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) |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
95
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:10:00 -
[151] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Marlona Sky wrote:CCP Fozzie, Is there any plans to completely change information links to something more useful? Currently shield, armor and speed links help every ship. 99% of the time players will choose one of those three over information bonuses every day of the week and twice on Sunday. The current fleet hierarchy only sees real use of bonuses in the fleet and wing command spots. Which is tank and skirmish. Would changing the info bonuses to be bonuses to drones, which 90% of all ships in the game have, be an option? Also I am one of the 7 with max information bonuses on T3 and command ships.  I trained max information warfare skills specifically for one Info Claymore fit for the AT. And then joined CCP before ever actually flying that ship on TQ. 
Lol its a link that might sit well with amarr not needing the skirmish one being a bunch of bricks and all perhaps the link could have synergy with TD's and neuts perhaps but yes maybe some drone bonuses would make it interesting or make a separate drone link altogether |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
95
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:11:00 -
[152] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:Any thoughts on adding another level in the hierarchy so a fleet can hold 1,281. Granted I am not a fan of massive scale combat, but the game needs it. All wars are fought on a coalition level and the players have outgrown the current max numbers allowed in a fleet. This would also open up another level of bonuses where information (or a new version of it) could see use in large scale combat. Regulating them to a squad commander spot is impractical when you are only helping out ten people total. You are just better off bringing a combat ship.
Nah i was thinking the other day that the wing command skill should be scaled back infact to maybe 1 squad a level instead of 5 |

Dracko Malus
Lightbringer's Sanctuary RAZOR Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:12:00 -
[153] - Quote
Finde learth wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: In that case you would get both racial battlecruiser skills to V.
why not four racial battlecruiser skills to V after patch if i have bc V? Because you couldn't fly those two BC's before and they would have to grant you both cruisers to 3.. and seeing as cruisers require Frigate 5, that too. Tess La'Coil's loveslave. |

Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
1804
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:13:00 -
[154] - Quote
It would make more sense for Gallente and Amarr to have the information drone bonuses then, due to them having the drone boats.
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |

Schmata Bastanold
Black Rebel Rifter Club The Devil's Tattoo
134
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:16:00 -
[155] - Quote
Heh, looks like a lot of fun awaits us in 2013.
And those TEARZ, already flowing... :) I am not my skills but... http://eveboard.com/pilot/Schmata_Bastanold |

Vereesa
Gallivanting Travel Company Rebel Alliance of New Eden
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:18:00 -
[156] - Quote
Changing skill requirements for capital ships from Racial Battleships 5 to 4, but introducing or increasing other skills to keep the same overall training time requirements
I think this is a bad idea. Low end capital ships at the moment have very niche roles for a pretty big ISK outlay so making people still have to train forever to get into one after having a bigger grind to get to battleships strikes me as a little unfair. 30 days is a moot point if you're going for supercapitals anyway because all the other skills will take a year or more to train and the ISK investment is colossal. It wouldn't have been so much of a problem pre supercarrier because capital ships were deployed a lot more but now it just seems like another nail in the coffin. It doesn't affect supercapital pilots or supercapital wannabes because they're going to have to invest in a year or more of other skills after they can sit in a capital ship anyway a 30 days difference isn't a huge deal if that's what they really want to do.
Especially when 16 supercarriers with a small support fleet can do the job of about seventy odd capital ships in olden times.
It won't affect me so much anyway because I am a supercarrier pilot, I just feel bad for the new people who see capital ships and think they're awesome on their first day. |

Milton Middleson
Rifterlings Damu'Khonde
147
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:18:00 -
[157] - Quote
I have a question about battlecruisers related their concept/role (especially non-Tier 3 battlecruisers):
What does CCP expect them to do? Frigates and cruisers seem to have a pretty clearly defined conceptual spaces: light roaming/support and heavy roaming/support, respectively. More to the point, frigates and cruiser are pretty clearly distinct in terms of how you use them. Are battlecruiser supposed to be like super-destroyers: capable of dumping all over cruisers but of limited utility vs anything else? Are they supposed to be fleet-capable cruisers that don't immediately wilt under the firepower of a modest fleet engagement? It still seems like tier 1 and 2 battlecruisers are going to be over-sized cruisers where you take a moderate hit to mobility in exchange for a lot more firepower and tank. |

half san
Temnava Legion No Holes Barred
5
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:21:00 -
[158] - Quote
T3 ships needs to have 5% boost bonuses cos they are mainly used as fleet boosters for defending systems, and off course they give you a loot of defence power over attackers, that is normal in every fight situation. Cos you need twice as much people to atack defenders, so that you have chance to defet them. This is normal situation in any war/battle fight in history.
What gives you advantages in fight is your own tactics.
And yes T3 ship are more expensive to make, and they should me more versible for fleet boosting and command ship should be used for field/fight boosting, cos they are on field.
You should make some change about fleet/field boosting, and bring something new in that.
|

Dracko Malus
Lightbringer's Sanctuary RAZOR Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:21:00 -
[159] - Quote
Vereesa wrote:Changing skill requirements for capital ships from Racial Battleships 5 to 4, but introducing or increasing other skills to keep the same overall training time requirements
I think this is a bad idea. Low end capital ships at the moment have very niche roles for a pretty big ISK outlay so making people still have to train forever to get into one after having a bigger grind to get to battleships strikes me as a little unfair. 30 days is a moot point if you're going for supercapitals anyway because all the other skills will take a year or more to train and the ISK investment is colossal. It wouldn't have been so much of a problem pre supercarrier because capital ships were deployed a lot more but now it just seems like another nail in the coffin. It doesn't affect supercapital pilots or supercapital wannabes because they're going to have to invest in a year or more of other skills after they can sit in a capital ship anyway a 30 days difference isn't a huge deal if that's what they really want to do.
Especially when 16 supercarriers with a small support fleet can do the job of about seventy odd capital ships in olden times.
It won't affect me so much anyway because I am a supercarrier pilot, I just feel bad for the new people who see capital ships and think they're awesome on their first day.
But how would you feel if this increased skill would be shared across the capitals? Like JDO5 and JDC4? Like the BlackOps ships have? Tess La'Coil's loveslave. |

Jennifer A
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:21:00 -
[160] - Quote
Would be cool if you fixed the HORRIBLE drone UI before you made half of the ships DRONEboats. |
|

jonnykefka
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
162
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:24:00 -
[161] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Harvey James wrote: An AOE range would be the way too go and make all CS brawlers
However, let's throw a brainstorming concept out here just for fun: What if gang links worked a lot like warp disruption spheres? 
I like that general idea, with one key detail: Inverse relationship of radius and power.
I don't mean that you can necessarily select to boost over a smaller radius to give bigger bonuses (though that might also be interesting, with scripts for example), but generally speaking, if you made it like bubbles but the bubble had a 250km radius, then the rebalanced bonus strength would be fine (as much as it is fine for off-grid boosting). If the bubble had a much smaller radius, say on par with warp disruption bubbles, then the bonuses should be increased, because it introduces a lot more vulnerability to the boosting ship and the fleet as a whole. It would require much more coordination to stay within the bonused sphere, and in short-range fleets it would bring the boosting ship much closer to the enemy neuts/webs/painhurtydeath.
Actually, the idea of being able to script links so that they apply over a much smaller radius but give greater bonuses is fairly appealing, and would probably introduce some really interesting emergent tactics at the level of ship positioning rather than fits/fleet comps.
Also, if you didn't see what I said about tech 3s earlier (https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2145850#post2145850) I would really appreciate some insight into how this fits into the idea of making tech 3s more versatile as opposed to more specialized tech 2 ships. |

DenForX
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
28
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:26:00 -
[162] - Quote
Ok, so if you are going to kill generic skills and have racial specific ship skills for each ship class, ok. Are you going to reduce the multiplier on them since each skill will be less individually useful? Doesn't need to be a lot mind you but really, since you are taking away substantially from the skill's usefulness, you should consider reducing it's training requirement slightly.
Also:
Quote:Changing skill requirements for capital ships from Racial Battleships 5 to 4, but introducing or increasing other skills to keep the same overall training time requirements
What the heck is the point with this? Add some other inane skill to what is already a long long slog. Not only do you have a new class of weapons to train, ship training, modules to train now let's tease with 'You won't need BS to 5 anymore but hey, you still won't save any time cause we are going to add something different.' That just seems puerile, stop it. |

Dracko Malus
Lightbringer's Sanctuary RAZOR Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:26:00 -
[163] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:However, let's throw a brainstorming concept out here just for fun: What if gang links worked a lot like warp disruption spheres? 
I like the idea, but feel a bit unsure how this would affect small ships burning out of bonus range and what happens to their HP like used to happen when jumping with Shields ships having the HP drop down basically negating the bonus just after a jump. Tess La'Coil's loveslave. |

Bantara
Corp 54 Curatores Veritatis Alliance
19
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:27:00 -
[164] - Quote
ReK42 wrote:It's still a nerf to the boost itself {...} Problem with gamers on the internet--"nerf" has become synonymous with "reduction".
|

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
96
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:30:00 -
[165] - Quote
On T3 ships i really hope they are limited to T1 resists but with navy like tank/fittings and certainly no resis bonus on subs and maybe increased sig radius also as these are many of the reasons T3's have ludicrous tank.
This way they could say do the job of 2 recon/CS/logi/e-war jobs but with weaker bonus and a slightly better tank than the e-war cruisers would have. I would definitely like to see them as support ships only rather than combat ships as they are mainly used for now but ofc they would need to be cheaper as a result to make them viable. |

Daneel Trevize
Give my 11percent back
246
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:32:00 -
[166] - Quote
Bantara wrote:ReK42 wrote:It's still a nerf to the boost itself {...} Problem with gamers on the internet--"nerf" has become synonymous with "reduction". Er because it means that? MAybe you're confused with a reduction being a bad thing for balance, or in some way implying instantly bringing something below average or competitive, rather than just down from too high a place? |

Romvex
126
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:32:00 -
[167] - Quote
can't wait for the command ship rebalance. finally a Damnation can be flown into combat! Post with your main |

War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1433
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:33:00 -
[168] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:However, let's throw a brainstorming concept out here just for fun: What if gang links worked a lot like warp disruption spheres? 
I like this idea. Offgrid boosting is hokey, even for miners.
I like where the whole devblog was going.
I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all. |

Lors Dornick
Kallisti Industries Solar Assault Fleet
288
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:33:00 -
[169] - Quote
Jennifer A wrote:Would be cool if you fixed the HORRIBLE drone UI before you made half of the ships DRONEboats. You're sure that you want the game designers monitoring this thread getting involved in a long outstanding UI issue?
There are better targets for that (5 y celebrating Karkur, Puncturis and "don't touch that button" Tuxford seems likely) and they appear to be well aware of it.
Let's focus our balancing wrath on Ytterbium and his game designer minions ;)
|

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
96
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:35:00 -
[170] - Quote
Lors Dornick wrote:Jennifer A wrote:Would be cool if you fixed the HORRIBLE drone UI before you made half of the ships DRONEboats. You're sure that you want the game designers monitoring this thread getting involved in a long outstanding UI issue? There are better targets for that (5 y celebrating Karkur, Puncturis and "don't touch that button" Tuxford seems likely) and they appear to be well aware of it. Let's focus our balancing wrath on Ytterbium and his game designer minions ;)
designer minions lol |
|

Romvex
126
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:37:00 -
[171] - Quote
War Kitten wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:However, let's throw a brainstorming concept out here just for fun: What if gang links worked a lot like warp disruption spheres?  I like this idea. Offgrid boosting is hokey, even for miners. I like where the whole devblog was going. i endorse this product and/or service Post with your main |

Bantara
Corp 54 Curatores Veritatis Alliance
19
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:37:00 -
[172] - Quote
Daneel Trevize wrote:Bantara wrote:ReK42 wrote:It's still a nerf to the boost itself {...} Problem with gamers on the internet--"nerf" has become synonymous with "reduction". Er because it means that? Maybe you're confused with a reduction being a bad/negative thing for balance, or in some way implying nerfing involves instantly bringing something below average or competitive, rather than just down from too high a place? No, it didn't. Originally, "nerf" came from Neft bats and their other toys, referring to a reduction so severe as to make something useless. I am not confused, especially since I don't feel reductions are a bad thing for balance--you are confusing me for the other guy. |

Vereesa
Gallivanting Travel Company Rebel Alliance of New Eden
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:37:00 -
[173] - Quote
Dracko Malus wrote:
But how would you feel if this increased skill would be shared across the capitals? Like JDO5 and JDC4? Like the BlackOps ships have?
I wouldn't mind, Jump drive operation would be a good one for it since you need it to 5 before you can train the other useful skills. It would also save the headache of zero skill carrier pilots trying to hop on a logistics chain .
Jump callibration to 4 before you could sit in the ship is a bit harsh though, although it makes sense. |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
96
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:42:00 -
[174] - Quote
also on the topic of fleet boosts what are the plans on them as neutral boosts in say a high sec war? |

DenForX
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
28
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:42:00 -
[175] - Quote
Daneel Trevize wrote:Bantara wrote:ReK42 wrote:It's still a nerf to the boost itself {...} Problem with gamers on the internet--"nerf" has become synonymous with "reduction". Er because it means that? Maybe you're confused with a reduction being a bad/negative thing for balance, or in some way implying nerfing involves instantly bringing something below average or competitive, rather than just down from too high a place?
The history of gaming teaches us that the bolded part is exactly what happens in the large majority of games, online or not. |

Dracko Malus
Lightbringer's Sanctuary RAZOR Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:42:00 -
[176] - Quote
Vereesa wrote:Dracko Malus wrote:
But how would you feel if this increased skill would be shared across the capitals? Like JDO5 and JDC4? Like the BlackOps ships have?
I wouldn't mind, Jump drive operation would be a good one for it since you need it to 5 before you can train the other useful skills. It would also save the headache of zero skill carrier pilots trying to hop on a logistics chain . Jump calibration to 4 before you could sit in the ship is a bit harsh though, although it makes sense. Well, jump Cal 4 is only 6 days approximately of training time. Add the 20 days for jump drive operation and you're pretty much in the direction of what BattleShip 5 would have taken you to train. And it makes you able to pilot the ship a lot better as you can actually get somewhere. (+4 implants and a general remap considered in training time.) Tess La'Coil's loveslave. |
|

CCP Soundwave
C C P C C P Alliance
2112

|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:43:00 -
[177] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Lors Dornick wrote:Jennifer A wrote:Would be cool if you fixed the HORRIBLE drone UI before you made half of the ships DRONEboats. You're sure that you want the game designers monitoring this thread getting involved in a long outstanding UI issue? There are better targets for that (5 y celebrating Karkur, Puncturis and "don't touch that button" Tuxford seems likely) and they appear to be well aware of it. Let's focus our balancing wrath on Ytterbium and his game designer minions ;) designer minions lol
Technically they're my minions  |
|

Forlorn Wongraven
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
20
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:44:00 -
[178] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:You mentioned technical difficulties, is this really so hard to program?
The obvious problem is the constant appearance of broken grids and/ or gridfu. Ugleb > and TDR won't log in so long as their core members are demotivated for whichever reason is in flavour this week |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
97
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:45:00 -
[179] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:Harvey James wrote:Lors Dornick wrote:Jennifer A wrote:Would be cool if you fixed the HORRIBLE drone UI before you made half of the ships DRONEboats. You're sure that you want the game designers monitoring this thread getting involved in a long outstanding UI issue? There are better targets for that (5 y celebrating Karkur, Puncturis and "don't touch that button" Tuxford seems likely) and they appear to be well aware of it. Let's focus our balancing wrath on Ytterbium and his game designer minions ;) designer minions lol Technically they're my minions 
I bow to the minion lord  |

Ranamar
Cerulean Eagles Li3 Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:45:00 -
[180] - Quote
Regarding the Ferox, if we're trying to keep it advantaged as a sniper, I feel like there's really only one way to think about it. It's not a large Moa, it's a smaller, faster Rokh. The tank bonus is needed for durability, I'd expect, and giving it range/damage will make it just a smaller-gunned version of the Naga, whose problems other people have covered here. (I agree with the people saying that "Large Moa" will make one or the other insufficiently good. The same goes for the Naga comparison.)
I'd really like to see a properly snipey Ferox, now that I might actually have T2 medium rails soon, but it needs to be able to hold up under fire to compete with things like the Drake, even if that's an extreme example which may be getting a tanking nerf to go with its damage nerf. |
|
|
|
|
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 |