Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 [40] 50 .. 53 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 45 post(s) |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
335
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 19:24:00 -
[1171] - Quote
The problem is that even if we have AAR and ASB, normal active tanking doesn't provide you half the lifespan of buffer fits. Simply put I still believe all armor reppers and shield boosters should give ~20% more hitpoints repaired pr minute than currently. Obviously balanced with a look into wether cap use should be changed with it...
I would at the same time look into pirate implants and nerf them to about 50% of what they give today. 50+ % armor buffer or shield boosting is tipping the game balance and I think Snakes, Slaves and Crystals would still be hugely attractive doing half what they do now. You know in todays game all armor supers/titans HAVE to use slaves and crystals are actually the only time active shield boosting gets viable in pvp when combined with faction gear...
Pinky |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War Out of Sight.
967
|
Posted - 2013.02.04 00:57:00 -
[1172] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:The problem is that even if we have AAR and ASB, normal active tanking doesn't provide you half the lifespan of buffer fits. Simply put I still believe all armor reppers and shield boosters should give ~20% more hitpoints repaired pr minute than currently. Obviously balanced with a look into wether cap use should be changed with it...
I would at the same time look into pirate implants and nerf them to about 50% of what they give today. 50+ % armor buffer or shield boosting is tipping the game balance and I think Snakes, Slaves and Crystals would still be hugely attractive doing half what they do now. You know in todays game all armor supers/titans HAVE to use slaves and crystals are actually the only time active shield boosting gets viable in pvp when combined with faction gear...
Pinky Why would anyone bother with a ~13% snake set when a single implant in the 6th slot (currently taken by Omega) can provide 8%? Add CAs and a cheap-ass combination of 3 implants already outperforms a full pirate set. lol?
Also, Crystals don't work on capitals. If anything, they can give the same treatment to the rest of sets, if that is such of a big issue.
Seems you've missed the key failure of ASBs - they are such a bad game concept precisely cause they lack any high-end variations and everyone is forced to use the same expendable solution even when fitting a faction ship, which is sheer moronity. 14 |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
335
|
Posted - 2013.02.04 02:30:00 -
[1173] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:Why would anyone bother with a ~13% snake set when a single implant in the 6th slot (currently taken by Omega) can provide 8%? Add CAs and a cheap-ass combination of 3 implants already outperforms a full pirate set. lol?
Also, Crystals don't work on capitals. If anything, they can give the same treatment to the rest of sets, if that is such of a big issue.
Seems you've missed the key failure of ASBs - they are such a bad game concept precisely cause they lack any high-end variations and everyone is forced to use the same expendable solution even when fitting a faction ship, which is sheer moronity.
It's a long time since I looked at snake numbers - but 13% for a LG set and 25% for HG set seems fine... Obvisouly you cannot balance something without having to do minor adjustments to other things. We had this discussion before but I still think it's a shame to require faction mods, implant sets and pills to be pvp competitive and only the most elitist can afford to pvp with those outside empire and lowsec. And elitist people should not be allowed to pay for 50% more armor or shield boost where most players can't. All other modules are built up about giving MINOR advantages for a big cost... Pirate implants aren't just giving you a minor advantage. Nothing should be balanced just because it cost a lot.
Also I never said crystals work at capitals - I know they don't...
And the Key failure for ASB is the balance. 1 minute reload is more than most fights take from the beginning. Thats because they balanced them so dual ASB setups wouldn't be too powerfull - however suddenly doing a single ASB setup as originally intended isn't competitive with buffer tanks and you might as well buffer tank. As a result the potential buff to active shield tanking from no longer being dependant on a cap booster is useless. I don't get why they didn't just made it a single module pr ship and adjusted the amount of cap boosters.
Besides I am sure when ASB's are deemed balanced more meta and faction variants...
ASB and AAR are still the most horrible attempta to fix active tanking though. They would be great alternative on top of a generic boost, however as single shot solutions the game play around active tanking is still in a sorry state.
|
Tsukinosuke
Id Est
6
|
Posted - 2013.02.04 11:20:00 -
[1174] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: Armor Rigs
UPDATE: Overheating Rig is pulled while I re-evaluate the method used to apply the bonus.
