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) |
Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
53
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:23:00 -
[151] - Quote
After mulling these Missile changes over for a bit, where does this leave Caldari? They have historically been the "long-range" race. But now all their long-range weapons suck in the medium ship class. Even ECM is getting the (well deserved) nerfbat in the winter.
To make matters worse. The standard doctrine of long-range/high-PG vs short-range/low-PG weapons was reversed for Hvy Missiles & HAMs. And Caldari ships had the powergrid to push them towards hvy missiles. The Drake can use HAMs effectively. Not so much with the Nighthawk, Crapacal, and Cerb.
Some sort of missile change needed to be made. But I think the overall effect is going to be rather severe for Caldari specced players. It'll be like Gallente's 2008, but all at once instead of spread out over 3 expansions. |
Sirane Elrek
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
139
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:23:00 -
[152] - Quote
I'm picturing a world where, instead of making sweeping changes across the board twice a year, CCP could make small iterative changes once a month or so, and watch the effect. Then maybe change some more if it wasn't enough. |
Meditril
T.R.I.A.D Ushra'Khan
120
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:23:00 -
[153] - Quote
Allandri wrote:Meditril wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Tracking/Range Mods and Ewar -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 explosion radius Optimal range disruption script lowers flight time The first one (tracking enhancers) will make missile boats absolute frigate murders. Just change your script and viola you can switch from long range to anti-frig point defense. A very bad decision. The second one (TDs affect missiles) will make TDs the must have module for all frigates... having "must have" modules is very sad. Must have modules currently include a long / short point and a prop mod
This is true, but not a reason to add one more module to the list of "must have modules".
@Devs: Will there be a difference how Tracking Enhancers and TDs are affecting Guided vs. Unguided missiles? Currently it is for example not possible to change (reduce) explosion radius of Unguided missiles with Warhead Rigor Catalyst rigs as far as I know. Will this mean that Unguided missiles will be only affected 50% by Tracking Enhancers / TDs compared to Guided missiles? |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4630
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:24:00 -
[154] - Quote
Arthello wrote:How about fixing the Drake before you nerf all the other BC's. The Drake is the number 1 overpowered ship in EVE at the moment.
But Tengus are just fine even though they do more DPS, have more tank, better resists, longer targetting range and higher sensor strength, faster m,issile velocity and are much smaller and faster, because you like flying those, right? Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Michael Harari
The Hatchery Team Liquid
289
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:24:00 -
[155] - Quote
20% nerf to damage is ridiculous. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4633
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:26:00 -
[156] - Quote
Sirane Elrek wrote:I'm picturing a world where, instead of making sweeping changes across the board twice a year, CCP could make small iterative changes once a month or so, and watch the effect. Then maybe change some more if it wasn't enough.
I'm picturing a world where CCP devs don't derive a huge amount of entertainment fromt he reactions they get from trolling the ever-living crap out of us.
(It's pretty dull. I'm mostly playing some other game) Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Sebastian Hoch
Black Lance Fidelas Constans
33
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:26:00 -
[157] - Quote
Blawrf McTaggart wrote:I don't really understand why CCP continue to do this "pendulum" style of balancing. Make something overpowered -> useless -> overpowered -> useless.
I have observed the same and not just in ship changes. I think it is by design--the purpose being to 'reset' the game board once groups and individuals have aligned themselves around related goals and achieved great success exploiting a mechanic. The desired result is to keep fresh challenges alive in the game at the cost of what was was achieved and fairly won. This applies to training/ doctrines and isk sinks, Anomoly buff/nerf, tech buff/nerf, Gun mining buff/nerf, incursion buff/nerf, FW buff/future nerf, ect.. Each change provides a new "gold rush" that players make goals around and eventually reap above average rewards, but whose welcome is worn out over time. The principle extends to the training goals that players make.
Unlike other MMO's, which drive massive content infusions with new releases, Eve has to keep more or less the same universe interesting.
What we really need CCP to provide is the new character choice of a Panda and this game will be crap until they do that. |
Jarin Arenos
Card Shark Industries
33
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:26:00 -
[158] - Quote
All I'm hearing is "Ohnoooz, my long range weapons don't nearly outdamage my close range weapons anymore!"
Look at hybrids and cry me a river. |
Z1gy
Vindicator Corporation Strategic Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:27:00 -
[159] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hello everyone! we've got another F&I balance thread for you all, covering tentative plans for missiles in the Winter expansion plus a hurricane fittings nerf that doesn't really need it's own thread. I'd like to start off by reminding people that everything in these F&I threads is open to changes, however there are some significant balance issues being dealt with here that will need to be solved in one way or another. There are also some details that remain to be ironed out but we wanted to get these ideas out to you all as early as possible. I'll start off with the orphan announcement. In the Attack Cruiser thread we also announced changes to medium gun fittings. We're going to be changing the hurricane at the same time but I wanted that thread to stay dedicated to the specific cruiser balance instead of getting derailed so we're moving that here. 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.
what about those that use armor hurricane? 1600mm plate? |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
713
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:27:00 -
[160] - Quote
It's a bloody joke that CCP keeps balancing this game around fleet combat. Even if you'd argue that fleet combat is the ultimate "goal" in EVE, it's still lag riddled and so full of pilots + potential varieties/different roles/segmets of the fleet, that that's just wrong to begin with.
* Drake is not overpowered in any way until you field a blob of them. * Tengu has too high damage output overboard when it combines the dmg + engineer subsystem, but a cloaky Tengu for example has lower damage output than a recon. This could easily be tweaked by (as a wise man told me) a simple RoF fix. The balance between the kin and non-kin damage is good as is. * Nighthawk is already very low on the pecking order and does need alot of love, especially in the damage department (but it's also quite sad it can't even sport an X-L booster). * Caracal and Cerberus lol. Khanid ships with HML lol.
TL;DR HML is not an issue, balancing game around fleet combat is, and a tweak for the Tengu damage subsystem could be in place.
(edit; oh, I could buy the argument that HML hits frigs too easily.. tho the damage output of HML's is not an issue, in fact it's pretty low in non-dps-subsystem-Tengu cases) AFK-cloaking in a system near you. |
|
BadAssMcKill
Ghost Headquarters The Ghost Army
2
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:28:00 -
[161] - Quote
Missiles are not turrets, I really don't like having TDs/TEs affecting them.
Starships were meant to fly~ |
Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Test Alliance Please Ignore
104
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:28:00 -
[162] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Arthello wrote:How about fixing the Drake before you nerf all the other BC's. The Drake is the number 1 overpowered ship in EVE at the moment. But Tengus are just fine even though they do more DPS, have more tank, better resists, longer targetting range and higher sensor strength, faster m,issile velocity and are much smaller and faster, because you like flying those, right?
If only drakes were nerfed, only newer/poorer players would be effected. |
Sirane Elrek
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
140
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:28:00 -
[163] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:(It's pretty dull. I'm mostly playing some other game) How is that different from the current situation? |
Thalen Draganos
Thunderwaffe Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:29:00 -
[164] - Quote
Bagehi wrote:Lord MuffloN wrote:For everyone comparing blasters to heavy missiles, you're dead wrong and they should be compared to HAM's. HAMs still need a slight damage boost IMO. But, yeah, this. If HM are supposed to be the same as rails, arty and beams then maybe they should be fixed first and then a slight reduction to the HM and a slight buff to HAMs to equalize things. Not a range nerf to HMs though if they are supposed to be the LR version. That's a bit much. |
Danny Centauri
Ghost Headquarters The Ghost Army
56
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:29:00 -
[165] - Quote
Wow quite shocking to read the comments, why on earth are you people comparing HMLs to pulse/blasters/autos? For god sake atleast compare like to like weapons platforms to spot weaknesses.
Don't like the HML changes, I find med rails a hell of a lot more frustrating! If you really want to compare drake to blaster boats atleast use HAM stats otherwise reading your posts is just cringe worthy. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4633
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:30:00 -
[166] - Quote
I'd be OK with a 20% damage nerf to heavies if they gave the Drake 8 launcher slots!
DO IT FOZZIE YOU KNOW YOU WANT TO
EDIT: Oh yeah and give the Cerb another launcher too, plus some grid and CPU, for the love of mike. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
MisterNick
The Sagan Clan Pax Romana Alliance
109
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:30:00 -
[167] - Quote
Real men HAM Drake anyway "Human beings make life so interesting. Do you know that in a universe so full of wonders, they have managed to invent boredom." |
Michael Harari
The Hatchery Team Liquid
290
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:30:00 -
[168] - Quote
In other words, its another nerf to small gang and solo (where the damage nerf comes into play), and another buff to blobs (where the damage and range nerf doesnt matter nearly as much).
The entire theme of winter so far is "buff blobs, make solo impossible."
CCP obviously wants every in blobs (since making #s important makes ccp more isk), and is ok with removing small gang (lol ewar buffs, more free damage mitigation that is easier to get, nerfs to the most common solo ships) |
Domiblob
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:31:00 -
[169] - Quote
This is pretty much the most badly thought out balancing change I've ever seen. I don't disagree for a second that the Drake is over-powered, but it's over-powered because it has a battleship sized tank and huge range (which isn't currently affected by tracking). The nerf to a Drake should be in the form of a reduction in tank, followed by a reduction in range, if anything. The last thing that needs touching is it's DPS, which is already it's most underwhelming quality. |
Yun Kuai
Justified Chaos
2
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:31:00 -
[170] - Quote
I have to agree with everyone else on this one. I love my drake and I love to go solo'ing in it, but when you kill the dps by 20%.....really ccp? really?
Nerf the range, acceptable. Make them receive TD penalties. we'll see how much it hurts them Kill their DPS: USELESS SHIP NOW
I agree, bring the nerf hammer down on drakes and canes, but make sure we nerf the right part and we do efficiently. If we haven't learned anything in the past, panic nerfs to the extreme ruin ships for years to follow *cough* gallente *cough*
Also, side note: Someone better be looking at TD's native strengths at all lvl 5 skills on an non-bonused ship and how they can be avoided so that the entire eve playerbase doens't automatically fit scram/web/TD before going out to solo. They need to be specialized enough that they are useful, but not so much that they ruin everything |
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4633
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:31:00 -
[171] - Quote
Sirane Elrek wrote:Malcanis wrote:(It's pretty dull. I'm mostly playing some other game) How is that different from the current situation?
Thatsthejoke.gif Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Test Alliance Please Ignore
104
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:31:00 -
[172] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:I'd be OK with a 20% damage nerf to heavies if they gave the Drake 8 launcher slots!
DO IT FOZZIE YOU KNOW YOU WANT TO
EDIT: Oh yeah and give the Cerb another launcher too, plus some grid and CPU, for the love of mike.
The ship model screams this should have 8 launchers.
|
Ensign X
229
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:32:00 -
[173] - Quote
Whiners: DRAEK AND TENGOO TOO POWERFUL! NERFFFF!!
CCP: Welp, they do make a good point. The Drake and Tengu both use Heavy Missiles, so let's nerf Heavy Missiles.
Random, intelligent ex-CCP employee: But won't that nerf every other ship that uses Heavy Missiles?
CCP: So what, nerfing 1 weapon system is WAY easier than nerfing 2 ships.
Random, intelligent ex-CCP employee: But aren't we already nerfing the Drake?
CCP: Shut up, you're fired.
Whiners: YAY! |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Ev0ke
327
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:32:00 -
[174] - Quote
have you considered to look at the maelstrom at the same time you look at the drake ? nerfing only the drake (and tengu) could have some not so nice consequences for quite a lot of pilots :( |
Doddy
Excidium. Executive Outcomes
195
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:32:00 -
[175] - Quote
NiGhTTraX wrote:The current Drake with 7x T2 HML launchers and 2x T2 BCU, firing T1 Scourge Heavy Missiles outputs 321 DPS. With 7x T2 HAM launchers and 2x T2 BCU, firing Scourge outputs 401 DPS. The Hurricane with 6x T2 720mm Artys and 2x T2 Gyrostabs with EMP outputs 371 DPS. The Hurricane with 6x T2 425mm Autocannons and 2x T2 Gyrostabs with EMP outputs 477 DPS. The new Drake will only have 0.8 x 321 = 257 DPS at a 25% lower range or 320 DPS with HAMs. It becomes the shittiest battlecruiser in terms of DPS. And if you nerf it further by reducing its tank, well.... Oh and now they can be tracking disrupted? Goodbye solo missile platforms! CCP Frozie wrote: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. No other high tier battlecruiser requires implants or gun downgrading to fulfill its intended purpose. These decisions seem terrible on paper imho.
Hate to tell you this bud but fitting an oversize tank (LSE) is not "fulfilling its intended purpose". Having to fit smaller guns or use a fitting mod to fit a ship size aboves tanking mod seems pretty sensible to me......
|
The End
Paragon Fury Tactical Narcotics Team
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:32:00 -
[176] - Quote
Why don't you just remove missiles altogether and just give us sticks and rocks to toss at one another ? |
Vicar2008
Mindstar Technology Fatal Ascension
57
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:33:00 -
[177] - Quote
While the nerf to HML nerf to range i can agree with, the nerf to damage is pretty dam awful 20% and is a terrible terrible idea imo. Cerebus HAC has just went from bad to Eagle bad, and trust me there now both worst HAC there is....... |
Melina Lin
Universal Frog
36
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:33:00 -
[178] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Rage: Reduce range, increase damage slightly Weren't these of all missiles the ones with the absolute shortest range? I hope they still make it out the launch tubes without a tracking mod. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
4633
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:33:00 -
[179] - Quote
Danny Centauri wrote:Wow quite shocking to read the comments, why on earth are you people comparing HMLs to pulse/blasters/autos? For god sake atleast compare like to like weapons platforms to spot weaknesses.
Don't like the HML changes, I find med rails a hell of a lot more frustrating! If you really want to compare drake to blaster boats atleast use HAM stats otherwise reading your posts is just cringe worthy.
So your argument, if I am following it correctly, would appear to be:
"Medium rails are crappy and heavy missiles are good, so the right thing to do is make the missiles as crappy as the rails"
Yes? Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Aliventi
Southern Cross Trilogy Flying Dangerous
3
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:33:00 -
[180] - Quote
Range reduction is great. As a drake pilot it was really unfair to the other BCs that I was so awesome cause I could hit so far.
However the damage reduction.... Well let's just say it's not so good. Drakes were already out DPS'ed by canes and the cane only had 6 turrets. In addition drakes are slower, can't fit neuts, have no damage type variety. My drake could hit maybe 400 DPS. Canes were hitting 550+ DPS. I think HMs should get a slight (5-10%) damage reduction, but HAMs should get a slight damage upgrade (5-10%). Really make HAM drakes competitive with Canes.
I can't wait to see what CCP has in store for the drake. But don't nerf HM damage by 20%. This in one thing that can be fixed with a nerf and a buff. |
|
|
|
|
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 |