Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [20] 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 .. 213 :: one page |
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 63 post(s) |

Proletariat Tingtango
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
139
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 20:45:00 -
[571] - Quote
Daneel Trevize wrote:Proletariat Tingtango wrote:So hey look, I hated drakefleet and i dont mind the pvp ramifications, but what am I supposed to make money with in nullsec as a low-sp pilot? I can salvage off of kinder vets sometimes, but that's a finite and pretty limited source of isk. I'm just now able to do forsaken hubs on my own, and that's my only steady source of isk. With these nerfs on the board it really sounds like you're dicking low-sp pilots that live in nullsec out of one of their major sources of income, which wasn't that major to begin with.
I was also slowly training for a tengu to rat and now i'm second guessing that. Did you guys even think this nerf through? Do you actually want people to never use the drake or heavy-missile based ships ever again?
It seems like you could have reduced the viability of heavy missiles in pvp without completely screwing low-sp income sources.
Edit: And if anyone tells me that I should mine I will take a veldspar asteroid and cram it waaayyy up your ass. Group PvE, in this MMO?! Seriously, do it, surprise yourself. It's not like you even need to worry about aggro switching when shooting non-sleepers & non-incursion sanshas.
I already group when I can because it's faster/easier to generate more money and way less boring, but no, I should not have to group up to generate income. If the only time I can log in is during off-peak hours I have no chance of grouping up.
It's worth repeating, I'm almost glad to see the drake nerfed in pvp, but there's no real viable replacement for newbies in nullsec pve, and while i'd rather not, if I have to set foot in low sec or high-sec to generate a reasonable amount of income, I'm just going to scam it out of someone rather than waste my time.
|

Jhan Niber
Big Johnson's Ascendance.
10
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 20:47:00 -
[572] - Quote
The Hurricane nerf might be a bit too heavy. I understand it does too many things too well but a 1/6 cut seems like a bit too large of a cut.
While I wish that missiles had their own counter *looks at the broken defender missiles* so that we could have a fleet anti missile ship ala Patriot missiles, this will make for an interesting dynamic. As usual though we will adapt to the given constraints and I'm glad I'm already training Amarr cruiser V. |

Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
716
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 20:47:00 -
[573] - Quote
Takeshi Yamato wrote:Here are some raw numbers useful for understanding the proposed HML, beam laser and artillery changes:
250mm Railgun II with Spike: DPS: 20 Alpha: 92 Optimal: 65 km Falloff: 15 km Cap/sec: -1.1 PG: 187.2 CPU: 31.5
Heavy Beam Laser II with Aurora: DPS: 21 Alpha: 91 Optimal: 54 km Falloff: 10 km Cap/sec: -3.8 PG: 223.2 (previously 248.5) CPU: 27.8
720mm Artillery II with Tremor: DPS: 17 Alpha: 242 Optimal: 54 km Falloff: 22 km Cap/sec: 0 PG: 223.2 (previously 248.5) CPU: 24
Heavy Missile Launcher II with Caldari Navy Scourge: DPS: 23 (previously 29) Alpha: 189 (previously 237) Range: 63 km (previously 84) Cap/sec: 0 PG: 94.5 CPU: 41.3
This is without any ship bonuses. My view on this is that a 25% range and a 20% dps nerf only seem ridiculous if one ignores just how much better HMLs were than other weapon systems.
..because comparing guns with missiles is good to begin with? Why don't you add in drones in that equation too, that's about as reasonable as your apples and oranges. If you wanted to be fair, you'd at the very least also mention missiles travel time, and mention smartbomb/FoF that kills missiles/drones but not gun damage (but you could mention TDs affect guns/drones but not missiles).
You also forgot to mention which ships that is affected in what way with what bonuses (gun- and missile ships tend to have a different way of handing out bonuses, like your beam comment should mention that almost every damn Amarr ship there is has a cap bonus built in).
Horrible one-sided argument with obvious flaws, mate, try again. AFK-cloaking in a system near you. |