GÇóChange the penalty on all active armor rigs (Aux Nano Pump, Nanobot Accelerator, and the new Nanobot Overcharger) to increase the powergrid use of local armor reps by 10% instead of reducing ship velocity. Note this is increasing the PG use of the reps by 10% (or 5% at Armor Rigging V) not decreasing the total PG of the ship.
Plates
GÇóAdd a new skill to the game called Armor Upgrades. This skill reduces the mass penalty of all armor plates by 5% per level. (Int/Mem, rank 3, requires Mechanics 3) This skill affects all plates (including 1600mm) and is separate from the stat change listed below. GÇóReduce the base mass penalty on all 800mm, 200mm and 50mm plates by 20%
Armor Reps:New:
GÇóReduce the Powergrid requirements of all Medium Armor Repair units by 20% GÇóReduce the Powergrid requirements of all Large Armor Repair units by 10%
Ancillary Armor Repairer
GÇóNot the same mechanic as the ASB, please read to the end. GÇóAlways uses the same cap as a normal (T1/T2/Named) Armor Repper GÇóWhen not loaded with Nanite Repair Paste, has 3/4 the rep amount as a T1 Armor Repairer GÇóWhen loaded with Nanite Repair Paste triples rep amount (so reps 2.25x a T1 repairer when loaded) GÇóSame cycle time and fittings as T1 reps GÇóSmalls use 1 paste per cycle, mediums 5, larges 10. Can hold 8 cycles worth of paste at a time.
good and logical changes, i cant believe that i would say "good" for work of team five0.. your "improved" crimewatch2, blah... |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
532
|
Posted - 2013.02.04 12:36:00 -
[1175] - Quote
Takeshi Yamato wrote:In addition to my previous post, another "obvious" alternative is to disallow oversizing of ASBs.
Well I could almost agree with you if it wasn't for the simple fact, shield tanking alternative accumulates the biggest number of possible modules being able to be fitted despite being oversize modules, for whatever reason this makes those ships work quite decently so I tend to say let it be and don't nerf what does not need nerfs (welp the invuln passive thing it's another thread)
The other possible alternative is armor tanking with a very known robust fleet/gang concept/doctrines, those have very strong tanks, enough mobility and dps amount/application, but we're only talking here about armor buffer tank which is the only one able to work quite properly because pulse+scorch and ships with +armor resist per lvl (majority in fleet/gang)
Once you start tackling active armor rep, which seems to be Gallente racial trait more than having drones as 1rst weapon system some idiots like to think, and here we go with all those cumulative drawbacks, lack of anything interesting modules wise consistent with racial philosophy, ships stats hilariously opposed to either racial trait (active armor tanking but the ship has more hull than armor) either racial philosophy (shortest range weapon system on the second slowest fitted hull with an active tanking based on "sustainability" when it needs "burst")
Lazy choices are lazy, accumulation of those overtime lead to this precise point: unless gimmick/fake/lol module, new skills because lol again, there's no way for this active tanking to become anything else than it was already, just different and the core problem still not solved.
Gò¡Gê¬Gò«n+ên+¦n++n+¦n+ëGò¡Gê¬Gò«-á don't haten++ |
Vulfen
Snuff Box
7
|
Posted - 2013.02.04 14:02:00 -
[1176] - Quote
@ CCP Fozzie
Would it be a good bonus for the AARs could have the ability that when loaded with nanite paste when you overheat them they use twice the paste for the rep but it does not suffer heat damage? After all nanite paste is used for repairs.
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
3849
|
Posted - 2013.02.04 14:41:00 -
[1177] - Quote
A lot of questions have been coming in concerning alternate modes for the AAR such as being able to toggle the more powerful rep. That's not something we can do for 1.1 and we'd have to take time to consider it more fully but I won't rule out the idea.
One change we have decided to make is slightly decreasing the Paste consumption of the medium and large AARs. We'll have the mediums eat 4 per cycle and the larges eat 8. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
272
|
Posted - 2013.02.04 14:49:00 -
[1178] - Quote
Will repair paste be cheaper to produce? Not looking forward to the pricing when all this hits the fan. We are recruiting talented pilots for innovative small gang PvP
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=175061
http://www.thedeadrabbitsociety.com |
Mund Richard
304
|
Posted - 2013.02.04 15:20:00 -
[1179] - Quote
Beaver Retriever wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:Did anyone else notice that the AAR description on Sisi says Quote: Prototype Inferno module. The same as all the other new modules since Inferno then. Also, Fozzie, any chance for meta and T2 Reactive Armor Hardeners in 1.1? Would be interesting to see the T2
Based on it's stats, it could be a bigger buff to armor tanking than this whole AAR thing and the plate skill together.
Or is that why it won't happen. Wish there was a Rogue Drone Faction Battleship... Infested Domi! Including all the wiggly bits to tend to your swarm, droneboat role bonus, and ofc with turrets. |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
517
|
Posted - 2013.02.04 15:22:00 -
[1180] - Quote
Moonaura wrote:Will repair paste be cheaper to produce? Not looking forward to the pricing when all this hits the fan. How can you (and others) still be worried about price?
BS numbers: Lets say paste triples in price after the AAR is released, the LAAR will consume 64 units before going dry with a total price of <4M (20k x 3 x 64) which is less than a single gun, equal to roughly 2000 units of faction ammo .. total value of the ship will probably be somewhere in the 250-300M bracket
Now consider that the AAR allows you to win fights that would otherwise be lost .. even with insurance, the loss of mods, spare ammo and hull far exceeds any deficit incurred by the cost of the paste. Hell, if it allows you to win just 10% (random %, probably far lower) more than usual you are already making loads of money on the investment.
In short: Think of the cost of paste as an opt-in to the insurance, ABS brakes to the airbag and seatbelt .. it may not prevent calamity but significantly reduces the risk and in the even of "fail" minimizes the economic damage.
Even shorter: As long as CCP (read: Fozzie) keeps an eye on market price and is prepared to order tweaks to PI formulas if the need arises it is literally a non-issue. |
|
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
272
|
Posted - 2013.02.04 15:33:00 -
[1181] - Quote
Your argument sounds great when applied to Battleships.
Please consider that not every ship is a battleship lol.
A T1 Cruiser fit, will cost around 20-30m ISK. You're talking about an increase in costs of 10-20% total. Added up, thats quite a lot of ISK being spent.
Personally though I think this is all part of the plan for CCP to sell more Plex's. ;) So far they have done nothing to stop the inflation issues the game is having or bringing in mechanics to counter the unfairness of the cartel that just makes the rich richer.
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xex9rz_gordon-gekko-greed-is-good-full-spe_shortfilms#.UQ_UlFrMfoo
We are recruiting talented pilots for innovative small gang PvP
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=175061
http://www.thedeadrabbitsociety.com |
Callic Veratar
Power of the Phoenix
322
|
Posted - 2013.02.04 16:11:00 -
[1182] - Quote
I just did a quick look at some Vargur fits on battleclinic. Most of them have about 10-15 CPU left over after a dual XLASB fit. A sufficient nerf to the ASB may be to increase the fitting requirements to be on par with the T2 boosters rather than the T1.
30 more CPU and 50 more PG isn't much for a battleship, but it would likely be crippling to a cruiser. DirectX 11, it's not rocket appliance! |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
518
|
Posted - 2013.02.04 16:24:00 -
[1183] - Quote
Moonaura wrote:Your argument sounds great when applied to Battleships... Goes for all ships, cruisers load will cost <2M and carry maybe 2 reloads .. they already carry similar value in faction/T2 ammo and their fittings make up the bulk of initial cost ..
Again, if the cost of the 2-3 paste loads lets you win just one or two fights more out of 10-20 you are already in the black.
Cost efficiency of investing in paste goes through the roof when you hit frigate/dessie level due to hulls being practically free compared to fits and AAR output being almost equal to the dps levels involved.
It makes little difference which hull size you focus on, the investment in paste will be more than covered if said investment lets you have just one mail rather than becoming one.
PS: Note that I went with the 'outside' event of paste tripling in price, personally doubt it will more than double (over time, not counting initial speculation buys) if that so numbers will likely be even more in favour of my argument.
|
Sinzor Aumer
Atlas Research Group Aerodyne Collective
93
|
Posted - 2013.02.04 16:49:00 -
[1184] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:A lot of questions have been coming in concerning alternate modes for the AAR such as being able to toggle the more powerful rep. That's not something we can do for 1.1 and we'd have to take time to consider it more fully but I won't rule out the idea. Any chance that we will see regular reps being loaded with nano-paste, in the future? |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
3850
|
Posted - 2013.02.04 16:56:00 -
[1185] - Quote
Sinzor Aumer wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:A lot of questions have been coming in concerning alternate modes for the AAR such as being able to toggle the more powerful rep. That's not something we can do for 1.1 and we'd have to take time to consider it more fully but I won't rule out the idea. Any chance that we will see regular reps being loaded with nano-paste, in the future?
Anything is possible. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
464
|
Posted - 2013.02.04 20:48:00 -
[1186] - Quote
How come I can't fit more than one AAR? I can fit multiple oversized ASB modules that use zero capacitor, but not multiple armor reppers? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Karl Hobb
Stellar Ore Refinery and Crematorium
943
|
Posted - 2013.02.04 21:15:00 -
[1187] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:How come I can't fit more than one AAR? I can fit multiple oversized ASB modules that use zero capacitor, but not multiple armor reppers? Apparently the ASB is so OP that CCP doesn't want to make the same mistake twice. Also because people who armor-tank can't have nice things. If you're not already part of a bloc, this is the best guy for CSM8. |
Freighdee Katt
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
129
|
Posted - 2013.02.04 22:22:00 -
[1188] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:How come I can't fit more than one AAR? I can fit multiple oversized ASB modules that use zero capacitor, but not multiple armor reppers? They learned their lesson about making an overpowerd, neut-immune, oversizeable, multiple-fittable rep module with the ASB. So to fix the mistake they made with the new OP shield tanking module, they decided to pre-nerf the new armor tanking module.
See? All better now. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
3639
|
Posted - 2013.02.04 22:25:00 -
[1189] - Quote
Yeah, let's not fix the broken module... let's just make sure any similar module is nerfed into obsolescence before it's introduced. Malcanis for CSM 8 Phrases like "you can't nerf / buff X EVE is a Sandbox" have the same amount of meaning as "If this is a sack of potatoes then you can not carrot." - Alara IonStorm |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
475
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 05:17:00 -
[1190] - Quote
Freighdee Katt wrote: They learned their lesson about making an overpowerd, neut-immune, oversizeable, multiple-fittable rep module with the ASB. So to fix the mistake they made with the new OP shield tanking module, they decided to pre-nerf the new armor tanking module.
See? All better now.
so why didn't they nerf the asb..
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Hakan MacTrew
Caledonian Light Industries
289
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 05:43:00 -
[1191] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Freighdee Katt wrote: They learned their lesson about making an overpowerd, neut-immune, oversizeable, multiple-fittable rep module with the ASB. So to fix the mistake they made with the new OP shield tanking module, they decided to pre-nerf the new armor tanking module.
See? All better now.
so why didn't they nerf the asb.. They might, but then again they might not. Imagine the ranting and the tears in the forum's if they announced they were! MODULAR DRONES
MORE ORE SHIPS |
Luc Chastot
Zero Excavations You Failed the Mumble Test
197
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 06:46:00 -
[1192] - Quote
ASBs should take like 5 minutes to reload. Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot. |
Meditril
T.R.I.A.D
236
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 10:51:00 -
[1193] - Quote
I propose you guys calm down a bit.
ASB has been nerved a lot with the last patch. Pre-patch in FW nearly every shield frigate was fitted with an ASB. Now I rarely see people use ASB. So at least within the context of FW the ASB is not that much overpowered any more.
With regards to the AAR, I think the general approach is right. Even though I think that it is too much pre-nerved. Either the rep factor should be higher, current rep factor of 2.25x a T1 repairer when loaded which equals 1.66 of a T2 repairer, which is not much especially if taking into account that a small repairer just runs for 8 x 4.5s = 36s (assuming full skills).
Since the small reppers have a repair cycle which is half of the medium and large ones I think they should be able to hold twice the amount of paste, which means for 16 cycles. Alternatively the small repairers should have a rep factor which is twice that high as it currently is, so that they are intended to be used in burst mode. |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
519
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 13:04:00 -
[1194] - Quote
Meditril wrote:...Since the small reppers have a repair cycle which is half of the medium and large ones I think they should be able to hold twice the amount of paste, which means for 16 cycles. Alternatively the small repairers should have a rep factor which is twice that high as it currently is, so that they are intended to be used in burst mode. SAAR is the least of the problems as everything is pretty well balanced on the frig/dessie level to begin with, ie. the dps/ehp ratios are spot on. Thirty seconds is in the upper range of the average frig/dessie fight duration so again, spot on. Any longer and you are going from buffing armour tanking to buffing a specific hull exclusively, namely the Incursus (Punisher does not have cap or slots to get cap for much longer than 30s). Same applies if you double the rep amount and although that would include the Punisher it would still be be a big FU to all other frigs/dessies.
Can be argued that MAAR/LAAR should have room for more than 8 cycles as dps/ehp ratio tends to be skewed due to more people being involved, but increasing rep amount modifier should be done/considered very carefully as you don't want to create an environment where extreme neuting is mandatory for anything to get done (as Amarr only, it is bad enough as is) .. the HP/cap with extra rep amount risks awarding a massive advantage to ships with cap to spare.
Speaking of the Punisher/Incursus .. I'd really like a third mid on my Punisher for an injector or in the very least a hefty cap bump. Falls far behind in the cap race at the mere mention of a small neut
|
Freighdee Katt
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
131
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 13:09:00 -
[1195] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:so why didn't they nerf the asb No need to. They nerfed the AAR instead to balance it. |
Naomi Anthar
No Tax So Relax.
22
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 13:29:00 -
[1196] - Quote
Guys and girls please stop giving feedback they don't care. They think asb is fine , maybe they will even buff it for lolz. cmon - i'm mad at myself now. I was thinking our feedback and most notably valid arguments can shift or change anything - no they can't. Train shield skill skills and move along. Game is still fun even with this part broken i guess. |
Alx Warlord
SUPERNOVA SOCIETY Fade 2 Black
360
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 16:40:00 -
[1197] - Quote
Naomi Anthar wrote:Guys and girls please stop giving feedback they don't care. They think asb is fine , maybe they will even buff it for lolz. cmon - i'm mad at myself now. I was thinking our feedback and most notably valid arguments can shift or change anything - no they can't. Train shield skill skills and move along. Game is still fun even with this part broken i guess.
you guess?
But, indeed, CCP should read more the forums...
There would be no need for the CSM to exist if everyone in CCP were listening what we say here...
And don't forget... for now, CCP Fozzie is the best DEV iin this category... He really listen to people here!
But once ha makes a decision, he needs to develop on that, put on sisi, see if it worked, and then move on or rework it...
so have some patience with him...(but not with the rest of CCP )
Please read this! > New POS system (Block Built) Please read this! > Refining and Reprocess Revamp |
Alx Warlord
SUPERNOVA SOCIETY Fade 2 Black
360
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 17:15:00 -
[1198] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Change the penalty on all active armor rigs (Aux Nano Pump, Nanobot Accelerator, and the new Nanobot Overcharger) to increase the powergrid use of local armor reps by 10% instead of reducing ship velocity. Note this is increasing the PG use of the reps by 10% (or 5% at Armor Rigging V) not decreasing the total PG of the ship. Armor Reps:New: Reduce the Powergrid requirements of all Medium Armor Repair units by 20% Reduce the Powergrid requirements of all Large Armor Repair units by 10%
This mean that for BS the things will be the same at the start and will be better in the late game??
Finally a Good Buff to the armor system! It is a shame lacking powergrid and dps becouse of the tank... Please read this! > New POS system (Block Built) Please read this! > Refining and Reprocess Revamp |
Haifisch Zahne
Hraka Manufacture GmbH
193
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 17:15:00 -
[1199] - Quote
Maybe suggested, but I am not going through 60+ pages of posts, sorry.
Give armor repper's an additional bonus of 5% to all armor resists (per some skill level?) .
(My luck, no one reads this thread anymore. Or, better still, only trolls.) |
Jerick Ludhowe
Crimson HellHounds Drunk3n H00ligans
401
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 17:24:00 -
[1200] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:How come I can't fit more than one AAR? I can fit multiple oversized ASB modules that use zero capacitor, but not multiple armor reppers?
It's a simple admittance that listening to the community when it comes to the introduction of new modules produced for a fail "new modules idea" sticky thread was an astoundingly "mongoloidish" idea.
The reality is that ccp is finally beginning to pull their heads out of the communal ass they've been stuck in for so many years. In essence, don't expect CCP to correct unquestionable mistakes of the past by introducing more content destroying "content". |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 [40] 50 .. 53 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |