Which exactly proves my point, the reason being you HAVE to shield tank everything these days, and the current TE exacerbate this problem. You shouldn't get to have all of your tank, plus all of your gank. Trade offs and decisions, considerations, and drawbacks.

The problem that you HAVE to shield tank a Talos, proves the issue. You have to be able to keep up/kite otherwise you lose, as Canes and other ships can apply their dps well within/outside scram range and there isn't **** you can do about it if you are slower than they are.

It is a side buff to armor ships, and it is fantastic.

If you're shield tanking your armor ships, you're gonna have a bad time. Well you should anyway.

But I'll test the -33% versions all the same, just not sure it is wise to hit optimal by the same amount after auto and recent blaster changes with nothing done to lasers since Trinity?, I forget.

If your fighting at 0, say in scram & Webb range to be doing affective damage, theres no way to disengage say if your off gate. Unless your ****** fit with stabs or possibly AB fit and able to burn out. The more powerful ship or better counter fit ship will always win. You will not have the ability granted to kiting ships to disengagde by either burning away, or causing the hostile to lose point by pulsing MWD on cross axis so they burn out of range & lose point, allowing you to warp out. There's little skill in fighting at 0 (scram/Webb) range, nerfing TEs kiting ability, wich is an art and skill its self would be yet another mistake by CCP, and a great loss as far as skill goes for the game.
There is counters to kiting ships, & as far as minnie ships go, they have already been nerfed enough, dont ruin it by overstepping a reasonable current mark & success. This proposed change to TEs needs to be scrapped. All it would do is subject eve to yet a other nerf of making the game ever easier, this does not inspire anybody to become better within tactics and situational awareness, it only acts to dumb it down, even giving more reason to blob, and there should be no further reason given to blobbing WHAT SO EVER. Should be promoting skill and fun gfs instead.
Sometimes it becomes very apparent CCP are out of touch with the game and its tactics, this is as good as any example.
A resounding NO to TE nerf from me.

I agree, I think the nerf to TEs is far too harsh, especially considering the ships that generally use them are very deficient in optimal range and require boosts to falloff in order to have decent damage projection.

You're nerfing the skirmish playstyle essentially. I don't like it.

Not to mention (especially sniper) HACs being completely outmoded by tier 3 battlecruisers - and now even moreso

Any chance of TE-s affecting missiles?
In combination with TD-s affecting missiles.

CCP was talking about it, why wasn't it done? inability to disrupt missiles is a big problem in any small scale engagement.

Says pandemic legion who controls fozzie and whole game.

In that case, maybe the TC needs a slight buff to compensate for the loss.

I feel like blasters were finally decent, i really don't want to see blaster ships suffer from this change, IMO it's totally uncalled for. Maybe a small faloff buff is in order for blasters if this change makes it to TQ. Not enough to make them the new OP, FOTM guns, but just so they maintain current range.

i can understand the need of a nerf to TE but since some minmatar ship got rebalanced being weaker than their cunterparts in recent balancing can we take a look at that as well?

beware my moa army.

It's Mr. Fozzie being bored and his PL friends doing idiotic changes.
Fozzie nerfed missiles first, now everything else will be nerfed also.

I'm not familiar with how these insta-locking fleets are set up but effectively, what you guys are saying is that after these new changes are implemented, it will be IMPOSSIBLE to achieve the same scan resolution (or as high is needed to insta-lock) as these fleets have now because of stacking penalties...

If that's true then CCP has just removed a legitimate tactic from the game and if it's not true (i.e. you will be able to get the same scan res) then your reasoning, that stacking penalties somehow balance insta locking fleets, is flawed.

The effect on optimal and falloff is the same regardless of what turret but that does not mean that the effect on projectiles is the same as on other types of turrets (due to falloff damage reduction mechanics).

I understand the allure of hyperbole related to the death of the small gang versus the blob - but this change should definitely be considered in the context of a game where a gang with some standard cruisers and BCs with a couple skirmish links can engage at almost any ratio of friend to foe.

Its fun to engage outnumbered (I've heard), but expecting a few extremely strong mods to do a large portion of the work for you seems a bit over the top.

It also seems important to me that since speed isn't actually being effected here, fast moving skirmish engagements will likely look very similar except that during critical moments there will be a slightly higher tendency to commit. This could mean more vulnerability for the awesome small gang of nano pilots, or it could also mean that your prey now has to venture closer to actually apply dps.

I like writing posts but I'm not sure its doing any good

ship fully aligned that refuse to warp (a 20+ fleet of nano vaga aligned , wing warped, half of them needed 5 extra second to initiate warp!)

What?
I could do a dissertation length document on why they're better and ways to change armor ships to compensate.

I can't believe you actually asked that.

Hm, care to support these your words by any examples? As far as I understand the main problem of railguns isn't reach, but tracking. Which said TE nerf won't help to.

LOl Funny as ammar say they are the most nerfed, then minmatar say they are the most nerfed.. then come the gallente and say that blasters will be ruined.


Can you see people? That means its BALANCED!!!!!

What would PL stand to gain from this?

Awesome! Thanks for the update - this has cheered me up! - [edit having read all these threads - I came here from another part of the forum] the drone bay won't do squat as they are now useless for missions but the 10% is epic for the fall off.

I was also upset at first with these proposed changes, but unlike apparently the majority of forum readers here, I also read the other forum threads identifying the changes proposed for cruisers and frigs. As it is apparent in those threads the loss of falloff is being addressed in new bonuses to the hulls most in need of it.

It would follow that Fozzie is on the job and tweaking where needed to provide the necessary buff and nerf as appropriate, placing the apparent OP bonuses where they belong, in the Hull, not the modules. Eve is not the real world and progress in eve should not compare, if everything gets better and quicker it would lead to the eventual reduction of options to one ship one gun and no fun at all. (Imagine everyone with Nukes)

Sit back and enjoy the time you have left with the falloff you have now, all the while thinking up a new way to make your advantage work for you and against the other guy, you did it once before, or you copied the guy that did it once before, so be original and come up with a new plan.

All this "re-balance" is doing it making it easier for blob PVP. Don't over complicate this topic. Put simply CCP is siding with the masses and rationalizing that it should be even harder for a smaller fleet using tactics and paying attention to the game, to beat a larger fleet using the "approach MWD fire" key while eating a cookie. Tailoring games to the retards is why MMO's start to fall of the deep end.


BTW to the above post ^^^^ I dont want tracking I want damage projection L2 read what we are bitching about?

SFI needs range
Vaga needs range
exc......

A nerf to these ships rage puts me nearly at web range. So whats the point of flying them unless i have numbers + long rage ammo to do the same thing. again tailored to more blob warfare yay because that's what eve needs. -_-

Did you even read OP its not about tracking that stays the same its about optimal and falloff that we are talking about....great research lol

Sorana Bonzari is right if this change hits there will be bunch of ships in need of major redoing of their bonuses or they will be utter crap...worth it???

Wrong damage projection for medium size ships will decrease. Please refer to above post for the definition of damage projection.

SFI
Vaga
Cynable
Vigelnt
Exc,,,,,

Fair point but counter point the TE nerf effects everything but the one ship they already fixed for damage projection. This TE debuff is focused because of the T3 BC grievance so I believe it is relevant to this mod.

And that's exactly why every once in awhile people like me come out of the woodwork and post on the forms to get their voice heard so when that final rebalanced happens and is rolled out that small fleet PVP'er like myself don't get left behind. Ive loved lot of the other changes don't get me wrong but small fleet PVP needs to be heard as just as big of an issue as big fleet pvp where IMHO balancing doesn't even matter. After 100 people are on the field individuals are so diluted +- a little of this and that don't matter.

Says who? You or people who play the game? Because I'm looking at a 40 page thread of your customers telling you this change is unnecessary.




Agree 100%

I find the composition of responses to this change to be rather amusing. As expected a majority of posters seem opposed to the TE change, which is unsurprising as the module has become a staple of certain fitting types. The really interesting part though is the other portion of responses. The argument that "this nerf doesn't do anything so get over it" seems to be rather prevalent in many of the posts. I think people are taking this attitude as a pro-nerf stance, which it may be in some cases. However, the fact that people are arguing that a nerf is ok due to the fact that it is not really relevant is an argument that the nerf does not go far enough. There have been significant posts in the threads showing the numbers differences on falloff and optimal on some of the more standard fits that operate in the 20~ km range. It seems that the loss in range falls into the 1-3~ km range, or an overall loss of 5%~ dps for falloff. These are just generalized numbers of course. Essentially the nerf does very little to ships that have solidly established kiting styles, and has more impact on mid range ships. Which is interesting in and of itself as almost all of the examples in this thread pertain to ships with exceptional range with or without TEs

Also the cause of the nerf seems to be interesting. In the OP, Fozzie seems to be motivated by "Minmatar dominance in recent years" Which could be backed up by the fact that twelve out of the top twenty used ships in pvp are minmatar, but that doesn't necessarily establish a link between TE and minmatar being overpowered. I think that people seem to believe that minmatar ships have fallen out of favor, but on the aggregate this is not true. In some arenas such as solo-duo and FW caldari and gallente ships have seen a significant rise in usage, but in the 0.0 blocks minmatar ships are still highly prevalent. As a small gang player myself I of course am going to have a skewed perspective to that type of play and so I would caution people to form their opinions more holistically.

Of course there is the armor shield debate, but I already posted my opinion on that subject in a previous post and don't think it needs repeating. Overall I think people, players and CCP balancers, need to consider whether a nerf that is widely viewed as either bad or ineffective is really the way to go.

One does not simply use TE's for 5 years unchanged and suddenly break them. They are broke because you say they are broke when they were never broke to begin with. Your changing the way people play the game. Its more then a nerf its a game changer. But oh well I was never a fan of kiting anyways. The closer the better. But the point is its not the mods that are overpowered, its the way people always invent new fits that are deemed overpowered when they are simply just so powerful. Dominance is all in the creativeness of the fitting. When Kil2 use to fly Talos's he could kill fleets with it. So anything that can do that should be nerfed according to CCP so nerf a major mod that effects everybody and force them to fight at closer ranges with medium ranged weapons. It may as well be close range because weapons for medium range now will only be effective at close range. Of course forcing us to use a mid slot for a TC just to get range also nerfs the tanks of a lot of ships players want to shield tank making them have even less EHP. These nerfs are tba getting out of hand because they are stealth nerfing shield tanks on common ships.

Err. Not that I saw. Range buff on hulls - show me more. Because from what I can see. . ..

1 ship got their falloff upgraded. The stabber.

1 ship got their optimal uprated. Some Amarr thing.

I'm sorry - what other hulls are getting their falloff / optimal enhanced to coincide with this nerf?

Please help me - I've read / re-read - all these posts and threads. Where are the other ships who are getting their tracking-weapon's weapon ranges increased?

You pointed me at the Faction cruisers thread - Only the IN Omen gets and upgrade - The normal Stabber gets an upgrade - You pointed me at the faction frigates thread the Imperial navy Slicer shows a range bonus that it has AWLASYs had - and nah - other than the INOmen and the Stabber - nothing. . .

Damn, seeing the topic's name I thought CCP is actually making a change towards missiles being affected by TCs/TEs.
Sadly there was none.
Are we going to see this change in the summer patch?

CCP is not increasing or giving vessel bonuses to counter the proposed changes to tracking enhancer at all.

In the past. skirmishing was limited to specialized vessels.

Back then I was aware of heavy missile Drakes and shield-Harbingers being used solo in early 2008. So it was clear most ships bonused for lasers and missiles were capable of skirmishing. Even though they lacked dominance in overall velocity.

However. When CCP changed tracking enhancers near all Minmatar vessels could now skirmish (not just the Vagabond). Instantly bringing them from the dirt that is close range combat and leaving Gallente completely behind. There by removing specialization and adding to ubiquity. Near every ship is now able to skirmish and are fitted for that purpose.

Removing that ubiquity makes alot of sense. Furthur, the Hurricane and many other Minmatar vessels are dangerous artillery platforms. I dont need to tell those who are not ret@rded that a fleet of shield-artillery-Hurricanes is superior to a fleet of shield-autocannon-Hurricanes.

Minmatar have a near overpowered long range weapon system. CCP has said nothing about touching it. Hope they dont because near every other race now has a ship better than Minmatar vessels at skirmishing.

When it comes to combat battlecruisers at skirmishing solo:

1. Drake (Ham (javelin), Hml)
2. Harbinger (pulse laser)
3. Hurricane (autocannon)

When it comes to attack battlecruisers at skirmishing solo:

1. Talos (blaster)
2. Oracle (pulse laser)
3. Tornado (autocannon)

When it comes to t1 cruisers at skirmishing solo:

1. Caracal (Ham (javelin), light missile)
2. Omen (pulse laser)
3. Bellicose (Ham (javelin), light missile)
4. Rupture (autocannons)

The combat battlecruisers have been much the same for awhile now. The rest is what it is.


- killz