Lakshata Chawla
Blue-Fire Tribal Band
47
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 20:48:00 -
[574] - Quote
My poor drake.... Guess I'll have to upgrade to a raven until they change the drakes kinetic bonus out to something useless.
I see the need for changes, and think the range nerf is a good start.
I don't exactly agree with the nerf to damage because I fly primarily drakes, but it would be nice to see HAM's be useful. |

Laura Dexx
Snuff Box
9
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 20:48:00 -
[575] - Quote
Proletariat Tingtango wrote:Daneel Trevize wrote:Proletariat Tingtango wrote:So hey look, I hated drakefleet and i dont mind the pvp ramifications, but what am I supposed to make money with in nullsec as a low-sp pilot? I can salvage off of kinder vets sometimes, but that's a finite and pretty limited source of isk. I'm just now able to do forsaken hubs on my own, and that's my only steady source of isk. With these nerfs on the board it really sounds like you're dicking low-sp pilots that live in nullsec out of one of their major sources of income, which wasn't that major to begin with.
I was also slowly training for a tengu to rat and now i'm second guessing that. Did you guys even think this nerf through? Do you actually want people to never use the drake or heavy-missile based ships ever again?
It seems like you could have reduced the viability of heavy missiles in pvp without completely screwing low-sp income sources.
Edit: And if anyone tells me that I should mine I will take a veldspar asteroid and cram it waaayyy up your ass. Group PvE, in this MMO?! Seriously, do it, surprise yourself. It's not like you even need to worry about aggro switching when shooting non-sleepers & non-incursion sanshas. I already group when I can because it's faster/easier to generate more money and way less boring, but no, I should not have to group up to generate income. If the only time I can log in is during off-peak hours I have no chance of grouping up. It's worth repeating, I'm almost glad to see the drake nerfed in pvp, but there's no real viable replacement for newbies in nullsec pve, and while i'd rather not, if I have to set foot in low sec or high-sec to generate a reasonable amount of income, I'm just going to scam it out of someone rather than waste my time.
This game isn't supposed to be easy for newer players. I started Amarr and I had a hell of a hard time trying to work my way through the Omen, Harbinger and Apocalypse with T1 fittings. The fact that this game is such a breeze with a t1 drake or raven is an insult to all other races. |

Adriel Malakai
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
80
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 20:48:00 -
[576] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: Since we planning to reduce the powergrid needs of all medium artillery by 10% across the board, we are also planning to subtract 225 PG from the Hurricane, leaving it with a base powergrid of 1125. The upshot is that fitting a full rack of 720s with a MWD and LSE and full mids and lows will require a RCUII and either an ACR or PG implant. Also fitting a standard shield autocane with neuts and LSE will require dropping a few guns down to 220mm. The hurricane will likely receive significantly more changes when we get to battlecruisers in the balance pass, but this is designed as a compensation for the drop in Arty PG and to help alleviate the problem of Arty ships having so much free PG when they use autocannons.
Way to completely hamstring the hurricane. You won't be able to fit a decent armor cane with these changes. It's now a ****** nano-cane or nothing. Nice work on making the game even more uniform and less interesting. |

Lili Lu
439
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 20:50:00 -
[577] - Quote
Reticle wrote:Laura Dexx wrote:Guns can't be outrun? I guess I must have missed tracking all this time. try outrunning them in a straight line some time Whoa we're settling on a direction now? Pick any direction you like with a firewall setup. Do those work on turret based weapon ammo? Didn't think so. Firewall was an extreme solution to the lack of a dedicated anti-missile mechanic in the game. It is hardly ideal and has problems in application. Now with this single buff/nerf masses of newbies in Crucifiers, Vigils, Arbitrators, and Bellicoses and their tech II varietes may become as sought after as those in Griffins and Blackbirds et al. We can only hope damp boats are made as desireable as well.
This will open up the game to new fleet doctrines and even better, non-monoculture fleets. This will be good for the health of the game. And eventually some of you who put all your eggs in the one basket of heavy missile boats will realize the joys of crosstraining. |

Lord Ryan
True Xero
610
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 20:50:00 -
[578] - Quote
Ana Fox wrote:Proletariat Tingtango wrote:So hey look, I hated drakefleet and i dont mind the pvp ramifications, but what am I supposed to make money with in nullsec as a low-sp pilot? I can salvage off of kinder vets sometimes, but that's a finite and pretty limited source of isk. I'm just now able to do forsaken hubs on my own, and that's my only steady source of isk. With these nerfs on the board it really sounds like you're dicking low-sp pilots that live in nullsec out of one of their major sources of income, which wasn't that major to begin with.
I was also slowly training for a tengu to rat and now i'm second guessing that. Did you guys even think this nerf through? Do you actually want people to never use the drake or heavy-missile based ships ever again?
It seems like you could have reduced the viability of heavy missiles in pvp without completely screwing low-sp income sources.
Edit: And if anyone tells me that I should mine I will take a veldspar asteroid and cram it waaayyy up your ass. This is my main concern.New players will be those who will have hard time.When I say new I think those that are up to 6-7 months old.It is not problem to get other ships more used it is that they / we dont have what other ships to use to be if nothing close to effective as those two are mostly reason for this nerf it seems. I would not have problem to use T2 cruiser on my Caldari pilot ,but that T2 suck so bad . I will say same as I did in my previous post ,HML was op in some things like range and same dps application no matter of target distance ,but was that dmg so much op to be 20% less now with this proposed changes? Again I would not have problem if I am player that is two years old and you have gunnery and cross trained ship options,but sadly I dont have.For us it will be even more hard to get involved in some cool stuff older players do just cause some went Caldari way. Lucky for me I have one more pilot with gunnery :/.
Take away the range and damage, than you need to make missle instant damage with short fire cycles. Not mention you can only load 24 charges
Do not assume-áanything above this line-áwas typed by me. Nerf the Truth, it's inconvenient. Nerf it cause I can't fly it. I want to fly a badass Mon Calamari stlye-ácruiser painted to match my Tron clothes. |

Powers Sa
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
315
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 20:51:00 -
[579] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Heavy Missiles -Base flight time reduced by 30% -Base velocity increased by 6.66% -In total, base range reduced by ~25% -Damage decreased by 20% (rounded to closest digit) -Affects all variant Heavy missiles, including FOF.
Tech Two Missiles -At the moment Fury missiles at Light and Heavy sizes have a faster explosion velocity than precision missiles, we'll be fixing this defect as part of the changes. -Remove ship penalties from tech two missiles (ship velocity and signature radius) Precision: Improve bonuses to explosion velocity and explosion radius, increase damage to match T1 missiles, reduce flight time slightly Fury: Increase damage, increase the severity of penalties to explosion radius and velocity Javelin: Just remove ship penalties Rage: Reduce range, increase damage slightly
Tracking/Range Mods and Ewar -These changes apply equally to guided and unguided missiles -Modify tracking enhancers and tracking computers to affect: Max flight time (with optimal range script) Explosion radius and explosion velocity (with tracking speed script) -Make TDs affect Missiles Tracking speed disruption script lowers explosion velocity and increases explosion radius Optimal range disruption script lowers flight time
As someone who spends a lot of time in things that have to shoot drakes, I think a 20% decrease in range vs 25% is a bit more fair. Reducing flight time by only 20% instead of 30% also seems a bit more fair.
On a large fleet scale, drakes will have to be realigning more when shooting towers making them much more susceptible to bombing runs. |

Barrak
Wormhole Engineers Greater Realms
58
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 20:51:00 -
[580] - Quote
Re-arrange these words:
Worms Can of Open.
I can not see past this being an ISK controlling exercise.... and an incredibly badly though out one.
*just wanted to list some things that are not good about missiles for those that don't really use them.
1. The training for one weapon platform. Gun supports support three different races. Missile support only supports Missiles. 2. Only ammo that can be speed tanked whilst flying directly at it. 3. As far from 'instant' damage as you can get. You can actually align and warp before these things hit you sometimes. 4. Low Alpha compared to other similar platforms. |

Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon
44
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 20:51:00 -
[581] - Quote
Laura Dexx wrote:
This game isn't supposed to be easy for newer players. I started Amarr and I had a hell of a hard time trying to work my way through the Omen, Harbinger and Apocalypse with T1 fittings. The fact that this game is such a breeze with a t1 drake or raven is an insult to all other races.
Yes, because the raven is a breeze to use.
Because everyone always waits until they do level 4s before starting PvP right?
Drake is op, everyone knows that. Nerfing it down to 250 dps isn't really a good way of fixing it, nerfing a bit and improving the other options it has than heavies is better. |

Elder Ozzian
Stargates and Smuggler Barons
37
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 20:52:00 -
[582] - Quote
"...and missiles will act in a way that is more intuitive to newer players."
Does this mean that finally you are fixing the infamous 'When i hit warp button, all my missiles are losing it's payload and will not do any damage' -function? ...Or is it still working as intended? |

Ensign X
257
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 20:52:00 -
[583] - Quote
Adriel Malakai wrote:Way to completely hamstring the hurricane. You won't be able to fit a decent armor cane with these changes. It's now a ****** nano-cane or nothing.
Sure you can. You just won't be able to fit 2 1600mm plates, 2x Medium Neuts and 425mm ACs. You'll have to work for your fitting. Try using 1 plate. Or downgrade your neuts. Or downgrade your ACs. Trust me, it works.
|

Wolfstorm
Knights of Free Space Tribal Band
10
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 20:53:00 -
[584] - Quote
James1122 wrote:
I don't understand this argument, If everything is equally useless then surely everything is also equally useful ? (i.e. balanced, nothing is significantly OP or UP compared to each other ?)
To the moderators: If my comments below are to harsh please leave the top bit of my post in when you delete it, Ta.
Requesting a jita riot because the developers are working on ship balencing ? You are a f**king clown and the absolute problem with this game. I feel sorry for the developers having to deal with people like you, the type that moan at them for not doing anything, and then moan at them when they do try to do stuff.
The other ships are actually useful - the real issue and it's been an issue for years - is blobbing. It's not that missiles are OP - they have very strict drawbacks and uses and counters - like everything in game is supposed to have. The current proposed changes make them useless for everything except blobbing where they will then be just ok.
This is not good game design, in fact it's more of what I'd expect out of one of my first year students.
I want CCP to get off it's ass and actually do the work to keep the feel, vibrancy, vavriancy, and nuanced tactics - and this change only addresses blob warfare by putting blinders on and pretending that's the only way people use these ships.
So YES we should burn jita again - remind them we hold them to a higher standard of game design. If we wanted elementary level crap we'd play WOW.
|

Michael Harari
The Hatchery Team Liquid
300
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 20:54:00 -
[585] - Quote
Ensign X wrote:Adriel Malakai wrote:Way to completely hamstring the hurricane. You won't be able to fit a decent armor cane with these changes. It's now a ****** nano-cane or nothing. Sure you can. You just won't be able to fit 2 1600mm plates, 2x Medium Neuts and 425mm ACs. You'll have to work for your fitting. Try using 1 plate. Or downgrade your neuts. Or downgrade your ACs. Trust me, it works.
You cant fit that. Dual plate requires 180s.; |

Omega Sunset
Caldari Roughnecks
39
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 20:56:00 -
[586] - Quote
Reticle wrote:edit: also, if defender missiles worked properly, complaints about HMs would probably stop I have them trained a little, early on, until I found that they were worthless. This would make actual sense. So I punch through with four out of five missiles a volley, there 's the 20% reduction. I think missile boat drivers can live with that and it's not a nerf. Though I can imagine the tears of players needing to load defenders on hardpoint. Best option is still bringing non-missile boats up to standard. But just fixing the defender compared to nerfing is an acceptable lazy fix in comparison to fixing the rest of the fleet where it needs fixing. |

Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
716
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 20:57:00 -
[587] - Quote
Ravcharas wrote:Michael Harari wrote:Ravcharas wrote:Michael Harari wrote:Also making TDs affect missiles is goddamn ********. Now there is literally NO situation in which you dont want TDs fitted and there is NO counter to someone using TDs (apart from blobbing them....see a theme?) Fit a tracking enhancer, fit a tracking computer, fit a web, fit a painter, fit neuts, use appropriate ammo, or use ecm. Do you really think that a tracking computer counters a tracking disruptor? PS. Show me the shield cane fit with a tracking computer and a web. It sure mitigates it. Another counter could be to bring a friend with tracking links. Hue hue.
Welcome to blob online, bring a fleet of ships to counter a single enemies ewar.  AFK-cloaking in a system near you. |

Ensign X
259
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 20:57:00 -
[588] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:Ensign X wrote:Adriel Malakai wrote:Way to completely hamstring the hurricane. You won't be able to fit a decent armor cane with these changes. It's now a ****** nano-cane or nothing. Sure you can. You just won't be able to fit 2 1600mm plates, 2x Medium Neuts and 425mm ACs. You'll have to work for your fitting. Try using 1 plate. Or downgrade your neuts. Or downgrade your ACs. Trust me, it works. You cant fit that. Dual plate requires 180s.;
And Small Neuts. I'm aware. I was referring more to the implication that somehow 'Canes will no longer be able to fit an armor tank when, in reality, they just won't be able to dual plate their armor 'Canes. |

Wolfstorm
Knights of Free Space Tribal Band
13
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 20:59:00 -
[589] - Quote
Adriel Malakai wrote:
Way to completely hamstring the hurricane. You won't be able to fit a decent armor cane with these changes. It's now a ****** nano-cane or nothing. Nice work on making the game even more uniform and less interesting.
Armor cane FTW ... no one but pirates seem to fly one anymore tho.
But again our CCP design team is crap and they don't look at all the uses a ship gets and instead only go hey, it can be used in one way we think we might not like so we gotta break it so it can't be used like that, but damn the side effects of other things it's no longer good for.
We don't want WOW in space, in fact we want WOW in space players to quit and go find a game suited to them. |

Barrak
Wormhole Engineers Greater Realms
58
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 21:00:00 -
[590] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Tracking/Range Mods and Ewar -These changes apply equally to guided and unguided missiles -Modify tracking enhancers and tracking computers to affect: Max flight time (with optimal range script) Explosion radius and explosion velocity (with tracking speed script) -Make TDs affect Missiles Tracking speed disruption script lowers explosion velocity and increases explosion radius Optimal range disruption script lowers flight time
Hate to be the one to let you know, but isn't a Submarine we're talking about where the missiles/Torp are connected to the boat via cable.
I assume by using TD's you are going to make people target individual missiles and TD them else I don't see how this works in accordance with EvE's mechanics.
You're breaking your own physics to nerf something........ at least put some effort into creating something specific that does this, rather than the outstanding idea someone clearly had sitting around the large conference table with a coffee in their hand......."oh let a gun tracking disruptor that affects turrents ON ships, now affect an intelligent ammo that has it's own built in systems".
|

Laura Dexx
Snuff Box
11
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 21:00:00 -
[591] - Quote
Adriel Malakai wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: Since we planning to reduce the powergrid needs of all medium artillery by 10% across the board, we are also planning to subtract 225 PG from the Hurricane, leaving it with a base powergrid of 1125. The upshot is that fitting a full rack of 720s with a MWD and LSE and full mids and lows will require a RCUII and either an ACR or PG implant. Also fitting a standard shield autocane with neuts and LSE will require dropping a few guns down to 220mm. The hurricane will likely receive significantly more changes when we get to battlecruisers in the balance pass, but this is designed as a compensation for the drop in Arty PG and to help alleviate the problem of Arty ships having so much free PG when they use autocannons.
Way to completely hamstring the hurricane. You won't be able to fit a decent armor cane with these changes. It's now a ****** nano-cane or nothing. Nice work on making the game even more uniform and less interesting.
[Hurricane, 1125 base PG (AWU III ENGI V)] 1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I Damage Control II Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Experimental 10MN MicroWarpdrive I Warp Disruptor II Stasis Webifier II Small Capacitor Booster II, Cap Booster 200
425mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP M 425mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP M 425mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP M 425mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP M 425mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP M 425mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP M Small Energy Neutralizer II Small Energy Neutralizer II
Medium Ancillary Current Router I Medium Trimark Armor Pump I Medium Trimark Armor Pump I
Warrior II x5 Warrior II x1
There. Still a great brawling ship. Still has the utility slots. Just not as brutally strong as it used to be. If you really want a med neut, drop the 425s to 220s and you can switch a small neutralizer for a medium one. You have to make choices now. Like all the rest of us. |

stoicfaux
1652
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 21:01:00 -
[592] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Tracking/Range Mods and Ewar -These changes apply equally to guided and unguided missiles -Modify tracking enhancers and tracking computers to affect: Max flight time (with optimal range script) Explosion radius and explosion velocity (with tracking speed script)
How do TC/TEs impact Target Painters? Will TPs become primarily a fleet weapon?
Golem. If TC/TEs are "better" than TPs, will the Golem's Target Painting and/or Explosion Velocity bonii be changed?
You can tell me what is and isn't Truth when you pry the tinfoil from my cold, lifeless head. Feature Request: -áDamnation Ship Codpiece-áfor the NeX store.
|

Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
1329
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 21:01:00 -
[593] - Quote
It's like CCP Fozzie can read my mind!
Also can you please look at medium rails Fozzie, they are completely useless on everything. Please look at the insanely high fitting requirements of them. There is plenty of time before winter gets here. 
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |

James1122
Aperture Harmonics K162
33
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 21:02:00 -
[594] - Quote
Misanth wrote:Takeshi Yamato wrote:Here are some raw numbers useful for understanding the proposed HML, beam laser and artillery changes:
250mm Railgun II with Spike: DPS: 20 Alpha: 92 Optimal: 65 km Falloff: 15 km Cap/sec: -1.1 PG: 187.2 CPU: 31.5
Heavy Beam Laser II with Aurora: DPS: 21 Alpha: 91 Optimal: 54 km Falloff: 10 km Cap/sec: -3.8 PG: 223.2 (previously 248.5) CPU: 27.8
720mm Artillery II with Tremor: DPS: 17 Alpha: 242 Optimal: 54 km Falloff: 22 km Cap/sec: 0 PG: 223.2 (previously 248.5) CPU: 24
Heavy Missile Launcher II with Caldari Navy Scourge: DPS: 23 (previously 29) Alpha: 189 (previously 237) Range: 63 km (previously 84) Cap/sec: 0 PG: 94.5 CPU: 41.3
This is without any ship bonuses. My view on this is that a 25% range and a 20% dps nerf only seem ridiculous if one ignores just how much better HMLs were than other weapon systems. ..because comparing guns with missiles is good to begin with? Why don't you add in drones in that equation too, that's about as reasonable as your apples and oranges. If you wanted to be fair, you'd at the very least also mention missiles travel time, and mention smartbomb/FoF that kills missiles/drones but not gun damage (but you could mention TDs affect guns/drones but not missiles). You also forgot to mention which ships that is affected in what way with what bonuses (gun- and missile ships tend to have a different way of handing out bonuses, like your beam comment should mention that almost every damn Amarr ship there is has a cap bonus built in). Horrible one-sided argument with obvious flaws, mate, try again.
TDs will now effect missiles. Ok travel time but missiles still have more base range and damage. They have upped missile velocity to compensate. Missiles are capless (the amarr bonus is considered as a waste cos its there to compensate for a built in redundancy with weapons)
Two Step for CSM |

Catabolistic
Higg's Zombie Fusion
3
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 21:02:00 -
[595] - Quote
Really this whole can of worms will be a game killer. No easly trainable PVE ship will exist for low skill pilots. TD will be a god module. The blob is the real issue but instead you kill off a large section of solo play with these proposed changes. I might as well put discos on my tengu and go f*ck someone up in jita. |

Adriel Malakai
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
80
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 21:03:00 -
[596] - Quote
Ensign X wrote:Adriel Malakai wrote:Way to completely hamstring the hurricane. You won't be able to fit a decent armor cane with these changes. It's now a ****** nano-cane or nothing. Sure you can. You just won't be able to fit 2 1600mm plates, 2x Medium Neuts and 425mm ACs. You'll have to work for your fitting. Try using 1 plate. Or downgrade your neuts. Or downgrade your ACs. Trust me, it works.
Decent armor cane fit is 220s, 2 med nuets, mwd, and 1 1600mm plate. With these changes, you'll either lose about 8k EHP by switching a trimark to an ACR, have to drop to 180s, or use small neuts. Pretty much all of these mean you'll have a hard time going toe-to-toe with any of the other BCs. |

PinkKnife
The Scope Gallente Federation
207
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 21:03:00 -
[597] - Quote
Oh my god. This thread.
9/10 complaining about their drake and tengu. 10/10 people haven't seen the impending changes to the drake/tengu. How can you say something is usless, when you haven't seen what they want to do with it?
So, IGNORE the stupid drakegu, and look at these medium weapons on the cruisers listed, not on hypothetical theorycrafting about ships not yet balanced. CCP is likely largely aware of the huge nerf to the drake and will give it some changes to compensate and not make it useless.
See that, it's called being reasonable.
+1 for Cane needing tradeoffs like other ships, and having to make fitting decisions.
+1 for HMLs being brought in line in terms of damage projection at range
+1 for T2 missile buffs
+1 TD effecting missiles, now my pilgrim can go on blops roams without remote reps equipped
+1 Tracking Enhancers/computers effecting Missiles, to counter the range nerf, and tracking disruptor.
On the "omg tracking disruptors now the god module" Sensor dampners would like a word with you and how little you see them used despite the fact they effect every ship with 0% chance of missing.
Sure TD's might be due to a slight nerf, but they won't proliferate on that basis alone, as damps have obviously not done as so either. (Yes I know they were nerfed, and Yes they are being talked about brought back into effectiveness, ECM is not the only ewar module out there). |

Basil Wencislas
limited infinity. The Machine.
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 21:03:00 -
[598] - Quote
Applying TDs to Missles makes absolutely no sense. Alot of people forget that there already is a counter to missles, just no one uses them because they take up a high slot and a missle launcher spot to boot. Why not create a module specific for countering missles, something along the lines of an AMS ZWIS like todays Naval fleets use, and perhaps make it a low or medium slot item?
TDs should apply to the ship, not the launcher. It would make perfect sense to have a TD however that say, limited the fire rate of missle launcher. To say that a TD somehow affects missle explosion velocity is absurd in my opinion. That is the point of missles, they are a different class of weapon with different characteristics, and different counter measures. By implementing a patch that makes everything apply to everything is not a direction CCP should be taking because people are unhappy with drake blobs.
If the problem is the drake, fix the drake. |

Deerin
Murientor Tribe Defiant Legacy
16
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 21:04:00 -
[599] - Quote
Although everybody is talking about cruisers and battlecruisers, I want to divert attention to another point that seems to be overlooked.
What will these changes mean on battleship level. Will torpedoes have longer range with TC/TE's now. Are we going to get torpedo ships that can actually hit smaller stuff by using TE/TC's. Did you guys consider these parameters when thinking about TE/TC for missiles?
Everybody is talking about the 20% damage nerf which is just one part of the nerf hammer.
"-At the moment Fury missiles at Light and Heavy sizes have a faster explosion velocity than precision missiles, we'll be fixing this defect as part of the changes. Fury: Increase damage, increase the severity of penalties to explosion radius and velocity"
T2 Fury missiles were actually very efficient missiles for their job and they were adding a lot of DPS. Many tengu/drake pilots were using them as default as they are cheaper than their faction counterparts. With the new changes I doubt they can be used against anything cruiser sized anymore.
I liked the fact that CCP actually has balls to go with this type of change. It may make the high-sec crowd cry a bit. It may even result in some loss of subscribers. But it will make eve much more playable and (more importantly) enjoyable in the long run, thus generating more subscribers in the long run.
Go Fozzie!!!!
|

Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon
45
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 21:07:00 -
[600] - Quote
Wolfstorm wrote: The current proposed changes make them useless for everything except blobbing where they will then be just ok.
This is exactly it. Everyone who is like "Yay, this change is the best!" Hasn't really thought about how drakes are only "reasonably good" in small scale and solo PvP, now they will just be useless, along with any other boat that usually uses heavy missiles, in this form of warfare. |
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [20] 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 .. 213 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |