|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
516
   |
Posted - 2013.01.28 15:18:00 -
[1] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:This is a huge buff to energy neutralizing and a huge nerf to active shield tanking.
I hope lots of thoughts have been put into this...
It's not a nerf, it's a hidden buff to passive mods. 
Gò¡Gê¬Gò«n+ên+¦n++n+¦n+ëGò¡Gê¬Gò«-á don't haten++ |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
521
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 23:02:00 -
[2] - Quote
Verity Sovereign wrote:I was about to train EM ad TH to lvl 5, and bring kin and Exp to lvl 4
I now see this would be useless if CCP goes through with the planned changes
I'd vote against this, and I'm holding off training those unless CCP makes it clear this is not going through.
Base % Shield Explosion resist amplifier
Base % Armor Reactive resist
Base % Armor Energized Reactive resist
Gò¡Gê¬Gò«n+ên+¦n++n+¦n+ëGò¡Gê¬Gò«-á don't haten++ |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
525
|
Posted - 2013.01.31 11:38:00 -
[3] - Quote
Cindy Marco wrote:And oh, btw, no reimbursement for your skills that now useless for most players. I don't even need the SP anymore, but I bet there are newer guys that trained those skills to 5 and wish they had them back. That is like a month of wasted training.
When will you guys understand those passive resist skills are not a waste of time?
Up until now you didn't had to think about your fittings, was invulns and shield extenders everywhere. Now you have to think about your fittings and get the best out of those passive resist modules.
Armor might have EANP's but they clearly lack oversized reppers and no cap cost ASB/guns, it's a trade off you guys are not used to while being mainly armor trained I've always had to and used. I also use most often my armor tank ships with shield tanking so please go ahead and keep telling shield tanking is bad and in need of more buffs.
I'm ok for you guys to get some sort of shield EANP but I definitively want the equivalent of shield Invuln. Is this fair enough for you?
Gò¡Gê¬Gò«n+ên+¦n++n+¦n+ëGò¡Gê¬Gò«-á don't haten++ |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
531
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 17:41:00 -
[4] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:This change will make it easier to kill supers. Therefore, I support the change!
Nope, it should make it even harder.
Because those A-Type resist Amplifiers will give you more tank than those A-Type hardeners once offline.
I can fit both armor and shield, this change does not affect me that much on shields usually using capless guns, but bothers me a little bit plus about armor hardeners on ships using the most cap hungry weapon systems and already suffer, by far, from cap warfare .
Gò¡Gê¬Gò«n+ên+¦n++n+¦n+ëGò¡Gê¬Gò«-á don't haten++ |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
533
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 10:29:00 -
[5] - Quote
Dex Tera wrote:i quit and and im taking my 3 accounts too so long ccp hope you can learn from your mistakes
I accept all isk/mods/hulls/fighters/bombers donations so I can get my Wyvern 
I promise I'll make good use of it.
Thx
Gò¡Gê¬Gò«n+ên+¦n++n+¦n+ëGò¡Gê¬Gò«-á don't haten++ |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
533
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 13:31:00 -
[6] - Quote
Besbin wrote:Greyscale has the subtlety of a pregnant spermwhale. I give up...
...in an all together passive (pun intended) non-quity way.
Yes, "u can haz ma stuffz" :-p
Thank ya, contract it to this character.
Gò¡Gê¬Gò«n+ên+¦n++n+¦n+ëGò¡Gê¬Gò«-á don't haten++ |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
545
|
Posted - 2013.02.11 11:46:00 -
[7] - Quote
BobFromMarketing wrote:Way to make that three months of training on multiple characters utterly worthless Greyscale. I continue to dislike you more than Dust or Incarna.
Why is it every change you bring to us seems like one of the worst ideas ever? Anomaly's being tied to truesec for example.
Perhaps you didn't think it's a big change because you don't play the game, and thus do not grasp how it works?
I can fly both armor and shield and still can't see the problem you guys are moaning about. No real numbers, just moaning.
Which one imho suffers the most from neuts?- Armor and I have yet to see someone telling me I'm wrong with other thing than regular EFT/Pyfa vomit. This change is good and as you guys can read it it's worth for SHIELD and ARMOR HARDENERS.
Now lets get back to our double XL-ASB Sleipnir bait some special nerds somewhere in new Eden...
Gò¡Gê¬Gò«n+ên+¦n++n+¦n+ëGò¡Gê¬Gò«-á don't haten++ |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
547
|
Posted - 2013.02.11 15:52:00 -
[8] - Quote
RavenPaine wrote:Neuted out, most shield fits will have ZERO resist. Nada, 0, zip, nothing. Armor ships do not have a zero resist hole in their main defense mechanic.
Really?? -was this implemented last DT?
Please do yourself a favor, train those shield skills above lvl1 and if you get the courage to, do it also for armor skills.
Then tell us all how your armor ship does awesome dps once neuted and how much "most" shield fits as you say, have 0 resists.
Just fit modules and train for those past lvl1 and you'll see it's quite awesome.
Gò¡Gê¬Gò«n+ên+¦n++n+¦n+ëGò¡Gê¬Gò«-á don't haten++ |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
547
|
Posted - 2013.02.11 16:00:00 -
[9] - Quote
RavenPaine wrote:To counter this, you have to lose a slot or a rig spot now for EM specific protection. It is equivalent to a 20% nerf on slots, or a 33% nerf on rig space for those ships.
If you use a Damage control for the counter, it will most likely cause a loss of DPS overall, On ships that already have DPS issues historically.
If you think for a second armor hardeners provide more protection you're wrong.
If you think for a second passive resists provide more protection you're wrong
If you think for a second armor ships don't loose as much useful slots for dps mods and rigs, you're wrong.
If you think a DCU in an armor ship is an option you're again very wrong.
Actually you're wrong all the line, ask this to everyone being able to properly fit armor/shield why they tend to shield tank their armor ships. In your expert opinion it's because those have natural higher resists in their shields too?
Gò¡Gê¬Gò«n+ên+¦n++n+¦n+ëGò¡Gê¬Gò«-á don't haten++ |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
555
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 14:10:00 -
[10] - Quote
Besbin wrote:I wish I could understand what you were trying to say, so I could tell you how stupid that is.
You can't already understand this change is not worst for shields than for armor.
Leave it alone reading comprehension.
Gò¡Gê¬Gò«n+ên+¦n++n+¦n+ëGò¡Gê¬Gò«-á don't haten++ |
|
|
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
563
|
Posted - 2013.02.13 11:52:00 -
[11] - Quote
Ong wrote:Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:Besbin wrote:I wish I could understand what you were trying to say, so I could tell you how stupid that is. You can't already understand this change is not worst for shields than for armor. Leave it alone reading comprehension. A lot of things.
Well, tell me how much different it would end for that cyclone in YOUR specific 1v1 scenario? -nothing, just 2 or 3 shots+
An offline EM hardener alone gives you 15% resist, but gives you 66% EM resist Over Heated when online
2 offline Invuln gives you 26.1% Resist EM
An Em resist amplifier gives you 46.9% all the time, so no, you don't get 0 resist on your shield ship once you have no cap the moment you train your skills and change the usual fits often made of double invuln and nothing else but extenders/point/prop.
Train your resist compensation skills and find creative fits, shield ships often have generous fittings and slots/mods for this.
*removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
565
|
Posted - 2013.02.13 20:06:00 -
[12] - Quote
CMD Ishikawa wrote:CCP Guys already said those changes are coming ...  How about we focus on the passive modules, some people have stated that we could use a passive mod like the EANM and I think there is a good idea around there, passive shield buffering is almost useless right now.
Yes I could use of an armor invuln hardener too, this would actually be a huge improvement for active tanking.
*removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
570
|
Posted - 2013.02.15 14:00:00 -
[13] - Quote
DireNecessity wrote:Solaris Ecladia wrote:Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:CMD Ishikawa wrote:CCP Guys already said those changes are coming ... How about we focus on the passive modules, some people have stated that we could use a passive mod like the EANM and I think there is a good idea around there, passive shield buffering is almost useless right now. Yes I could use of an armor invuln hardener too, this would actually be a huge improvement for active tanking. Didnt you just get the reactive thingy? Indeed the Armor Tankers did. Seems the Armor Tankers get both active and passive omni-hardening. Meanwhile, Shield Tankers are having their passive omni-hardening options removed leaving only active omni-hardening available. CCP - I presume it's your desire to give armor tankers more options than shield tankers. If I may be so bold . . . why?
If you really think Reactive Armor Hardener is a great thing you should fit those on your shield ships and tell us what happens.
Do you even read F&I and all the comments how badly designed/nerf this module is at the point no one or very little use them? -you clearly have no idea what it looks like to see your capacitor depleting just by shooting ammo, leave alone hardeners/prop mod and rep with.
After 3rd cycle this mod is completely useless, + easy to exploit from aggressor in small fights scenarios, and on top of it the higher your skill gets the more cap you throw away for little to no benefit.
But be my guess to explain us how awesome this module is and how much you would like to have one like that for your shields.
*removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
575
|
Posted - 2013.02.17 23:00:00 -
[14] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Furthermore the impact on the Chimera is immense, I cannot even bring myself to use it, because I cannot fit it to fight with it...
Armor fit it, plug slaves. Problem solved?
*removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
575
|
Posted - 2013.02.17 23:22:00 -
[15] - Quote
Castelo Selva wrote:Well, well, well... The real problem now is not that GÇ£the active hardeners no longer have the passive resist element, and that change are going live to TQ without any official CCP note about it (aka stealth nerf)GÇ¥ but about the usefulness or not of the compensation skills.
Those are great skills to get for other purpose than the passive 15% without stacking you get from an off line invuln.
LVL5 compensation skills+OGB+off line invulns: something is wrong here, it's either active or passive, not both.
Quote:For some play base this change do not meaning nothing, but for other player base this change all they play style. So, the real question is if the compensation skills should be reimbursed or not, because it-¦s a set of lvl 5 skills that become obsolete.
Compensation skills are useful and there's no reason to reimburse those skills. Will this change some specific fits?-hope so.
It's good for the game and keep smarter players entertained finding new fits and tactics.
Quote:I think that the fair is that should be a one time question at login asking if you want to be reimbursed or not, and this solve all problem. The one who are affected by the usefulness of the skill are reimbursed, and the one who want to keep it are ok either.
Compensation skills are useful, point blank.
Quote:And, of course, better communication between CCP and the player base are always welcome (no more stealth nerfs). Remember, I did not said no more changes, but no more unannounced changes, please.
They're getting better each year at communicating with players but not perfect in every situation, while I agree this could have been communicated differently, there's not that much to fuss about. Far too much panic for nothing.
*removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
584
|
Posted - 2013.02.18 23:34:00 -
[16] - Quote
NextDarkKnight wrote:Some of my wormhole PVE requires the 12% passive bonus to the inactive invul field. Without a module to do this I can kiss that activity good bye now.
DCU II = 12.5%
Maybe you need to change your fits a little bit and play differently but it's not that much of a big change as you guys claim to be.
*removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
584
|
Posted - 2013.02.19 00:06:00 -
[17] - Quote
NextDarkKnight wrote:Some of my wormhole PVE requires the 12% passive bonus to the inactive invul field. Without a module to do this I can kiss that activity good bye now.
Tengu with sub +10% shield per level
1 Pithum B-Type Em (cheapo for wh guys)
1 T2 Explo Amplifier
1 DCU II
1 T2 EM rig
2 T2 LSE
No invuln fitted, resist profitle = 72.7 - 82.5 - 73.8 - 76.8
Add 1 T2 invuln and you get = 77.4 - 88.3 - 81.6 - 82.8 -change that T2 invuln and other mods for a dead space/faction ones and you get the lowest resist at 80%, add OGB and it becomes insane even with invuln off line.
Not trying to prove anything else than the simple fact you had a base 15% passive effect gone that wouldn't even provide those 15% once offline because stack penalty.
With HAMs you get a nice 750DPS without much pimp for 40km range (CNSHAM], add implants and a bit of pimp and it's about 850 without overheat for a cruiser with over 50K EHP and 680m/s with cheapo C-Type afterburner.
No big deal
*removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
592
|
Posted - 2013.02.19 15:55:00 -
[18] - Quote
Human Cola wrote:So.. to offset this nerf, just fly around faction fit loot pinatas, no big deal?
Because farming Tengus are known to be T1 fitted?
Wh dudes crying about isk? -WTF???
If you're in some WH (like OP) and can't afford to put 1 or 2 B in your farming ship, change to a better WH corp/alliance.
*removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
602
|
Posted - 2013.02.20 22:11:00 -
[19] - Quote
Alayna Le'line wrote:AxeMan2 wrote:Especially pilots who try and shield fit their Armor ships. This might be entirely intentional and I'm not even sure it's such a bad thing.
Shield modules are so much out of whack that armor ships using those have the same issues for tackling (4slots it's meh) but win so much agility, speed and dps while keeping a decent tank (some times better than armor one)
This goes even more crazy when you start using faction/pirate/T2 ships with enough mids, for the record a brutal 2.5K DPS OH blaster Vindicator can still have a very decent tank (amount/resists) which is enough to clean the field from peskies thx to his brutal dps.
Until these latest changes I couldn't understand why people would not shield tank their Vindicator, unless of course sitting duck games, maybe these changes will make me armor fit one at some point but I'm not very enthusiast ATM
*removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
619
|
Posted - 2013.02.25 21:02:00 -
[20] - Quote
Verity Sovereign wrote:I'm still trying to find a use for my kin and exp shield comp skills, I'll keep my em and therm, but I'd like to get my Exp and Kin sp back... I'll never use them now
NO!!
*removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
|
|
|
|
| |
|