Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 37 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 23 post(s) |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
4555
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:10:00 -
[1] - Quote
Good evening ladies and gentlemen. Got some more Odyssey updates for you all, this time in the form of some module rebalancing! We're going to have a number of module balance changes release in Odyssey on June 4th, and our first batch to announce are the Remote Sensor Boosters and Tracking Enhancers.
Let's start with Remote Sensor Boosters. They give pretty extreme bonuses to scan res at the moment, similar to officer sensor boosters. This has contributed to the growth of instalock camps that are in our opinion a bit too easy nowadays. So we're gonna decrease the scan res bonuses so that they give a solid but more reasonable benefit over local boosters. We're leaving the lock range bonus of the T1 and T2 remote boosters the same since we don't see them as overpowered for that role, and actually buffing the lock range bonus from the meta remote boosters since they are currently all giving T1 meta 0 level bonuses for that stat right now.
Key stat for this change is that the best Remote Sensor Boosters will have their Scan Resolution bonus reduced from 40.5% to 33%.
Apologies for the terrible formatting (you can copypaste into a spreadsheet and it looks good)
typeNameOld ScanRes BonusNew ScanRes BonusOld LockRange BonusNew LockRange Bonus Remote Sensor Booster I33.82833.833.8 Coadjunct Linked Sensor Array I35.42933.835 Linked Sensor Network40.53033.836 Connected Scanning CPU Uplink37.13133.837 F-23 Reciprocal Sensor Cluster Link38.83233.838 Remote Sensor Booster II40.53340.540.5 'Boss' Remote Sensor Booster I40.53333.839 'Entrepreneur' Remote Sensor Booster I40.53340.540.5
Now for TEs. It's a fairly well accepted fact that the great optimal and falloff bonuses on TEs are over the top, especially considering they can get them while also giving decent tracking boosts. The strength of TEs has been one of the reasons for Minmatar dominance in recent years, as well as contributing to the relative strength of shield tanking over armor tanking by inflating the value of non-tank low slots. What we're looking at is simply decreasing the falloff and optimal bonuses of all TEs by 1/3, and leaving their tracking bonus intact.
Key stat for this change is a reduction in the Optimal/Falloff bonus on a T2 Tracking Enhancer from 15%/30% to 10%/20%.
NameOldFalloffNewFalloffOldOptimalNewOptimal Azimuth Descalloping Tracking Enhancer117.45.53.7 Basic Tracking Enhancer106.653.3 Beam Parallax Tracking Program12864 Beta-Nought Tracking Mode10.575.253.5 F-AQ Delay-Line Scan Tracking Subroutines11.57.65.753.8 Tracking Enhancer I2013.4106.7 Sigma-Nought Tracking Mode I211410.57 Auto-Gain Control Tracking Enhancer I2214.6117.3 F-aQ Phase Code Tracking Subroutines2315.411.57.7 Fourier Transform Tracking Program2416128 Tracking Enhancer II30201510 Domination Tracking Enhancer30201510 Republic Fleet Tracking Enhancer30201510 Mizuro's Modified Tracking Enhancer31.52115.7510.5 Hakim's Modified Tracking Enhancer332216.511 Gotan's Modified Tracking Enhancer34.52317.2511.5 Tobias' Modified Tracking Enhancer36241812
This change will be somewhat painful for many ships that rely on TEs for range in their current fits, but we are confident that the change is necessary to establish balance between the different weapon upgrade modules.
Let me know what you think! Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
895
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:18:00 -
[2] - Quote
I like what I read... Im not too sure te needed that much of a nerf large blasters really benefit from te... See talos...
Anychance we could see an ammo boost alla minmatar got to compensate? As its autocannons you are trying to nerf... Ok, so you've corrected my spelling,do you care to make a valid point? -áThere are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... |
Karl Hobb
Stellar Ore Refinery and Crematorium
1416
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:18:00 -
[3] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:The strength of TEs has been one of the reasons for Minmatar dominance in recent years, as well as contributing to the relative strength of shield tanking over armor tanking by inflating the value of non-tank low slots. I'm curious as to why the low-slot, non-cap-using TEs are still better in this iteration than the mid-slot, cap-using TCs, especially considering this statement? I support Malcanis and Psychotic Monk for CSM8. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
4562
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:20:00 -
[4] - Quote
Karl Hobb wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:The strength of TEs has been one of the reasons for Minmatar dominance in recent years, as well as contributing to the relative strength of shield tanking over armor tanking by inflating the value of non-tank low slots. I'm curious as to why the low-slot, non-cap-using TEs are still better in this iteration than the mid-slot, cap-using TCs, especially considering this statement?
TCs give far superior tracking bonuses, this narrows the gap for range bonuses. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Taoist Dragon
The Church of Awesome
312
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:21:00 -
[5] - Quote
TE's - ouch!
I agree they can be over powering (especially on hulls like the Talos) at times but this will pretty much kill the only advantage the minnies get with their weapon systems - nice falloff.
Now they will have the worst damage and not the best range. Any thoughts on uping their dps or base range to at least keep them competive? That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything. |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
735
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:21:00 -
[6] - Quote
Quote:What we're looking at is simply decreasing the falloff and optimal bonuses of all TEs by 1/3, and leaving their tracking bonus intact.
You say "a third" but it looks like you chopped optimal by half and falloff by a third. Mynnna for CSM 8 |
Serenety Steel
27
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:21:00 -
[7] - Quote
If it aint broke, DON'T fix it!
Way to nerf some more stuff, well done ccp.. |
BadAssMcKill
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
193
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:22:00 -
[8] - Quote
TE changes look good Starships were meant to fly~ |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
4562
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:23:00 -
[9] - Quote
Taoist Dragon wrote:TE's - ouch!
I agree they can be over powering (especially on hulls like the Talos) at times but this will pretty much kill the only advantage the minnies get with their weapon systems - nice falloff.
Now they will have the worst damage and not the best range. Any thoughts on uping their dps or base range to at least keep them competive?
This change affects falloff and optimal bonuses equally, so it doesn't decrease Minmatar falloff relative to any other ship that fits TEs. Minmatar feel the pain mainly because they have a lot of ships that shield tank and use extra lows for TEs. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
4562
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:25:00 -
[10] - Quote
mynnna wrote:e: nevermind, read the chart wrong.
It's possible that I mistyped something but I can't find anywhere that it has optimal cut in half. This is probably a symptom of the terrible formatting making it hard to read.
It is intended to be a -33% adjustment to both stats. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
Klarion Sythis
Quantum Cats Syndicate Samurai Pizza Cats
166
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:26:00 -
[11] - Quote
Ouch on the TE's. I hadn't ever considered them a problem before, but if the idea is giving more advantage to armor ships, this will definitely help. |
Escobar Slim III
YOLOSWAGHASHTAGDOLLARBILLZSWIMMINGPOOLICECREAMS
13
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:26:00 -
[12] - Quote
CAN WE HAVE A POTION BOOSTER FOR IMMUNITY TO ECM JAMMERS? I HAVE PUT A LOT OF THOUGHT INTO THIS BUT WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT IT. A POTION FOR STOPPING ECM WILL MAKE UP FOR LOSING TRACKING ENHANCING. THAT IS MY THOUGHTS ON THE SUBJECT AT THIS MOMENT IN TIME. |
Theon Severasse
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
2
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:27:00 -
[13] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:mynnna wrote:e: nevermind, read the chart wrong. It's possible that I mistyped something but I can't find anywhere that it has optimal cut in half. This is probably a symptom of the terrible formatting making it hard to read. It is intended to be a -33% adjustment to both stats.
Looks like 1/3 everywhere to me
Is this going to be a precursor towards Ewar changes, as this will further the void between beneficial mods (TEs etc) compared to Ewar? |
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
476
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:27:00 -
[14] - Quote
This is the post I've been waiting for. Grow a pair and get close you sissies
Cynabal nerf? check. No more people trying to kite in Thorax hulls? check. Significantly less reliable Tier3 BCs? Check. Significant scan res nerf for RSBs? Check.
This is a good development. -áwww.promsrage.com |
Kobea Thris
Inquisition FiS Division Surely You're Joking
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:28:00 -
[15] - Quote
Just to clarify, are you happy with the state of range scripted tracking computers? |
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
501
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:30:00 -
[16] - Quote
If TEs are so good why do fits pressed for low slots never give up a damage mod for them? You dont see armor ships with 1x damage mod/1x TE, its all double damage mod. You often see people flying with 3x damage mod 1x TE on shield fits - you never ever see 3x TE/1x damage mod.
Not only that, but tracking disruptors are still at -48% optimal and -48% falloff.
A single TD is 48%. No number of tracking enhancers on your ship will let you counter this TD. You can take a cane, and fill every low slot with a tracking enhancer, then TD it and your range is still less than when you started. The situation is even worse on laser ships where TDs have full effectiveness but TEs are only half as effective.
A cane with 6 TEs being tracking disrupted from an unbonused hull still has only 80% of the range of a cane with 0 TEs and no TD on it. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
4568
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:30:00 -
[17] - Quote
Kobea Thris wrote:Just to clarify, are you happy with the state of range scripted tracking computers?
I don't see a dire need to change them. After this change TEs will give more range than an unscripted TC but less than a scripted one. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Taoist Dragon
The Church of Awesome
312
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:30:00 -
[18] - Quote
I can live with these changes as long as you've stopped the silly notion of TE/TD and othe tracking type of modules affecting missiles!
Edit- are you going to make the TD bonus' the same number so they cancel each other out? That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything. |
Sentient Blade
Walk It Off
862
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:31:00 -
[19] - Quote
The TE nerf is going to hurt projectiles badly. With optimal ranges of medium weapons at under 3km then the falloff is all you really have to apply that damage to best effect, especially considering that other weapons systems have ways of changing their range / damage ratio with much more fine tuning than projectiles, which except for Barrage all do the same thing. The alternative is to switch to arty which are rubbish for many engagements. |
Elektrea
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
21
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:31:00 -
[20] - Quote
:swoon: |
|
Karl Hobb
Stellar Ore Refinery and Crematorium
1416
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:33:00 -
[21] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:TCs give far superior tracking bonuses, this narrows the gap for range bonuses. Ah, thank you, that makes sense. I support Malcanis and Psychotic Monk for CSM8. |
KwarK uK
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
67
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:35:00 -
[22] - Quote
At the moment the drugs/implants all give an arbitrary X%, regardless of the thing they're for. This is pretty bad game design because not all stats have equal value, drop will enhance a ship lacking tracking far more than soothsayer will a ship lacking falloff (10% is a negligible amount to falloff but a very considerable boost to tracking). Please rationalise the system so the drug increases are proportional to the modules they're augmenting (maybe add as much to the attribute as a single TE for tracking/optimal/falloff). You should vote for KwarK for a lowsec presence on CSM8. It's a good idea. I'd do it! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=213851 |
Roderick Grey
Broski North Black Legion.
280
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:38:00 -
[23] - Quote
With Blasters hurting for range as it is are CCP sure it's a good idea to further damage Gallente ships, which already suffer drawbacks just to nerf Minmatar superiority?
Perhaps with weapon damage upgrades being Race specific, we could have race-specific Tracking Enhancers each with their own varying buffs aswell? GÇ£We could learn a lot from crayons; some are sharp, some are pretty, some are dull, while others bright, some have weird names, but they all have learned to live together in the same box.GÇ¥- Special needs division of Fcon. |
Onnen Mentar
Murientor Tribe Defiant Legacy
40
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:39:00 -
[24] - Quote
As a very heavily minmatar specced pilot, I welcome this change. It's been way overdue. Looking forward to more bold iteration. |
Lex Arson
Adversity. Rote Kapelle
336
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:42:00 -
[25] - Quote
Yes please nerf TE's, having **** DPS at acceptable ranges in all kiting ships is more of what we the userbase want There's no use crying after every mistake, you just keep on trying 'til you run out of cake. |
PinkKnife
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
296
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:43:00 -
[26] - Quote
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. |
Dabigredboat
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
38
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:47:00 -
[27] - Quote
If you would be so kind ccp fozzie. Explain to me why you would change the range of the TE and not the TC. This dirctly nerfs a fleet ship such as nagas and rokhs who rely on a TE due to shield tank being the dominate form of tank.
Why not change both equally as to adjust the change needed to effect Navy apocs as much as changing the Rokhs role. A Navy Apoc will use two tracking computers the same as a rokh uses two tracking enhances to balance the range ratio.
Any plans to fix the balance this will change in armor to shield fleets? |
Roderick Grey
Broski North Black Legion.
282
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:47:00 -
[28] - Quote
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.
Armor Taloses are far more inferior compared to Shield and Megathrons are hardly seen in combat, but that's more of a battleship issue.
Blasters boats will suffer, a shield Brutix can hit out to 20km with Null, which is lesser range less speed, less tank, less tracking and only slightly more dps than a cane, Gallente will be affected. GÇ£We could learn a lot from crayons; some are sharp, some are pretty, some are dull, while others bright, some have weird names, but they all have learned to live together in the same box.GÇ¥- Special needs division of Fcon. |
Davion Falcon
Those Once Loyal
37
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:48:00 -
[29] - Quote
I suppose I'll have to welcome our new missile spewing overlords. Ruthlessness is the kindness of the wise. Never forgotten, never forgiven. |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
736
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:49:00 -
[30] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:mynnna wrote:e: nevermind, read the chart wrong. It's possible that I mistyped something but I can't find anywhere that it has optimal cut in half. This is probably a symptom of the terrible formatting making it hard to read. It is intended to be a -33% adjustment to both stats.
Yeah, I just read old/old/new/new when it's actually old/new/old/new.
I've gotta say that the effect this will have on projectiles, autocannons especially, concerns me as well. But I'm having trouble deciding if that's actual concern or just me being sad about my imminent Cynabal nerf...
Need to play around with some numbers before I can form a solid opinion. Mynnna for CSM 8 |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 37 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |