| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |

Taoist Dragon
Bastion of Mad Behaviour
242
|
Posted - 2013.02.16 00:57:00 -
[1] - Quote
LOL it's so funny looking at all the complaining about a passive bonus being removed from an active module!
Get over it you lot!
It's an active module therefore if should provide ACTIVE bonus not passive ones. This is just common sense and may also make some of those compensation skills actually worth training for.
This is following the line of making things in eve have a purpose and not being all encompassing! If you fit for active tanking you need to be concerned with cap requirements (however small they seem) to power your active modules (be that actual cap or cap charges) where as passive gives you cap safety but usually at a lower efficiency (resists, buffer etc)
This is probably one of the big indicators (along with ship rebalances) that CCP has finally got their head screwed on properly and are thinking of the bigger picture more than ever before! That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |

Taoist Dragon
Bastion of Mad Behaviour
243
|
Posted - 2013.02.16 02:06:00 -
[2] - Quote
I love how many armchair coders and game devs are out there.
The issues around the coding and whatnot just brought it to their attention. And once there they realised what a stoooopid idea it was to have PASSIVE bonus on an ACTIVE module.
You carebear whiney fucks just need to HTFU and get over yourselves! That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |

Taoist Dragon
Bastion of Mad Behaviour
243
|
Posted - 2013.02.16 02:45:00 -
[3] - Quote
Illest Insurrectionist wrote:Taoist Dragon wrote:I love how many armchair coders and game devs are out there.
The issues around the coding and whatnot just brought it to their attention. And once there they realised what a stoooopid idea it was to have PASSIVE bonus on an ACTIVE module.
You carebear whiney fucks just need to HTFU and get over yourselves! So um. I emphasized in your post where you are being an "armchair coder" and a "game dev". Have a nice day.
Why thank you.
Nice to see someone is actually paying attention! That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |

Taoist Dragon
Bastion of Mad Behaviour
244
|
Posted - 2013.02.16 07:48:00 -
[4] - Quote
Noddy Comet wrote:Taoist Dragon wrote:LOL it's so funny looking at all the complaining about a passive bonus being removed from an active module!
......
It's an active module therefore if should provide ACTIVE bonus not passive ones. This is just common sense and may also make some of those compensation skills actually worth training for.
So,please explain exactly how is it worth training 4 skills to level 5 now that previously gave a bonus and are now worthless to most of us that trained them in the first place?
Because they give a bonus to passive modules!
Really I shouldn't need to explain this to carebears.....go figure it out. stop wasting my oxygen in making me think for you! That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |

Taoist Dragon
Bastion of Mad Behaviour
250
|
Posted - 2013.02.16 23:59:00 -
[5] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:So if you do decide to do this, then remove the sig radius penalty on shields then!!!
Why?
Increased shield put more energy out therefore easier to target/shoot at etc. Duh! That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |

Taoist Dragon
Bastion of Mad Behaviour
250
|
Posted - 2013.02.17 00:08:00 -
[6] - Quote
Noddy Comet wrote: Perhaps you should use less oxygen hyperventilating over carebears and think for a second yourself, this thread is full of those who trained these skills for something that is being taken away (The passive resist on ACTIVE hardeners that has been available for years) Again, how are these skills worth a damn now to those who solely trained them for the reason that is being removed.,... ACTIVE shield tankers??
They are not.
We are now stuck with 4 skills trained to lvl 5 for something we will most likely never even use now.
But please, blame it on the careberars and anyone who doesn't play in the sandbox according to your rules rather than a stupid nerf ending up with worthless skills taking up clone costs now. I'm sure the community will be just as empathetic when the stealth nerfbat comes around and hits an entire skill set you took the time to train to lvl 5 and is now just as worthless.
LOL DILLIGAF around carebears wishing that they are going to have to adapt to a change in skill bonus application.
It is one of the fundamental differences in shield v armour tanking. Shield has ACTIVE omni resists and PASSIVE regen. Armour has PASSIVE onmi resists and ACTIVE regen.
Once again you are asking to use a PASSIVE focussed skill to enhance an ACTIVE module. This has been mentioned before that making modules more focused is a goal so that fitting a ship is one of compromise and benefit matching. The PASSIVE component to ACTIVE modules goes against that principle.
Get over it and adapt. Or just up and quit I DGAF That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |

Taoist Dragon
Bastion of Mad Behaviour
256
|
Posted - 2013.02.17 23:28:00 -
[7] - Quote
Axe and Drac
I am predominently a small ship pilot yes. And I have already mentioned in a lot of my post that I don't comment on the effects in relation to big ships. As for my ability to post in 'Big boy' threads?! Get over yourself. 'Big boys' often get owned by us little men And I have been playing since day 1 of eve and been active in every size of fighting/conflict in game. Just because this character is only a couple of years old don't assume you now my entire background in eve.
However I did assume that most of the people complainng about this were 'carebears'. I geenrally don't use the term as an insult and I appologise for the few times it has come across as one. I have good personal friends who are by their own definition 'carebears'. It is a playstyle just as pirate or explorer is.
Now i see that it is the pvp'ers whineing about this. To that I say then I probably has just as much if not more of an opinion to post on the subject than if it was the carebears.
To the pvp'ers complaining I say HTFU. My eirlier comments on the PASSIVE v ACTIVE nature of the skills/bonus' are even more valid in pvp. You fit to do a job. One fit is not supposed to do it all. GET OVER IT AND ADAPT.
Stop whining and giving pvp'ers a bad name! That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |

Taoist Dragon
Bastion of Mad Behaviour
257
|
Posted - 2013.02.18 20:41:00 -
[8] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote: Tao, you seem to want to engage with me on this, in terms of Axe's comment, my backing of his comment was in regards to which ships it had the biggest impact on, though I do still think the Talos is viable, his comments aimed at your style of play or your comments on this thread have no interest for me whatsoever. Your own comments have done the talking for you, I don't need to add anything to them, rather like when I let off steam on this in terms of the signature radius penalty on shields, perhaps shields will get some skill along the lines of armour honeycombing, or perhaps not which is the point I was trying to make. No matter what your comments are, the fact is that without a passive module covering all resists for shields, the neuting of shield ships is going to be a lot more effective. That CCP decided to do this knowing full well that the passive bonus was originally added to nerf neuting shows that they are likely to want this to stop people using shields on armour ships and use the new armour modules. The knock on effects of this are profound in some areas, while a Chimera is not really a very effective PvP carrier, it can be fitted for PvP for when you get caught, however the fit now has to be based on passive modules and nerf's its tank by around 8% on the best fit I could come out with, however its acceptable. Like always I will sort out my new tactics around the current situation, however I am sad to not be able to use a couple of ships in their full glory now that this is being applied tomorrow. Have fun...
Hi Drac
I can't comment on the carriers abilities etc but I can see your point in not being able to use them in way you have become used to. As for the effect of neuting on shield ships, one of the biggest complaints by armour tankers in general is that ASB's are neut immune and armour tanking is by far more neut prone. This being said though There has been comments by ccp dev that they are reducing the number of ships with utility highs to reduce the effect of cap warfare somewhat. Just look at the rebalance that have happened so far. A lot of the frigs and cruiser don not have utility highs anymore.
The specific skills themselves are now probably more usefull for armour tanks as they are more likely to fit a passive resist module than a shield tanker but this is fine as we don't need to have the tanking systems to be he same.
But it is good to hear that you'll adapt and make it work for you. We need more people to do this rather than just complain. That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |
| |
|