|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 23 post(s) |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
27
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 00:03:00 -
[1] - Quote
PinkKnife wrote:Beaver Retriever wrote:PinkKnife wrote:This hurts Minmatar more than Gallente because Gal almost always have the free mids to run a Tracking Computer, thus your Talos and Megathron will be fine assuming you aren't shield tanking them.
It's a nerf to shield ships with free lows, I.e. Canes, and it is ENTIRELY needed. Oh no Projectiles won't dominate in every single possible way anymore, they only get to still pick damage type, use no cap, and have the highest alpha of any turret. Yes, poor Projectiles.
The Blaster boats won't suffer, and the Minmatar's ability to kite at any distance and still be able to hit fully will be nerfed. It is about time. Thank you Fozzie.
The userbase can deal with flying ships with risk. Currently the same userbase flies almost exclusive caldari/minmatar because you can kite out, apply all your dps, and risk nothing in the engagement. See Drake, See Hurricane for further examples. Literally no one armor tanks their Talos. 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. I don't know, I've had alot of fun with shield tanked armor ships in the right fleets before :P |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
27
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 01:19:00 -
[2] - Quote
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
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.
to build abit upon this comment, I agree that lasers could use abit of love (I use projectile, missile, and lasers, btw) |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
27
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 01:31:00 -
[3] - Quote
Venustas Blue wrote: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. Your forgetting that CCP has stated they like blob fleets. |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
27
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 01:38:00 -
[4] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote: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. I repeat myself from earlier, CCP has already told us that they like Blob fleets. |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
27
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 01:44:00 -
[5] - Quote
UR13L wrote:
Not to mention (especially sniper) HACs being completely outmoded by tier 3 battlecruisers - and now even moreso
Uhh... BCs SHOULD be better then cruisers, herp! |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
27
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 02:13:00 -
[6] - Quote
Tub Chil wrote: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. Indeed, they've talked about it at least for the past 2 expansions and keep just putting it off ... I've been waiting rather long to see it go into effect |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
27
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 02:20:00 -
[7] - Quote
PAPULA wrote: Says pandemic legion who controls fozzie and whole game.
ROfawkingL, I remember a time when this was all goonswarm and other devs being controlled! |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
27
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 02:22:00 -
[8] - Quote
AlexKent wrote: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 agree, let's give the TC a buff to make it even better! |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
27
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 02:25:00 -
[9] - Quote
To mare wrote: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? ^^^ Might be worth some effort, tbh |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
27
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 02:36:00 -
[10] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:beware my moa army. can I join your moa army? I want to fit mine with lazors! |
|

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
27
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 02:44:00 -
[11] - Quote
PAPULA wrote:Zilero wrote:I don't understand the need for this nerf, but what's really bugging me about it is that in most cases it seems to be a idiotic divide by 2 in terms of bonuses.. It's Mr. Fozzie being bored and his PL friends doing idiotic changes. Fozzie nerfed missiles first, now everything else will be nerfed also. Dude, get off the drugs, your paranoid enough without them, these hallucinations are pushing you over the top |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
27
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 03:09:00 -
[12] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:Rek Seven wrote: Oh wait, what's stopping these gate camping fleets from using more remote sebo's to compensate?
You're aware of stacking penalties right? You're aware that after 3 mods the diminishing return on investment makes it not REALLY worth it right? From 1-3 Rsebo's you get a noticeable difference, then from 4-6 you can't even reach the same boost as the first Rsebo that was applied. 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. For what it's worth, I have a legion fit that can almost instalock pods w/out a resebo, so the nerf to it doesn't bother me, it'll still be just that much more effective if I have one on it either way :P |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
27
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 03:20:00 -
[13] - Quote
Sparkus Volundar wrote:
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).
That would be on purpose, otherwise CCP Fozzie wouldn't have made the comment about minmatar in the OP. |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
28
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 14:45:00 -
[14] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote: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  from my own experience, I can agree with this, I can see this making speed tanked cruiser/bc gangs abit stronger if the FC knows what he or she is doing :) |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
28
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 21:14:00 -
[15] - Quote
seth Hendar wrote: 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!)
This glitch I've personally experienced twice while in a legion in epic arc missions, the first time the GMs admitted there was an issue and reimbursed me, the second time they refused to admit any such thing. Nice to see public response that this glitch does exist! |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
28
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 23:22:00 -
[16] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Octoven wrote:
So enthrall me with your almighty wisdom as to why shield tanking trumps armor?
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. As someone who has flown a variety of hulls (caldari, amarr, and minnie) with either shield or amor tank on them (yes, that includes armor on cald and shield on amarr) I can say that neither is better then the other overall, it's more a matter of what you intend to use the ship for that dictates which version of a tank is better for it. |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
28
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 23:32:00 -
[17] - Quote
Lina Halid wrote:Commander Ted wrote:
TE's make long range weapons unnecessary because it makes it so you can kite using blasters, pulses, and autocannons. Sorry your railguns can't reach past hard coded lock range anymore.
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. actually, it's specifically stated that the tracking speed bonus of the TE is being left untouch, so explain to me how this will be a negative for the tracking of your rail guns? |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
28
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 23:37:00 -
[18] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Boris Amarr wrote:Nerf TE is a terrible idea! It is mean nerf ALL amarr ships. Amarr ships doesn't have med slots for tracking computers, because they need MVD, point (scramble or tracking disruptor) and cap booster. Also Amarr ships has huge capacitor usage, only EM and thermic damage, terrible bonus to capacitor use on 50% ships, terrible armor tank. And now you wand kill Amarr's optimal (that is not good). May be TE has overstate bonus to falloff but why are you going to kill optimal??? 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!!!!! Even funnier as I started this game as a pure amarr pilot and I've never used a TE on any armor tanked hull I made of that race and have done quite well thank you very much. |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
28
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 01:31:00 -
[19] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:PAPULA wrote:Lin Fatale wrote: and for what? what do we get in return? I cant see that this nerf is fixing anything besides a bad feeling of a dev that maybe the TE is a bit OP
I would like to get a clear answer, what will be the advantage of this nerf.
Some advantages: 1. Fozzie will be happy again and smiling. 2. Pandemic Legion will also be happy. What would PL stand to gain from this? He's a moron who can't do anything other then spout of random nonsense about his pet paranoid delusion, ignore him. |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
28
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 15:41:00 -
[20] - Quote
Claire Raynor wrote:Connall Tara wrote:Claire Raynor wrote:chris elliot wrote:Fozzie, do you have any plans to tweak tracking disruptors now that you have tweaked the tracking enhancers?
We know that the TD's were quite powerful before but with this change to TE's do you feel the TD's have been allowed to become a bit too strong? Yeah - I was gravitating towards Missiles - almost exclusivly after the TDs. Now that this has happened - I'll want to move more towards missiles. I wish Minmatar had faction missiles in their LP stores. Also will the Stabber be revisited now - as this will bury the Stabber. you mean in that other thread a few stickies down where the stabber is receiving a 25M3 dronebay and an improved fall off bonus from 7.5% to 10% per level? why yes... yes it has :> 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. try putting a disruptor or some other form of ewar on your ship to cause the rats to have even more hate for you, makes them much less likely to go after your drones. |
|

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
28
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 15:50:00 -
[21] - Quote
Goldiiee wrote: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. Thank you , for being one of those RARE few to actually do some research before bitching (also, if any of those threads are from the last month, could you send me a mail with the links?) |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
28
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 18:51:00 -
[22] - Quote
Sorana Bonzari wrote: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. -_- well, per that 'above' post of Goldiiee's, they ARE balancing out these TE nerfs by giving a variety of hulls a range boost, so your kiting issues won't 'die' and as Fozzie has stated, the tracking speed buff of the TE is remaining unchanged, so you don't need to see more tracking as your not losing any.
-edited to add link to relevant post- |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
28
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 18:56:00 -
[23] - Quote
Turgon Barash wrote:Goldiiee wrote:Pelea Ming wrote:Thank you , for being one of those RARE few to actually do some research before bitching (also, if any of those threads are from the last month, could you send me a mail with the links?) Sadly I have lots of time on my hands to read, but never thought to save any of the things I read. But for the rest of the guys perusing this thread here are just a few examples the can be found in a few seconds within the stickyGÇÖs right here. RIFTER: Frigate skill bonuses: +5% to small projectile turret damage and +7.5% to small projectile turret tracking per level TRISTAN: Gallente Frigate bonuses: +7.5% to small hybrid turret tracking and +10% to drone tracking and hitpoints per level IMPERIAL NAVY SLICER: Frigate skill bonuses: +25% to small energy turret damage and +10% to small energy turret optimal range per level FEDERATION NAVY COMET: Gallente Frigate bonuses: +7.5% to small hybrid turret tracking and +20% to small hybrid turret damage per level REPUBLIC FLEET FIRETAIL: Frigate skill bonuses: +25% (+5%) to small projectile turret damage and +7.5% to small projectile turret tracking per level Stabber: Minmatar Cruiser bonuses: -5% medium projectile turret rate of fire and +10% (+2.5) medium projectile turret falloff per levelOmen Navy Issue: 10% bonus to Medium Energy Turret damage 10% bonus to Medium Energy Turret optimal rangeStabber Fleet Issue: 5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret firing speed 10% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret tracking speedAnd sure Pela Ming, I will spend a little time later today and see if I can find some of the old posts and forward them to you. 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??? but that IS the point, the hulls that would be hurt the most by this nerf of TEs are already or will be adjusted to balance out the lost ranges, and those that need the nerf the most won't be receiving such changes. |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
28
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 19:09:00 -
[24] - Quote
Sorana Bonzari wrote:Pelea Ming wrote: but that IS the point, the hulls that would be hurt the most by this nerf of TEs are already or will be adjusted to balance out the lost ranges, and those that need the nerf the most won't be receiving such changes.
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,,,,, Yes, I read the proposed changes to the Navy Cruisers, and I don't like that the current low tank/high damage ships are all being nerfed on damage pretty severely, but something that specific I left to that specific thread. You have an issue like that over a specific ship class, put it on that thread, this thread is for the mod nerfs, and bringing up specific ship gripes in regards to that is actually rather bad form for an attempt to argue against it. |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
28
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 19:19:00 -
[25] - Quote
Sorana Bonzari wrote:Pelea Ming wrote: Yes, I read the proposed changes to the Navy Cruisers, and I don't like that the current low tank/high damage ships are all being nerfed on damage pretty severely, but something that specific I left to that specific thread. You have an issue like that over a specific ship class, put it on that thread, this thread is for the mod nerfs, and bringing up specific ship gripes in regards to that is actually rather bad form for an attempt to argue against it.
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. but from what I'm seeing, both in this thread, and the one relating to the Navy cruisers, and the little bit I gleaned from Goldiiee's post providing me with some info on the upcoming Navy frig changes, it will be balanced in the long run, we just need to be patient. Also, the changes to the TEs aren't going through until Odessy, which is when they are doing these other changes, so it will all get put through at the same time, essentially meaning that they will all be balanced out at the same time. |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
28
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 19:30:00 -
[26] - Quote
Sorana Bonzari wrote:Pelea Ming wrote:[quote=Sorana Bonzari] but from what I'm seeing, both in this thread, and the one relating to the Navy cruisers, and the little bit I gleaned from Goldiiee's post providing me with some info on the upcoming Navy frig changes, it will be balanced in the long run, we just need to be patient. Also, the changes to the TEs aren't going through until Odessy, which is when they are doing these other changes, so it will all get put through at the same time, essentially meaning that they will all be balanced out at the same time. 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. Oh, I completely agree, when I do pvp I MUCH prefer small gangs. So I don't mind it when people break out and bring things like this up. if you like armor fleets, btw, I might have to get you in touch with a good mate of mine that runs a very tight organization specializing in small gang armor fleets :) |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
29
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 22:06:00 -
[27] - Quote
amurder Hakomairos wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: These are broke, so we're fixing them.
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. Sorana Bonzari wrote: Since the problem is T3's then nerf them don't blanket nerf all of the other ships. But that makes to much common sense so its not going to happen.
Agree 100% 1) T3 nerfs have been scheduled, and 2) this is again trying to use a specific ship class to justify an argument against the proposed module change, very weak if not pretty much just invalid reasoning, please provide some reason relevant specific to the module, not whatever ship you feel it should/would affect the most. |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
29
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 22:29:00 -
[28] - Quote
Torei Dutalis wrote: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. Personally, I can't help but agree with your observations of this, and I agree that the TE nerf should go further. |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
29
|
Posted - 2013.03.30 02:28:00 -
[29] - Quote
the TE nerf is going through at the same time alot of ships are getting range buffs to their hulls if you were paying attention to the appropriate threads, this won't be making OP ships downgraded, it will be to keep a mod from making hulls that are getting the buffs from becoming OP. |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
29
|
Posted - 2013.03.30 02:46:00 -
[30] - Quote
Alxea wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Serenety Steel wrote:If it aint broke, DON'T fix it!
Way to nerf some more stuff, well done ccp.. These are broke, so we're fixing them. 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. And yet, as has been previously, and numerously, pointed out, this 'nerf' is actually simply returning the TE back to it's original stats at the same time as a number of hulls are getting alot of range boosts to more then compensate for this to begin with. |
|

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
29
|
Posted - 2013.03.30 13:47:00 -
[31] - Quote
Claire Raynor wrote:Pelea Ming wrote:the TE nerf is going through at the same time alot of ships are getting range buffs to their hulls if you were paying attention to the appropriate threads, this won't be making OP ships downgraded, it will be to keep a mod from making hulls that are getting the buffs from becoming OP. 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? Check out the threads for the upcoming Navy cruisers and Navy frig mods, check out the already existing changed hulls we have available in the game, the range buffs are there. |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
29
|
Posted - 2013.03.30 13:52:00 -
[32] - Quote
To be perfectly honest, I don't think that TE's should have ever been buffed up like this 4 years ago. I think it's wrong that a passive module should ever out perform an active one. with this nerf, in some respects it still does, but at least not to the point of having people say "wtf are you putting that TC on your ship? get a TE!" I honestly think that since the TC is an active mod, it should actually still get abit of a buff out of all of this yet, too. |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
29
|
Posted - 2013.03.30 14:10:00 -
[33] - Quote
Claire Raynor wrote:Pelea Ming wrote:Claire Raynor wrote:Pelea Ming wrote:the TE nerf is going through at the same time alot of ships are getting range buffs to their hulls if you were paying attention to the appropriate threads, this won't be making OP ships downgraded, it will be to keep a mod from making hulls that are getting the buffs from becoming OP. 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? Check out the threads for the upcoming Navy cruisers and Navy frig mods, check out the already existing changed hulls we have available in the game, the range buffs are there. 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. . . Ugg, I finished with the cruiser thread this morning, but I know I saw at least one hull also got a falloff bonus, and don't forget to look at the cruisers, frigates, and BCs that have already been changed got some boosts too. |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
29
|
Posted - 2013.03.30 14:32:00 -
[34] - Quote
Funky Lazers wrote: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? I agree, this change has been too long delayed. |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
29
|
Posted - 2013.03.30 14:41:00 -
[35] - Quote
Major Killz wrote: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 Exactly, use your artillery guns! |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
29
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 21:16:00 -
[36] - Quote
At this point, I'm just waiting to see what Fozzie's replies are, all the rest of the post are nothing but repeats of what's been getting posted all along. |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
29
|
Posted - 2013.04.01 16:23:00 -
[37] - Quote
as to everyone who tries to ***** that higher falloff bonuses then optimal on these mods is wrong, smack yourself now. When your in Optimal, your doing full applied dps, when your in fall off, your taking a penalty that only grows larger the further into falloff that your target is. ergo, falloff bonuses 1k to 1k are worth significantly less then optimal bonuses. |

Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
29
|
Posted - 2013.04.01 21:55:00 -
[38] - Quote
Personally, I think that, compared to the mid slot occupying, cap using, scriptable TC, the current TE is overpowered, and if the TE doesn't get nerfed, then the TC needs to be buffed. |
|
|
|