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) |
Sigras
Conglomo
397
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 06:49:00 -
[631] - Quote
Torei Dutalis wrote:I won't lie, did not see this particular nerf coming. Will this break eve? No, probably not. Condors and Atrons will still dominate the novice FW plexes, and Vagas and Cynabals will still kite their hearts out. Sure, dps on many ships will be reduced. Total kills will likely fall, and some ships will surely be flown less (long range null fits). I've never really considered the TE to be overpowered, but 30% is a big number I suppose. Frankly I've always wondered why the TE only takes 15 CPU, but maybe I'm the only one. On the flip side, I don't think that this nerf is necessarily "needed". I'd much rather see balancing team time spent on bringing the rest of the ship hulls into line that still need tweaking. It's good to see navy cruisers are making it in to the summer expansion, but it would be nice to maybe see a pass over some other ships instead of spending time on nerfs that aren't going to really do much to the landscape aside from lowering the variation of fits on the field and likely reducing the volume of pvp overall. Anywho, just thought I'd throw my two cents onto the fire. Im responding to the part I underlined.
Yes, this will reduce the power and possibly the number of shield tanking fits, but you forget to take into account the number of armor ships this helps make viable.
This is a sizeable buff for ships that cannot spare the low slots to fit 3x damage mods AND 3x TEs |
Sigras
Conglomo
397
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 06:51:00 -
[632] - Quote
Volstruis wrote:I like how this nerf does next to nothing to blob nagas and such, but is yet another change that makes small gang pvp more difficult. (Sort of like most of the tiericide changes) Quote:We have not forgotten solo pilots, even though this ship class does make things somewhat harder for them. Quote:I am aware that any expansion of logistics capability in eve makes things harder for solo players, and we are endeavoring to make sure that these frigates add options to combat instead of taking them away. Quote:Improving solo options without either killing fun aspects of group play or making solo too easymode is definitely a goal of ours, but the solution there isn't to keep the learning cliff facing support pilots. Quote:I understand how much solo players rely on killing key enemy ships fast and how anything that helps gangs keep their ships alive is going to make solo harder. In the end I believe that the stats on these ships will make them managable for solo and small gangs to face. Pretty much every new thread from fozzie has him saying "I know this makes solo pvp harder but I think its ok"{/quote} Thats because w/o AOE there is basically no way to do anything that effects the game that doesnt also help blobs. |
Captain Africa
GRIM MARCH SpaceMonkey's Alliance
34
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 06:53:00 -
[633] - Quote
CCP Fozzie I appreciate your work , but this is really becoming ridiculous. I view ship fitting as a fine art and spend a lot of time and money in maximizing every ounce of each ship and implants to enhance it.
Every damn time you change **** ,it costs me a fortune to adapt. IGÇÖm using t2 rigs on most of my setups . I donGÇÖt mind you changing ships , but then make RIGS changeable without losing them.
Btw I'm not talking one or two ships here I am talking huge losses .... Its so easy to just aaaahm lets change this lets change that ....get your **** together or give me my money back !
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
7215
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 07:12:00 -
[634] - Quote
Captain Africa wrote:CCP Fozzie I appreciate your work , but this is really becoming ridiculous. I view ship fitting as a fine art and spend a lot of time and money in maximizing every ounce of each ship and implants to enhance it.
Every damn time you change **** ,it costs me a fortune to adapt. IGÇÖm using t2 rigs on most of my setups . I donGÇÖt mind you changing ships , but then make RIGS changeable without losing them.
Btw I'm not talking one or two ships here I am talking huge losses .... Its so easy to just aaaahm lets change this lets change that ....get your **** together or give me my money back !
Man I hope they compensate you the same way they compensated titan and supercarrier pilots after Crucible
oh wait ~*a proud belligerent undesirable*~ TheMittani.com: The premier source for news, commentary and discussion of EVE Online and other games of interest. Malcanis for CSM 8 |
Bobbechk
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
31
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 07:12:00 -
[635] - Quote
sap fozzy |
BobFromMarketing
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
35
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 07:14:00 -
[636] - Quote
Captain Africa wrote:CCP Fozzie I appreciate your work , but this is really becoming ridiculous. I view ship fitting as a fine art and spend a lot of time and money in maximizing every ounce of each ship and implants to enhance it.
Every damn time you change **** ,it costs me a fortune to adapt. IGÇÖm using t2 rigs on most of my setups . I donGÇÖt mind you changing ships , but then make RIGS changeable without losing them.
Btw I'm not talking one or two ships here I am talking huge losses .... Its so easy to just aaaahm lets change this lets change that ....get your **** together or give me my money back !
So you're literally the guy who shows up to fleets in special snowflake setups instead of the actual fleet doctrine because "yours is better"
Well now yours is nerfed lolololol. |
Torei Dutalis
Perkone Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 08:02:00 -
[637] - Quote
Sigras wrote:
Yes, this will reduce the power and possibly the number of shield tanking fits, but you forget to take into account the number of armor ships this helps make viable.
This is a sizeable buff for ships that cannot spare the low slots to fit 3x damage mods AND 3x TEs
Is it really helping just armor ships or ships with smaller engagement ranges? Moas, shield raxes, and a plethora of other shield blaster ships benefit from an environment of smaller engagement ranges. This isn't so much a nerf that "helps armor ships" it just reduces damage projection. Therefore all ships with lower range (and thus a lower propensity to fit TEs) will benefit. This is of course assuming that said armor fit can catch said shield ship that now has less dps. The crux of the arguement that this nerf boosts armor seems to imply that shield ships will be coming into closer engagement ranges or that people will fly more armor ships, neither of which seems to be extremely likely in my opinion. People may force fits that are now borderline viable for kiting, but those fits will eventually die out. Additionally, nerfing the TE to the proposed levels has virtually no effect (read: can still engage at max disruptor range)on kitey Omens and the like as they are optimal users (yes there are like 2 ships who fit like this I know). Essentially this is mostly a nerf to mid-range TE users, as ships with extreme falloff such as Cynabals will still be able to kite with ease. Overall I think the argument has little to do with the shield versus armor dynamic. |
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
584
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 08:32:00 -
[638] - Quote
Torei Dutalis wrote:The crux of the arguement that this nerf boosts armor seems to imply that shield ships will be coming into closer engagement ranges or that people will fly more armor ships, neither of which seems to be extremely likely in my opinion. People may force fits that are now borderline viable for kiting, but those fits will eventually die out. Additionally, nerfing the TE to the proposed levels has virtually no effect (read: can still engage at max disruptor range)on kitey Omens and the like as they are optimal users (yes there are like 2 ships who fit like this I know).
A good argument that the TE nerf doesn't go far enough.
|
Swifty Blowback
Republic University Minmatar Republic
21
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 08:47:00 -
[639] - Quote
Volstruis wrote:I like how this nerf does next to nothing to blob nagas and such, but is yet another change that makes small gang pvp more difficult. (Sort of like most of the tiericide changes) ... Pretty much every new thread from fozzie has him saying "I know this makes solo pvp harder but I think its ok"
Yep. This is possibly the harshest nerf for solo / small gang PVP in a long time. Viable kiting platforms are being slowly reduced. CCP wants players to be social and play in large corps / blobs because their data says they get more monies when players do that. See last CSM summit write-up for details + see trial account spike after massive blob brawls are publicized. The future of solo PVP has never looked so grim.
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
1396
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 09:23:00 -
[640] - Quote
Swifty Blowback wrote:. The future of solo PVP has never looked so grim.
So grim that I spent the entire night PVPing solo unboosted in faction warfare in ships fit with t1 TE's to get used to the difference.
I was shocked to find that there is no noticeable difference.
And by shocked I do mean I told you so.
|
|
Mr Bright
Paradox Collective Choke Point
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 09:28:00 -
[641] - Quote
I cannot express how stupid the change to TE's is. Why should eve players be punished because some tard 3000 man alliance can't handle a fleet of shield tier 3 bc's?? I know this had been the trend of eve for a long time but it really needs to stop here. CCP, if you want to look at something to fix....FIX ECM. Don't sit here and preach to me how it isn't OP. Minmatar ships only advantage is SPEED and RANGE. Take away the range and what else is there for them? You can't just nerf the crap out of TE's and say "well now things are balanced". Minmatar ships cannot soak the damage the other races have. If people are stuggling with shield ships that have TE's fit.....bring tracking disruptors. Use the tools CCP has already provided. You've already destroyed the hurricane so I really hope you stop there. I understand CCP wants to cater to the larger alliances but I really do hope that the attempt to destroy solo/small gang pvp in eve is put to an end. Taking the advantage that minmatar has is a terrible plan to attempt to balance range and tracking. I would start by rethinking some of the ship bonuses as opposed to nerfing the modules. |
Roime
Shiva Furnace
2375
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 09:30:00 -
[642] - Quote
Swifty Blowback wrote:Michael Harari wrote:I like how this nerf does next to nothing to blob nagas and such, but is yet another change that makes small gang pvp more difficult. (Sort of like most of the tiericide changes) ... Pretty much every new thread from fozzie has him saying "I know this makes solo pvp harder but I think its ok"
Yep. The TE nerf is possibly the harshest for solo / small gang PVP in a long time. Viable kiting platforms are being slowly reduced. CCP wants players to be social and play in large corps / blobs because their data says they get more monies when players do that. See last CSM summit write-up for details + see trial account spike after massive blob brawls are publicized. The future of solo PVP has never looked so grim.
You don't have any kills, solo, small gang or blob
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
Roime
Shiva Furnace
2375
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 09:33:00 -
[643] - Quote
Mr Bright wrote: You've already destroyed the hurricane so I really hope you stop there.
1#Oracle 56,256 2#Naga 52,642 3#Tornado 51,917 4#Hurricane 48,758 5#Loki 46,526
It's useless
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
Edward Olmops
Sirius Fleet
42
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 09:45:00 -
[644] - Quote
Hey Fozzie and Rise,
I support the idea of Tracking Enhancers being too strong in their current form compared to other modules.
However, if you would like to alter the balance of shield vs. armor as well... Have you considered doing something with Tracking Computer vs. Tracking Enhancer like with Cap Recharger vs. Capacitor Power Relay?
More specific: instead of -33% Optimal/Fall-Off to all TEs something like just -16% Optimal/Fall-Off and -5% Shield HP or even -16% Optimal/Fall-Off, -5% Ship Velocity (to balance skirmish vs. sitting duck)
I know you dislike "multi-purpose"-modules, but this is slightly different. Compare Capacitor Power Relay/Cap Recharger.
An armor ship has 2 options: a) pick the Cap Recharger in a not-so-important Mid Slot. b) pick the Capacitor Power Relay, get a higher bonus to cap recharge, sacrifice tank, but laugh about the shield boost debuff.
A shield ship has also 2 options, but both do have a catch: a) the Cap Recharger hurts the tank because Mid Slots are essential for shield tanks. b) the Capacitor Power Relay in the Low Slot will also hurt the tank making the choice no no-brainer. Those ships that prefer cap recharge over Cap Boosters are based around sustainability and the shield boost debuff will hurt them significantly.
Net result: It is a tad easier for armor ships to pick up cap recharge which does make sense because they tend to be more cap-hungry. And at the same time cap-stable active shield tanks are harder to build.
Maybe the same could be good for shield vs armor if armor ships (while less agile) could pick up weapon range more easily than shield ships.
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction Whores in space
35
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 09:55:00 -
[645] - Quote
Roime wrote:Mr Bright wrote: You've already destroyed the hurricane so I really hope you stop there. 1#Oracle 56,256 2#Naga 52,642 3#Tornado 51,917 4#Hurricane 48,7585#Loki 46,526 It's useless
I really laugh whenever anyone bring up the number of ships used in killboard hits as if that was a demonstrator of wich one is superior. That plain stupid and blind.
Do you realize the cost of the ship and the fact that people had invested on last few years into the best flavor ships and will nto instantly change because their skills do not allow it, make WAY more impact on those number than the real effective capabilities of those ships?
If you could get numbers of usage of ships only from players with 100+ kills on last year, with a wallet over 10 bil isk and with 80M sp or more, then yes you could use those numbers for something. |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction Whores in space
35
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 09:59:00 -
[646] - Quote
nat longshot wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: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 released with EVE Online: 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 are 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 simultaneously 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! So you just killed the Mach. with changeing the TE's are you fing kidding me. I just got a Vaugar and i own a Mach and you are going to kill my gun range on both of my mission ships are you fing kidding me. Btw CCP Fozzie min. auto cannons are a med. range weapons you #@$%$%^%$^&$ they dont come close to blasters and dont have range of rails if we want to hit something far out we fit Atry with take way to much powergrid and cpu and they have **** POOR TRACKING so why do you just put a gun to my fing head and pull the damn trigger. I dislike CCP Falcon and now iam really not like you on the whole nerf TE and killing the one + side flying min had. ccp thinking = goon meat shield MORONS!!!
Game balance must catter first for PVP. PVE is and should be relegated to second place because you are not competign with anyone so there is no real unbalance.
Whining because of the mission ships is the most useless whine you can do. Want a "fix"for that? Propose them and uspport that they make the faction modules a bit stronger, sicne faction modules are mostly used on PVE ships that would not hurt so much PVP balance. |
Roime
Shiva Furnace
2376
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 10:03:00 -
[647] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Roime wrote:Mr Bright wrote: You've already destroyed the hurricane so I really hope you stop there. 1#Oracle 56,256 2#Naga 52,642 3#Tornado 51,917 4#Hurricane 48,7585#Loki 46,526 It's useless I really laugh whenever anyone bring up the number of ships used in killboard hits as if that was a demonstrator of wich one is superior. That plain stupid and blind. Do you realize the cost of the ship and the fact that people had invested on last few years into the best flavor ships and will nto instantly change because their skills do not allow it, make WAY more impact on those number than the real effective capabilities of those ships? If you could get numbers of usage of ships only from players with 100+ kills on last year, with a wallet over 10 bil isk and with 80M sp or more, then yes you could use those numbers for something.
I really laugh when someone claims that a ship is USELESS!!!1111 and OBSOLOTE!!!111 and NERFED TO GROUND!!111 when it clearly is not
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
116
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 10:18:00 -
[648] - Quote
Roime wrote:I really laugh when someone claims that a ship is USELESS!!!1111 and OBSOLOTE!!!111 and NERFED TO GROUND!!111 when it clearly is not You are wrong. Clearly it is useless because it's NOT #1. In fact no Minmatar ship is in the TOP 2. Which clearly indicates that they have NO DECENT SHIPS at all. I would try to explain it to you, but words don't exist that are small enough for you to understand, for you are obviously a mongrel idiot if you do not agree with my EFT-based point of view. This TE nerf is the DEATHKNELL for minmatar ships which are already useless.
And you smell like poo.
|
Imigo Montoya
Abraxsys Get Off My Lawn
116
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 10:32:00 -
[649] - Quote
Wow, missed this one so coming in late to the party.
Fortunately I fly Sabres more than Vagabonds these days, but the ability of a Vagabond (or Cynabal in the same role) to maintain range and kite is vital to their survival as skirmishing ships. The mantra goes like this: "A scrammed vaga is a dead vaga".
Seeing as this isn't affecting the speed of the ship, that's one thing which is not so bad, but it will certainly be taking a notch out of the applied DPS of a kiting AC/Blaster ship. What I'm not sure on at this point is just how much.
Can we get a graph of DPS over range for the selection of all medium range turreted weapons (Pulse Lasers with Scorch, Blasters with Null, and Autocannons with Barrage) of all sizes (S, M, and L), with one TE fitted, before and after the changes? Perhaps on comparable ships for bonuses (eg Harby/Brutix/Cane, or Zealot/Deimos/Vagabond).
Data like that would really help me decide whether I like the change or not. |
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
528
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 10:37:00 -
[650] - Quote
Vladimir Norkoff wrote: In fact no Minmatar ship is in the TOP 2.
Vagas are the best hac (although not that much better than zealot), and sleips are the best CS. Very arguably, sabres are the best dictor. Thats the extent of that crazy "winmatar dominance" you hear about |
|
Goldiiee
Superior Ratio High Sec Dropouts
313
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 10:40:00 -
[651] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Game balance must catter first for PVP. PVE is and should be relegated to second place because you are not competign with anyone so there is no real unbalance.
Whining because of the mission ships is the most useless whine you can do. Want a "fix"for that? Propose them and uspport that they make the faction modules a bit stronger, sicne faction modules are mostly used on PVE ships that would not hurt so much PVP balance. Without going into the fact that your supposition and your conclusion are both horribly misguided I would ask that you try to realise that PVP is the destruction portion of the sandbox and PVE is the building portion of the sandbox, one cannot exist without the other.
PVP is not, and should not, be the primary focus of rebalancing, as I am confident if the only ship available in EVE was a noobship there would still be people lining up to kill each other in it, and then spurge in local of how badass they are.
As for the Opinion that PVE is not competing against anyone. PVE is all about competition, for instance when contesting for the Loot drop in spawned sites, you are absolutely competing against everyone, PVEGÇÖers and PVPGÇÖers alike, with the added competition against time itself. Missions are competition as well but for both ISK generation and standings generation, so reduction in the ability to complete these effectively translates into moved goalposts, competition for these goals are indirectly PVP.
Not all PVP is decided in a Killmail, as not all Killmails are PVP (Or do you think a mining barge kill is PVP?).
Doing both PVP and PVE I can see how this will directly affect my current game play, the difference is I know all the PVPGÇÖers I go up against will be similarly handicapped, whereas the NPCGÇÖs I have to contend with are not going to be handicapped at all, since the code for NPCGÇÖs seems to be written in cuneiform.
This game is Not about PVP, itGÇÖs about building empire, and using PVPGÇÖers as pawns, this is something most people donGÇÖt seem to get, everyone in EVE is a pawn, probably even the kings.
Reason and logic never wins over Stubborn and Convinced (But I still try..) |
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
528
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 10:47:00 -
[652] - Quote
A better way to balance shields vs armor would be to reduce the base sig on all hulls and increase the sig bloom of shield modules. Add sig bloom to invulns and shield hardeners.
Add base armor to local armor reps. Give shield boosters a smaller sig penalty than buffer.
Stacking penalize both field extenders and trimarks.
Increase the bonus to speed from heating a mwd, and decrease the sig penalty of mwd. One problem with armor is that after mwd sig bloat, its bascally the same size sig as shields (enormous).
|
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
584
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 10:48:00 -
[653] - Quote
Roime wrote:Swifty Blowback wrote:Michael Harari wrote:I like how this nerf does next to nothing to blob nagas and such, but is yet another change that makes small gang pvp more difficult. (Sort of like most of the tiericide changes) ... Pretty much every new thread from fozzie has him saying "I know this makes solo pvp harder but I think its ok"
Yep. The TE nerf is possibly the harshest for solo / small gang PVP in a long time. Viable kiting platforms are being slowly reduced. CCP wants players to be social and play in large corps / blobs because their data says they get more monies when players do that. See last CSM summit write-up for details + see trial account spike after massive blob brawls are publicized. The future of solo PVP has never looked so grim. You don't have any kills, solo, small gang or blob
Well, that explains why his future looks so grim. |
Lina Halid
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 10:52:00 -
[654] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:Vladimir Norkoff wrote: In fact no Minmatar ship is in the TOP 2.
Vagas are the best hac (although not that much better than zealot), and sleips are the best CS. Very arguably, sabres are the best dictor. Thats the extent of that crazy "winmatar dominance" you hear about
Being the best out of a generally gimped class doesn't say a lot. And why do you compare CSs not titans? I mean you can't call command ships something everybody flyes nowdays. |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction Whores in space
36
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 10:52:00 -
[655] - Quote
Roime wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:Roime wrote:Mr Bright wrote: You've already destroyed the hurricane so I really hope you stop there. 1#Oracle 56,256 2#Naga 52,642 3#Tornado 51,917 4#Hurricane 48,7585#Loki 46,526 It's useless I really laugh whenever anyone bring up the number of ships used in killboard hits as if that was a demonstrator of wich one is superior. That plain stupid and blind. Do you realize the cost of the ship and the fact that people had invested on last few years into the best flavor ships and will nto instantly change because their skills do not allow it, make WAY more impact on those number than the real effective capabilities of those ships? If you could get numbers of usage of ships only from players with 100+ kills on last year, with a wallet over 10 bil isk and with 80M sp or more, then yes you could use those numbers for something. I really laugh when someone claims that a ship is USELESS!!!1111 and OBSOLOTE!!!111 and NERFED TO GROUND!!111 when it clearly is not
And I dare you to show where I said that the hurricane is useless. I am just arguing that you are using STUPID and USELESS DATA to make your point, even if your point is not wrong. |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction Whores in space
36
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 10:59:00 -
[656] - Quote
Goldiiee wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:Game balance must catter first for PVP. PVE is and should be relegated to second place because you are not competign with anyone so there is no real unbalance.
Whining because of the mission ships is the most useless whine you can do. Want a "fix"for that? Propose them and uspport that they make the faction modules a bit stronger, sicne faction modules are mostly used on PVE ships that would not hurt so much PVP balance. Without going into the fact that your supposition and your conclusion are both horribly misguided I would ask that you try to realise that PVP is the destruction portion of the sandbox and PVE is the building portion of the sandbox, one cannot exist without the other. PVP is not, and should not, be the primary focus of rebalancing, as I am confident if the only ship available in EVE was a noobship there would still be people lining up to kill each other in it, and then spurge in local of how badass they are. As for the Opinion that PVE is not competing against anyone. PVE is all about competition, for instance when contesting for the Loot drop in spawned sites, you are absolutely competing against everyone, PVEGÇÖers and PVPGÇÖers alike, with the added competition against time itself. Missions are competition as well but for both ISK generation and standings generation, so reduction in the ability to complete these effectively translates into moved goalposts, competition for these goals are indirectly PVP. Not all PVP is decided in a Killmail, as not all Killmails are PVP (Or do you think a mining barge kill is PVP?). Doing both PVP and PVE I can see how this will directly affect my current game play, the difference is I know all the PVPGÇÖers I go up against will be similarly handicapped, whereas the NPCGÇÖs I have to contend with are not going to be handicapped at all, since the code for NPCGÇÖs seems to be written in cuneiform. This game is Not about PVP, itGÇÖs about building empire, and using PVPGÇÖers as pawns, this is something most people donGÇÖt seem to get, everyone in EVE is a pawn, probably even the kings.
You are trying to be shortminded? PVE does not need to be focus of rebalance of primarely PVP ships! PVE is a secondary activity that you can use PVE ships. And PVP can happen very well without any rat killing. PVP only need effectively mining.
PVE is nto a competition, you are not going to earn less ISK because the other guy is faster running missions. If all missioning is speed down 2% (that is the most imapact these changes would have) then that would create a very very slight trend of deflation that would nulify those losses and at tned the impact woudl be insignificant.
On PVP if one ship gets stronger, others get weaker, that does not happen in PVE because its not a DIRECT COMPETITION (except when you run incursions on a non optimized way without agreeing on systems sharing).
And youa re wrong. this game IS about PVP.! The empire building is the background so we can have PVP.
People ran missiosn for years before the trackign enhancers had ANY FALLOFF bonus. I made BILLIONS in my vargur BEFORE the minmatar buff. With shorter falloff, no falloff bonus modules and LESS damage on the guns.
THERE is NO NEED for inter ship balance on PVE! Missioning is for isk making not for competition or fun. |
Swifty Blowback
Republic University Minmatar Republic
21
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 11:08:00 -
[657] - Quote
Roime wrote:Swifty Blowback wrote:Michael Harari wrote:I like how this nerf does next to nothing to blob nagas and such, but is yet another change that makes small gang pvp more difficult. (Sort of like most of the tiericide changes) ... Pretty much every new thread from fozzie has him saying "I know this makes solo pvp harder but I think its ok"
Yep. The TE nerf is possibly the harshest for solo / small gang PVP in a long time. Viable kiting platforms are being slowly reduced. CCP wants players to be social and play in large corps / blobs because their data says they get more monies when players do that. See last CSM summit write-up for details + see trial account spike after massive blob brawls are publicized. The future of solo PVP has never looked so grim. You don't have any kills, solo, small gang or blob
I have many. This alt has none. EvE eh! Damn tricky for some to grasp simple concepts... |
Goldiiee
Superior Ratio High Sec Dropouts
313
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 11:12:00 -
[658] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:You are trying to be shortminded?. No I dont think I am.
Kagura Nikon wrote: Missioning is for isk making not for competition or fun. But this is. Reason and logic never wins over Stubborn and Convinced (But I still try..) |
Swifty Blowback
Republic University Minmatar Republic
21
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 11:18:00 -
[659] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Swifty Blowback wrote:. The future of solo PVP has never looked so grim. So grim that I spent the entire night PVPing solo unboosted in faction warfare in ships fit with t1 TE's to get used to the difference. I was shocked to find that there is no noticeable difference. And by shocked I do mean I told you so.
It's a good job CCP haven't made a vast quantity of other changes that also hurt soloers... Oh wait...
P.S. "no noticeable difference". Wow. Looks like everyone using T2 TEs should have used t1s and used the CPU elsewhere huh! Strange as I'm sure I get at least 10% more DPS with T2 TEs over T1s at kiting range in a 'cane. |
Lina Halid
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 11:20:00 -
[660] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Swifty Blowback wrote:. The future of solo PVP has never looked so grim. So grim that I spent the entire night PVPing solo unboosted in faction warfare in ships fit with t1 TE's to get used to the difference. I was shocked to find that there is no noticeable difference. And by shocked I do mean I told you so.
Faction warfare isn't a solo pvp. Try to fly 30+ jumps in 0.0 and find a good target for your lonely ship and not die - that will be a solo pvp. |
|
|
|
|
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 |