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) |

Daneel Trevize
Give my 11percent back
316
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 00:45:00 -
[121] - Quote
P.S. I'm quite sure the game devs are aware that kiting will still be much stronger for outnumbered encounters, in that you'd still get most success from causing your opponents to mis-position out of support range, or you can just leave as you aren't committed to (unlinked) hard tackle range, and this is independant of TE changes.
I really wouldn't mind a direct Machariel and Cynabal bonus nerf/tweak though, along with the obvious needed tier3 BCs mobility/tracking nerf. These are the real ships that push TEs from understandable to broken. |

Michael Harari
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
502
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 00:45:00 -
[122] - Quote
Are there any plans to adjust the tracking disruptor numbers in step with tracking enhancers? |

Michael Harari
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
502
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 00:50:00 -
[123] - Quote
Also fozzie, on the PL AT teams, how many ships used even a single TE? |

Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld White Mountain Coalition
86
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 00:52:00 -
[124] - Quote
Hoarr wrote:Little Dragon Khamez wrote:As a former heavy missile user, I too would like to say 'feel my pain' to all of the minmater whiners out there. This is long overdue and I for one support these changes. This is literally not even the same issue, aside from all the sperg that is about to flow into this thread. Small changes in range at short distances have huge impacts because of the range of points.
|

Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld White Mountain Coalition
86
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 00:57:00 -
[125] - Quote
Hoarr wrote:Little Dragon Khamez wrote:As a former heavy missile user, I too would like to say 'feel my pain' to all of the minmater whiners out there. This is long overdue and I for one support these changes. This is literally not even the same issue, aside from all the sperg that is about to flow into this thread. Small changes in range at short distances have huge impacts because of the range of points.
It is the same, small changes that radically affect gameplay, except in the case of heavy missiles the changes were not so small. |
|

CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
4602

|
Posted - 2013.03.27 00:58:00 -
[126] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:Also fozzie, on the PL AT teams, how many ships used even a single TE?
Obviously can't say for sure with ATX or the NEO. However for instance the AT8 Sleipnirs had 1x TE for the team used vs Dead Terrorists and in the final, and 2x TEs for the setup used against Darkside and the one used vs Monks of War and Paisti Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|

Bouh Revetoile
TIPIAKS
265
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 00:59:00 -
[127] - Quote
Daneel Trevize wrote:I want to reiterate that CCP really can't mention a TE change without talking about how terrible medium railguns are & that they should be buffed, in damage applied as well as fitting. You tell me, does anyone use them for anything except noobs in lvl3s? I'm aware this is titled a 'Part One' thread. In fact, this may be a buff to railguns, because they have the best base range and lack a lot more tracking than range. Railguns are a lot less sensible to TE nerf than other weapons. |

Daneel Trevize
Give my 11percent back
316
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 01:01:00 -
[128] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote:Daneel Trevize wrote:I want to reiterate that CCP really can't mention a TE change without talking about how terrible medium railguns are & that they should be buffed, in damage applied as well as fitting. You tell me, does anyone use them for anything except noobs in lvl3s? I'm aware this is titled a 'Part One' thread. In fact, this may be a buff to railguns, because they have the best base range and lack a lot more tracking than range. Railguns are a lot less sensible to TE nerf than other weapons. But having terrible tracking shouldn't be a good reason why they aren't sensitive to Tracking Enhancer changes.  |

Venustas Blue
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 01:05:00 -
[129] - Quote
If your fighting at 0, theres no way to disengage say if your off gate. Unless your ****** fit with stabs or possibly AB 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 he burns out of range, allowing you to warp out. There's little skill in fighting at 0, 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, minnie ships 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. 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. |

Joe D'Trader
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
167
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 01:13:00 -
[130] - Quote
I always wanted to use some of these Gallente mid slots for TCs, guess now I'll have to try. |
|

M1k3y Koontz
Anominous
126
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 01:14:00 -
[131] - Quote
Is nerfing TEs going to close the gap between shield and armor? No.
Armor will become more popular when the first worry of any PVPer is no longer "How many guys are waiting on the other side of the gate" and they no longer have to worry about running on a moment's notice. The reason shield tanks are so popular on ALL the ships (Im looking at you shield Oracle, Talos) is because shield tanks have the ability to GTFO should an engagement turn against a pilot and armor tanks are greatly lacking.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp. |

Bouh Revetoile
TIPIAKS
265
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 01:15:00 -
[132] - Quote
Daneel Trevize wrote:But having terrible tracking shouldn't be a good reason why they aren't sensitive to Tracking Enhancer changes.  You fool ! Railguns don't care about TE nerf because it affect *all* turrets equally, but the farther from closest range you get, the better they become, because there base range being very long, ammo spread a lot farther than for any other weapon. Hence, this TE nerf mean that if beam or arties need to use a longer range ammo, railgun won't necessary need it, or they will lose less than the others anyway.
This change is a buff to railguns and a buff to armor tanking. |

Lee Vanden
Macabre Votum Northern Coalition.
4
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 01:16:00 -
[133] - Quote
I think this is going to hurt Gallente blaster boats more than it is Minmatar and it's not so long since they were finally made useable, please consider increasing the range of blasters if you're going to go ahead with this CCP. |

Goldiiee
Superior Ratio High Sec Dropouts
312
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 01:19:00 -
[134] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:We're not changing the relative strength of faction TEs vs T2 at all. Faction retains its tracking and fittings advantage, and if the faction TEs were worth the price premium over T2 for your purposes before they will continue to be worth the price premium. I have always wondered at the reasoning behind the equivalent values of meta-5 to meta-8, it would seem that 3 meta levels would result in a more noticeable difference than 7 saved CPU.
After this proposed change (Who am I kidding? When has it ever changed back after 'proposed' regardless of argument) the effective value of meta-8 TE's will be even less apparent and devalue the current (As of today) stock to 'worthless waste of ISK'. I assume you already knew this but felt it warranted saying anyways.
Reason and logic never wins over Stubborn and Convinced (But I still try..) |

McBorsk
Multispace Technologies Inc Yulai Federation
7
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 01:22:00 -
[135] - Quote
Not a big fan of the TE change. |

Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
37
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 01:25:00 -
[136] - Quote
Roderick Grey wrote: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? How about using tracking computers, if you "hurting for range"?... |

Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
884
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 01:27:00 -
[137] - Quote
i just ran some plots on a pve mach and wanted to share the results. (the TCs are scripted for range.) it seems like the typical shield mission mach will lose about 100dps @40k and around 150dps @60-80k. it's somewhat annoying but I can live with it. on a side note, notice how currently, three tracking enhancers are exactly as effective as four tracking computers, three scripted for range, one for tracking.
"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings" -MXZF |

Goldiiee
Superior Ratio High Sec Dropouts
312
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 01:31:00 -
[138] - Quote
One more thing; I find the coincidence of NPC tracking disruption being OP, combined with even less effective TE modules, to be the death knell to turreted mission runners that have been struggling to cope with Sansha rats.
The buckets of tears in the forums have been overwhelming since the NPC change, after this, the tears will become a tidal wave.
Reason and logic never wins over Stubborn and Convinced (But I still try..) |

Lin Fatale
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
15
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 01:34:00 -
[139] - Quote
I understand your intention to nerf TE
but I have the feeling that kiting and roaming shield setups which almost fight outmunered already vs the local blop and rely on range and tracking will suffer most of this nerf
|

Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
884
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 01:42:00 -
[140] - Quote
Goldiiee wrote:One more thing; I find the coincidence of NPC tracking disruption being OP, combined with even less effective TE modules, to be the death knell to turreted mission runners that have been struggling to cope with Sansha rats.
The buckets of tears in the forums have been overwhelming since the NPC change, after this, the tears will become a tidal wave.
if you fly against sanshas, you are most likely armor tanked or in a nightmare i.e. you either have 0 or 1 tracking enhancer. so basically, the TE change hardly affects you. also, didn't i read somewhere that NPC TD is getting nerfed again?
"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings" -MXZF |
|

IrJosy
Club 1621 Goonswarm Federation
22
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 01:51:00 -
[141] - Quote
Cowwarrior is not impressed. |

Omnathious Deninard
Extrinsic Operations
731
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 01:55:00 -
[142] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:[ We're not changing the relative strength of faction TEs vs T2 at all. Faction retains its tracking and fittings advantage, and if the faction TEs were worth the price premium over T2 for your purposes before they will continue to be worth the price premium. Are you concerned about how this might drive the already high faction variations up even higher? Or do you have a plan for faction LP stores in store for Odyssey. Ideas For Drone Improvement Updated 11/30/12Catastrophic Uprising is Recruiting |

Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
222
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 01:57:00 -
[143] - Quote
Lee Vanden wrote:I think this is going to hurt Gallente blaster boats more than it is Minmatar and it's not so long since they were finally made useable, please consider increasing the range of blasters if you're going to go ahead with this CCP.
I've got a few blaster based setups this is gonna hit pretty hard :S much more so than other setups, hence my response when I first heard about this is pretty much un-reproduceable here. Not a fan of these "closing the gap by nerfing towards the middle" type tweaks that seem to be being introduced alongside otherwise great changes of late.
|

Hellakhanasos
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
17
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 02:00:00 -
[144] - 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.
After sifting through the turd of many prior posts over the last couple of pages. This is more of less spot on.
|

Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
492
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 02:01:00 -
[145] - Quote
My Gallente cruiser fits are not looking forward to this patch. Shield / blaster setups were already really borderline, they'll now be depressingly ineffective.
Why do we want to skew the game towards "TOTAL COMMITMENT" type fits? Whats wrong with skirmishing? |

Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
492
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 02:03:00 -
[146] - Quote
Hellakhanasos wrote: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. After sifting through the turd of many prior posts over the last couple of pages. This is more of less spot on.
Yeah basically this. |

Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
37
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 02:06:00 -
[147] - Quote
If the best post you can pick from a whole thread is a pile of words that noone is able to comprehend... May be you should consider your sanity? |

IrJosy
Club 1621 Goonswarm Federation
22
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 02:08:00 -
[148] - Quote
The problem with nerfing RSB's is that it is too hard to get fights without them in many situations. Many players simply want to run away or cloak and warp. An interceptor crashing the gate simply can't be caught without an instalocking 90% web ship on the gate. Often that instalocking 90% web ship is assisted to instalocking status by RSB's. Even with an instalocking 90% web ship the chances to kill a good pilot in a fast ship are NOT 100%. Again, it is too easy to run away or avoid pvp in this game. The introduction of cloaky nulified t3 cruisers has exacerbated this problem. We need to stop nerfing pvp and start giving players more tools to force players into pvp. If players are going into low/hi-sec there need to be risks like that little pop up message suggests. It is far too easy to run around completely safe from any form of uncosensual pvp in null/low sec and it is seemingly getting easier with every change. At what point is enough, enough? We are already fairly far down the slippery slope of turning this game into carebear freindly themepark and less of a sandbox. Changes like cloaky haulers, buffing mining barges, adding cloaking delay to HIC bubbles, nullified t3 cruisers, and most recently reducing the scan res from RSBs are steps in the wrong direction. I suggest you step back for a moment and give some equally impressive tools to those of us looking for pvp as you have provided those seeking to avoid it. |

Dominick Owusu
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
4
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 02:11:00 -
[149] - Quote
You know things are silly when you have arty thrashers with 4791mm Scan res on grid. I'll miss that, but local sebos will still get me to 4461mm. No big deal. :) |

Muad 'dib
The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos
808
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 02:13:00 -
[150] - Quote
TE changes are ********.
Optimal is the issue not tracking - tracking is bad as it is nerfing TE bonus by half is just..... well stupid
if long range is a problem NERF LONG RANGE GUNS, not a stupid blanket TE nerf.
as many have said, blasters are hard enough to use as it is.
Remote sebos and stuff, didnt think there was a problem before but hey, a bit of a nerf isnt going to mean a whole lot since everyone stacks the shite out of them any way.
Canes will be in pain to use after this change, brutix and talos (lol).......
Go ferox? http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/4375/mynewsig2.jpg |
|
|
|
|
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 |