translate into individual cruiser hulls
So no gun rep crusier? =[
That's saddening.. But if its going to be fast and not kitey.. Is it going to be shield tanked? Because if it doesn't have a rep bonus it would have to fit a buffer which would make it slow.. I'm just not seeing how it will be an effective hull.
I just hope you keep up the active tanking thing you started with the asb's and the incursus. Active tanking is really the only way to make an armor ship without having it a complete immobile brick. |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
46
|
Posted - 2012.09.11 14:00:00 -
[4] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Tamonash en Welle wrote:The revamps are awesome and all... but please please please do not forget to update the ship descriptions. For many ships they already make little sense compared to the actual role and strong points and with these changes it is only going to get worse.  And, sure, new players can have fun in these ships, but they will be highly confused to pick a combat ship which primary role is described to be mining. We have description changes planned for these ships as well, yes 
When you rebalance the Phantasm, just read the current description and make it so that it fits that description. |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
46
|
Posted - 2012.09.11 14:06:00 -
[5] - Quote
Diesel47 wrote:Holy crap, stabber will look good and NOT suck?
I have to start flying those.
How will battlecruisers fit into the whole scheme of things? Will they be not worth using because cruisers are going to be so strong?
Battlecruisers are massively overpowered at the moment.. So i doubt that. |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
46
|
Posted - 2012.09.11 22:01:00 -
[6] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:So any plans to make amarr laser ships about something other than scorch ammo? How about some beam lasers.
Having to rep in station and buy more cap boosters after every fight is bad for solo. Hopefully it won't have to be fitted like that. I wanted to see mini apocs and geddons, not geddons and abaddons.
This, very much this.. Although i don't hate the baddon? :P |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
46
|
Posted - 2012.09.12 13:01:00 -
[7] - Quote
I don't think i'm ever going to get used to this Devblogs that please me thing.. |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
47
|
Posted - 2012.09.12 23:57:00 -
[8] - Quote
Angus MacDoom wrote:Diesel47 wrote:Angus MacDoom wrote:Love the look of the vaga, but whats gonna happen to my favorite cane? Cane looks fine, Rather see other ships get fixed before cane. Sorry, I was referring to the impending nerfs targeting the cane and drake in the devblog, and i quote: Quote:It also gets us so much closer of the next long awaited ship class that needs to be purified with fire: battlecruisers. Prophecy, Ferox, Brutix, Cyclone, we know how you feel. Drake and Hurricane, we are coming for you too.
its finally getting its well deserved nerf
Hopefully along with the rest of tier 2 bc's >_> |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
48
|
Posted - 2012.09.13 16:29:00 -
[9] - Quote
Hakaru Ishiwara wrote:I honestly do not understand the desire to nerf a given ship / class in the world of EVE. One of the joys of this game is finding ways to counter and crush ships that are considered to be over-powered. This happens all of the time with FoTM fleets getting countered by imaginative FCs and strategists. This applies to both small-gang and large engagements. What drives me bat-**** crazy about 'the need to nerf' a class of or a specific ship is that CCP [historically] goes to the ******* far reaches of extreme and renders once useful and sexually arousing ships into wet noodles. Not only does this result in killing the fun for that ship's operators, but the massive skills (time and subscription fees) spent on maxing out that ship are thrown away like a used condom: great fun while in use but now filled with fetid seed. Disclaimer: Yeah, I have BC 5 trained up on two characaters.  I lost out big-time with the dual Gallente nerfs give years back too with drone back shrinkage and the dampeners getting shafted. Falcon range -- yup, had just trained it up. The list goes on and on.
Ship balance revolves around buffs and nerfs..
You can't JUST buff everything every time you rebalance, you will end up with ridiculous numbers. Some ships are moved up, some are knocked down.
How much time you spent on the ship is completely irrelevant, especially since BC's will definitively still be good quit being bad.
But yes CCP have a history of overnerfing, but they have been doing well recently. |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
54
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 00:05:00 -
[10] - Quote
One thing..
CCP, please keep in mind to make rails viable for the new Caldari ships after the balance.
I would really HATE if all caldari boats just turned into shield gallente blabber boats, that would be terrible. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|