Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 34 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 28 post(s) |
Lipbite
Express Hauler
206
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 22:26:00 -
[361] - Quote
Tippia wrote:You don't need Destroyers because you already have Cruisers.
Thanks! |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
811
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 22:28:00 -
[362] - Quote
Varesk wrote: not really solo if you use a boosting alt.
It's not about definitions, but rather just about the fact how CCP can easily make gang-boosters hardly available for small-scale PvPers while keeping them easily accessible and usable for larger groups, which is what surely happens if they leave current link mechanics (a ship boosts N others for the same effect as just one) as is and just nerf link range.
That is the point, not how you treat those who prefer to multibox. 14 |
Xercodo
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
1395
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 22:31:00 -
[363] - Quote
Skill requirements are only to START training the skill, not to keep it.
This means that you can still keep flying a carrier even if you lost battleship 5 since you still have the carrier skill. The Drake is a Lie |
Moraguth
Ranger Corp
45
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 22:34:00 -
[364] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:Varesk wrote: not really solo if you use a boosting alt.
It's not about definitions, but rather just about the fact how CCP can easily make gang-boosters hardly available for small-scale PvPers while keeping them easily accessible and usable for larger groups, which is what surely happens if they leave current link mechanics (a ship boosts N others for the same effect as just one) as is and just nerf link range. That is the point, not how you treat those who prefer to multibox.
If you're gonna multi box and still want to maintain bonuses after this proposed (i hope it happens) change, have both of your characters in command ships or T3. Or hell... put both pilots in drakes/canes/whatever and have one do a little bit of boosting. Add that DPS to the fight! I can kill you with my brain too. It's genetic. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
293
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 22:35:00 -
[365] - Quote
Perhaps this has been asked and answered already (in which case, I apologize to everyone):
Looking even further in the future, is it likely - or even just possible - that T2 ships will be given the same racial skill treatment? Ie. are we going to have to train Gallente Assault Ships, Minmatar Recon Ships, Caldari Logistics, Amarr Marauder, etc.? |
Berendas
Clandestine Vector THE SPACE P0LICE
320
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 22:38:00 -
[366] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Perhaps this has been asked and answered already (in which case, I apologize to everyone):
Looking even further in the future, is it likely - or even just possible - that T2 ships will be given the same racial skill treatment? Ie. are we going to have to train Gallente Assault Ships, Minmatar Recon Ships, Caldari Logistics, Amarr Marauder, etc.?
Hopefully not, the barrier to entry in EVE is big enough without forcing newer players to train more skills. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
10265
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 22:39:00 -
[367] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Perhaps this has been asked and answered already (in which case, I apologize to everyone):
Looking even further in the future, is it likely - or even just possible - that T2 ships will be given the same racial skill treatment? Ie. are we going to have to train Gallente Assault Ships, Minmatar Recon Ships, Caldari Logistics, Amarr Marauder, etc.? According to the original blog, no. The racial skills give us the basic T1 hulls; the T2 skills give us special options for the hulls we already have.
It's like two axes: on the x-axis, we have a row of racial skills that gives us hulls; on the y-axis, we have a row of GÇ£roleGÇ¥ skills such as GÇ£logisticsGÇ¥ and GÇ£reconGÇ¥ that give us specialisations for the hulls. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan. |
Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
103
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 22:40:00 -
[368] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Perhaps this has been asked and answered already (in which case, I apologize to everyone):
Looking even further in the future, is it likely - or even just possible - that T2 ships will be given the same racial skill treatment? Ie. are we going to have to train Gallente Assault Ships, Minmatar Recon Ships, Caldari Logistics, Amarr Marauder, etc.?
doubt it especially as it already takes training a racial skill to lv5 |
Denegrah Togasa
Rifterlings Damu'Khonde
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 22:40:00 -
[369] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Perhaps this has been asked and answered already (in which case, I apologize to everyone):
Looking even further in the future, is it likely - or even just possible - that T2 ships will be given the same racial skill treatment? Ie. are we going to have to train Gallente Assault Ships, Minmatar Recon Ships, Caldari Logistics, Amarr Marauder, etc.?
That sounds terrible but your probably correct when they go through T2 rebalance this will happen. |
Moraguth
Ranger Corp
45
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 22:42:00 -
[370] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Perhaps this has been asked and answered already (in which case, I apologize to everyone):
Looking even further in the future, is it likely - or even just possible - that T2 ships will be given the same racial skill treatment? Ie. are we going to have to train Gallente Assault Ships, Minmatar Recon Ships, Caldari Logistics, Amarr Marauder, etc.?
That hasn't been asked or even hinted at to my knowledge. Even back in march when they first told us about the proposed change for destroyers/bc skills, they never said anything about that. I think it's a safe bet that the T2 skills won't change. And if they do, it'll be a very long time.
EDIT: I think this is the most answered question I've seen in the tread. Good Job Void! I can kill you with my brain too. It's genetic. |
|
Sephira Galamore
Inner Beard Society
40
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 22:49:00 -
[371] - Quote
Moraguth wrote:I think this is the most answered question I've seen in the tread. Good Job Void! It's called fear :D
|
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
294
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 23:06:00 -
[372] - Quote
Sephira Galamore wrote:Moraguth wrote:I think this is the most answered question I've seen in the tread. Good Job Void! It's called fear :D No, actually, it is called "long term planning". :)
If CCP is considering such a change, even just as a possibility, then it might be a good idea to spend some SP time next year leveling up the T2 ship skills to 5. They are all rank 4-10, and require 2-4 weeks each to get to level 5.
Also, they are Wil/Per skills, not Per/Wil or Int/Mem, so a remapping will also need to be scheduled, for optimal training. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
2258
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 23:15:00 -
[373] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Perhaps this has been asked and answered already (in which case, I apologize to everyone):
Looking even further in the future, is it likely - or even just possible - that T2 ships will be given the same racial skill treatment? Ie. are we going to have to train Gallente Assault Ships, Minmatar Recon Ships, Caldari Logistics, Amarr Marauder, etc.?
Nope Game Designer | Team Game of Drones https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Tarra Nobilii
Universal Origin
5
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 23:17:00 -
[374] - Quote
Prophecy: expected to be changed to a drone boat. This is a role revamp that will radically modify its slot and fitting layout. It will most likely have less bandwidth but more drone bay than the Myrmidon.
On top of being sacrilegious, this seems a daft idea; 1) armor drone boats cannot take advantage of new mods for lows along with their tank, 2) there is already and armor drone boat (myrmidon), 3) Amarr do not need drones, we shoot things with lasers. I understand the need for balance...but this is not balance to me. I would recommend making a Caldari variant ship for drones (as their drone bays are already poor on virtually all of their ships). For Amarr, we have the Arbitrator and the Armageddon (with a decent drone bay). Caldari have nothing for drones...and even from a storyline perspective, it would make sense for them to copy some tech. Even if the bonus was not to damage but to the effects of combat utility drones, that would be useful; the new web drones are limited at present...imagine where Caldari drone boats would web down a target for missile users and blasters to hit. This makes sense to me. If you want to make the Prophecy have a place so people fly them...then give them some flexibility for shield tanking (more mid distributions with less tank)...or have some kind of webbing bonus with conventional mods...or some kind of ewar ship for tracking disruption to counter Minmatar... All of those present viable ideas that would fit in with the Amarr-Minmatar combat and make the ship suck less, with a reason to fly it over the Harbinger. |
Soon Shin
Caucasian Culture Club Transmission Lost
199
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 23:18:00 -
[375] - Quote
Looks like we'll have to wait and see the numbers and descriptions to see if its good.
Field Command ships as a whole need to be looked at, they need to be a good deal better than their tech 1 variants.
All the Field Commands should be brought to the level of atleast the Sleipnir. The Sleipnir is the level that all field commands should strive for. Not just simply a bit better than Tech 1 or even worse in some cases (I'm looking at you Nighthawk)
If you want Command ships to be either gank/tank or boost/tank you're gonna to have to give them role bonuses in general rather than swap half and half.
An example of how I should see it changed to make it good for Both being a Fleet and/or Field CS:
Absolution:
BC LEVEL: 5% laser damage and -10% capacitor usage(please CCP swap this with something better)
CS LEVEL: 5% armor resist and 5% laser rate of fire
Role Bonus: -99% CPU usage of warfare links. 15% bonus to Armor and Skirmish Warfare links. +25% armor hitpoints.
Also something needs to be done about Information warfare links. I would take Armor, Shield, and Skirmish any time, any where over Information warfare.
Its bonuses are very niche and it bonus is not enough to be worth fielding most of the time where there are other things to be boosted. |
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
500
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 23:21:00 -
[376] - Quote
I am so glad i am skilling Command Ships 5.
Just think. Vulture with Siege Mindlink, Sensor Integrity link, Shield Resist link, running with a bunch of Thundercat Tengus. You'll have a sensor strength on the Tengus of around 60, and even more insane EHP.
As for the "ow ow my OGB alt!" crowd talking about their ability to "small gang/solo PVP being nutpunched" because OGBs in massively over-linked Tengus sitting at POSs allow them to "even the odds:...no. Sorry, no excuses.
This doesn't allow you to even the odds, level the playing field or other aphorism. It allows you, via deus ex machina, to gain the abilities of a Godlike being for your ship, with absolutely no risk. This then allows you to use your piloting skills (such as they are or are not) to spearate gangs with speed which is OTT for the ship you are fielding, tank gangs which you shouldn't be able to tank except for your OTT boosting, etc.
OGB alts sitting in POSs, particularly in FW, are stupid. Why? it's not just about one guy "soloing" with two T3 OGB alts in a POS (I'm looking at you RTSAvalanche) but if the fleet is adverted and set up with several booster alts and free move, you can set one up in several systems and as you go from system to system "soloing" you gain bonuses in every system you have an alt circling a POS in. This allows innumerable toons to move under the umbrella of a OGB alt the moment they hit system.
Does this "level the field" or allow you to be extra-skillful and hold the torch for solo or small gang roaming PVP? No. If you were skillful or wealthy enough, you should be skillful enough to fly a CS active on your seond screen vs just minimise it and leave it at a POS (taking no skill), and wealthy enough to be able to cop a 350M lossmail.
Under these changes, you can have your OGB Tengu, it will just suck fat nadgers. Gargle them, in fact. And the number of times I've been inconvenienced by ridiculously fast, un-ECMable ubertanky ships makes me chortle with glee thinking about how much ISK you'll have wasted. Bring it on. Taking submissions for "Trinkets friendly Advice Column" via evemail or private convo in-game. Anonymity sorta guaranteed.
|
Berendas
Clandestine Vector THE SPACE P0LICE
320
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 23:21:00 -
[377] - Quote
Tarra Nobilii wrote:Prophecy: expected to be changed to a drone boat. This is a role revamp that will radically modify its slot and fitting layout. It will most likely have less bandwidth but more drone bay than the Myrmidon.
On top of being sacrilegious, this seems a daft idea; 1) armor drone boats cannot take advantage of new mods for lows along with their tank, 2) there is already and armor drone boat (myrmidon), 3) Amarr do not need drones, we shoot things with lasers. I understand the need for balance...but this is not balance to me.
This was really the only other beef I had with what was in the dev blog. Making the Prophecy a drone boat just doesn't make all that much sense to me. A T1 missile boat for the Amarr would be more reasonable imo, as it would be a good lead in to the Khanid ship line. |
Name Family Name
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
78
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 23:27:00 -
[378] - Quote
What about SP bloat?
E.g. If I only used to fly Sleipnirs and thus have BC and CS V, but have Amarr Cruiser at IV to fly an Abaddon, will I receive Amarr BC and CS V (as well as all the other races in two of my charcters) as well although I never intended to fly them?
So to put it simple: Will my clones be bloated with SP and cost 20 mill more per pop for no benefit, will the BC (and CS) total Sp requirement be divided by 4, will we be given the chance of opting out of skills we don't want and redistribute them or will you finally get around to lower the weird scaling of clone costs? |
Lipbite
Express Hauler
206
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 23:29:00 -
[379] - Quote
Need clarification - how much time left till these battleship-destroyers skill requirement changes will be in effect - on December, 4 with Retribution or later?
P. S. Really, guys, these "soon" blogs went out of control lacking precise dates and clear statements like "we will (or we won't) change skills on November, 4" instead of "we will change them *after* T1 battleships overhaul which coming November, 4". |
Moraguth
Ranger Corp
45
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 23:33:00 -
[380] - Quote
Lipbite wrote:Need clarification - how much time left till these battleship-destroyers skill requirement changes will be in effect - on December, 4 with Retribution or later?
P. S. Really, guys, these "soon" blogs went out of control lacking precise dates and clear statements like "we will (or we won't) change skills on November, 4" instead of "we will change them *after* T1 battleships overhaul which coming November, 4".
read the thread.
since you won't, I'll just give an ambiguous hint (i'm not very nice).
No. I can kill you with my brain too. It's genetic. |
|
Lipbite
Express Hauler
206
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 23:47:00 -
[381] - Quote
If thread wasn't full of empty messages such as yours it could be much more readable and informative. But even with hidden messages (hint: triangle near avatar pix open options menu to hide messages from certain shiptoasters forever) thread is barely readable. Please, stop posting nonsense - just 26 days left till Dec 4 which is barely enough to train damn Battlecruisers V (not to mention Destroyers and racial skills frigate / cruisers skills I've planned for next year).
EDIT: found it: > Want to make this clear to everyone, the stuff in this blog is not coming on the 4th with Retribution. This blog covers some of what we are going to be working on in the beginning of next year. |
Moraguth
Ranger Corp
45
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 23:50:00 -
[382] - Quote
Lipbite wrote:If thread wasn't full of empty messages such as yours it could be much more readable and informative. But even with hidden messages (hint: triangle near avatar pix open options menu to hide messages from certain shiptoasters forever) thread is barely readable. Please, stop posting nonsense - just 26 days left till Dec 4 which is barely enough to train damn Battlecruisers V (not to mention Destroyers and racial skills frigate / cruisers skills I've planned for next year).
fiiiiiiine. you were reading earlier though, but i think maybe your question was answered before your first post a few pages ago. And I just like to pretend to be mean.
No, these changes aren't coming anywhere near to the winter expansion. You have plenty of time. There is no date.
My plan for reading threads quickly is to just scroll quickly and only read the posts for people i have set to positive standings or CCP employees. Everyone else is just speculating, asking questions, or repeating answers that have already been given. You can go through pages almost as fast as your computer can load them. I can kill you with my brain too. It's genetic. |
SevenBitBrian
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 23:57:00 -
[383] - Quote
I am really excited to see what you come up with for the Brutix. I've always felt it should be a front line ship, the type that makes you go "oh ****!" when it gets close.
My suggestion would be to give it basic blaster bonuses, nothing to high but enough to put out average DPS, but give it a really really good Tank and Armor Tank bonuses. So basically you have to deal with this thing at a range, if you let it get close to you you are going to get that "oh ****" moment because this thing is going to be able to take a serious beating, more than you can most likely, and will be hammering you with blasters all the while.
So basically make it a close range meat shield, if you let it get close it's going to soak up the dmg, but you have to take it out unless you can soak up it's dmg. It gives it a really nice role imo, if your tacklers can pin down a target and you can get your Brutix close then your opponent has 2 options; 1: sink the dmg into the Brutix to get it off so it can't apply it's constant dps pressure on the target, or 2: ignore the Brtuix, decide its not worth trying to pop that tank, and try to out dps the more dangerous targets leaving that Brutix all by it's lonesome.
So your getting risk and reward either way, it's just a matter of choice. I think this would give the Brutix a real role, a real place in fleets, a real identity or presence if you will. http://flydangerouseve.blogspot.com/ |
Random Womble
Emo Rangers Electric Monkey Overlords
13
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 23:59:00 -
[384] - Quote
Typhoon
I said a while ago i would personally like to see the projectile bonus replaced with a Target painter bonus, not useful on most ships but would benefit a torp boat. Additionally to facilitate this i would drop a high to a mid as with 5 launcher slots 2 versatility slots should be sufficient and 5 mids are needed to make a painter viable. 5 launchers is sufficient but not overpowered provided the phoon keeps its current drone bay + bandwith and also provides a diffrent flavour to the raven (mobile, armor tanked, reduced range, reduced base missile DPS, additional drone DPS &/or versatility)
Command Ships:
First seems odd that all 4 races get skirmish WF for T3s
Second regarding bonuses being given remotely:
At the moment there is already a bit of an issue, as a skirmish WF link user when in a gang the ships that most benefit from me are quick an agile (mainly inties) now if we are chasing a target the inties will need the bonus the instant they land to help survivability and help tackle so even as it is i cannot enter warp to join them without hurting their and my effectiveness so i am actually encouraged not to go to the fight on that basis alone. While i have not PvPed for a while my past losses and kills show i put Command ships in the thick of it and i would rather that was the way forward.
With that in mind i have 2 linked suggestions which i think actually benefit command ships but at the same time encourage them to come on the field.
1. Have a decay timer for bonuses (say 5 minutes) - providing that you have been on grid with a bonus provider within the time limit and their gang link is on you receive their bonus (in some ways its a bit like a positive combat flag). During this period you continue to recieve the bonus even if you or the bonus giver leave the grid. If you both remain on grid the timer effectively resets each cycle of the WF Link modules. Prefereably you should even be able to change system and keep the bonus but perhaps halve the time left on the timer.
2. Allow WF links to be turned on while in warp so that ships warping into combat are not punished (yes this applies to warping out as well but if you can warp in and out of grid repeatedly in a command ship without getting tackled you will be pretty busy)
There are a few other issues such as if a WF Link is switched off then back on again when you are on different grids do you get to regain the bonus? (personally i say yes again)
Oh and i would make mindlinks more common the prices of those are getting a bit silly. |
Sheynan
Lighting the blight
112
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 00:12:00 -
[385] - Quote
NOT THE PHOON :/
YOU CAN BUFF MY MIDSLOTS, AND MY LOWSLOTS AND MY GRID BUT YOU WILL NEVER GET MY SWEET AUTOCANNONS FOR IT |
Intex Encapor
3
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 00:18:00 -
[386] - Quote
sad to see how they want to reduce the most versatile bs to some khanid wannabe.
sure it requires many skills to max out, but its perfectly fine on each subset of skills too :/
eve really needs more of those ships, not less. |
Le Thanh Ton
Kick B0rt Test Alliance Please Ignore
13
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 00:21:00 -
[387] - Quote
Please the Typhoon alone - the whole point of the ship is versatility, don't make it just another Raven/missile boat.
Sure you need a lot of skills to fly it properly, but that makes it a great goal ship for middle-age players (before they step into capitals).
Other changes look interesting enough, but leave the Typhoon (you're leaving the Scorpion as that works, just make a new category for versatile ships and put the phoon in by itself like you did with the Scorpion) |
Berendas
Clandestine Vector THE SPACE P0LICE
320
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 00:30:00 -
[388] - Quote
Intex Encapor wrote:sad to see how they want to reduce the most versatile bs to some khanid wannabe.
sure it requires many skills to max out, but its perfectly fine on each subset of skills too :/
eve really needs more of those ships, not less.
QFT
I would encourage everyone else who wants to keep the Phoon as is to voice your discontent with the changes as early as possible so CCP can see how much we love the old boat. |
ITTigerClawIK
Galactic Rangers Intrepid Crossing
147
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 00:32:00 -
[389] - Quote
i REALLY wanted the prophecy to turn into a T1 HAM BC with a brick tank :-P...actually, how about a drone boat with HAM/Rapid light launchers ... that could be pretty cool.
also i thought the brutix was fine , just needs a tad extra fitting space. |
NightmareX
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
82
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 00:36:00 -
[390] - Quote
NightmareX wrote:I have a question about the Megathron.
Since it was said that the Megathron should be more mobile / agile. Will the Vindicator then get the aditional boost in agility (like it have now over the current Megathron) over the new Megathron stats then?
Will the Vindicator be even more agile then?
Or will this only affect the normal battleships? Quoting myself so i can get an answer on this. My current EVE videos.
Rebirth 4: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=131123
Bringers of Hatred: http://tinyurl.com/BOHINFOD |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 34 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |