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) |

2manno Asp
The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos
168
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 02:14:00 -
[151] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: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.
But TC's are mid slots Fozzie and there are a half dozen more reasons this is a terrible idea. If anything, ships need increased ranges, from blasters on up.
Decreasing ranges is like shrinking the size of a basketball court. It's already crowded under the hoop, making it more so is bad for the game.
I hate this idea. I think it's sophmoric as I listen to the rhetoric about minmatar dominance, TC's, and amor vs shield. Makes me think you guys don't understand the issues at all.
I hope you scrap this terrible idea. |

Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
37
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 02:17:00 -
[152] - Quote
IrJosy wrote: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. Accept the fact that there's ships that you won't be able to kill. Life is harsh, you have to live with it. |

James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4429
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 02:20:00 -
[153] - Quote
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. Malcanis for CSM 8 Module activation timers are buggy - CCP please fix |

2manno Asp
The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos
169
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 02:23:00 -
[154] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote: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? Lol wat? Stop trying to kite in a Thorax hull then. As someone who predominately flies Gallente, I can only think of Talos & terrible kiting Thorax hulls as the ships that routinely fit TEs. Gallente is the best it's been in a long time, and this nerf to TEs just means people are going to be closer to blaster range 
and your obvious bias is why your opinion should be disregarded. |

Maggeridon Thoraz
Reconfiguration Nation Existential Anxiety
53
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 02:28:00 -
[155] - Quote
seem like the title of the next expansion was choosen right.
Odyssey: cpp is on an Odyssey and dont know where the really going with the nerfs |

Mina Sebiestar
Mactabilis Simplex Cursus
295
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 02:28:00 -
[156] - Quote
I don't like it,affect minmatar the most and both weapon systems for that matter.
But real massacre will be in autocanons so i have q for CCP Fozzie
Hail ammo to my knowledge it remained nerfed while others ammo got buffed for the same reasons you are nerfing TE now....
Will you change Hail ammo stats? http://i.imgur.com/1N37t.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/KTjFEt6.jpg I dont always fly stabber but when i do...
|

Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
493
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 02:31:00 -
[157] - Quote
Tonto Auri wrote: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?
I you can't be bothered to read, we'd all prefer if you couldn't be bothered to post either. |

Ak'athra J'ador
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
17
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 02:35:00 -
[158] - Quote
Soo.... TE nerf. Yea just what the game needs. Let's cram EVERYONE into a 10km bubble.
Totally going in the wrong direction. The game needs to be opened up, not closed down. |

Ap01110n
Creative Ventures
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 02:35:00 -
[159] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Dabigredboat wrote: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? This change is specifically designed to change the balance between TEs and TCs. TEs still give very good range bonuses, decent tracking bonuses, and do it with less than half the fittings cost of a TC. I know that this will affect 0.0 fleet doctrines, but shaking up doctrines a bit isn't something we consider a negative.
It wont shake up doctrines, only serve to solidify them.
TC fit pulse NaPocs are currently solidly dominant in nullsec, only (ocassionally) challenged by Rokhs (which for the past 4 years havent been used at all until recently).
If you want to shake up doctrines make torp Ravens useable and leave rokhs alone. T3 BCs probably need a range nerf, but not at the expense of every other skirmish style ship.
Shields have never been dominant in anything but small scale hit and run tactics (except for Tengus which is a separate issue altogether). For the past 2+ years its been all amarr armor (or maels just to counter abaddons incredible buffer).
Shield caps and supers are regarded as "unuseable" in major conflicts because there are no solid shield subcap doctrines. God forbid you buy a Hel, theyre pathetic compared to anything else. |

Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
495
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 02:38:00 -
[160] - Quote
I don't really get the RSB nerf either. Guy guys we need a way to make burning back to gates easier. Because this game really needs to be more forgiving of pilot error. |
|

James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4431
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 02:40:00 -
[161] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:I don't really get the RSB nerf either. Guy guys we need a way to make burning back to gates easier. Because this game really needs to be more forgiving of pilot error. Agreed. Malcanis for CSM 8 Module activation timers are buggy - CCP please fix |

Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
495
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 02:41:00 -
[162] - Quote
Basically you should probably go back to 2007 game balance, where webs were death, on-grid probing took long enough to allow sniping ships to work, and both kiting ships AND immobile, close-range death ships both worked.
...and people couldn't burn back to gates. |

Alexandra Vyvourant
State War Academy Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 02:42:00 -
[163] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:I don't really get the RSB nerf either. Guy guys we need a way to make burning back to gates easier. Because this game really needs to be more forgiving of pilot error.
yea, and let's be sure that you can't shoot anyone from too far either. we want everyone to pile on top of each other.
we want all kiting ships to fight in scram range...
wait. what..?
|

Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
495
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 02:44:00 -
[164] - Quote
Alexandra Vyvourant wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:I don't really get the RSB nerf either. Guy guys we need a way to make burning back to gates easier. Because this game really needs to be more forgiving of pilot error. yea, and let's be sure that you can't shoot anyone from too far either. we want everyone to pile on top of each other. we want all kiting ships to fight in scram range... wait. what..?
Its imperative that they either fight inside scram/web range or don't do any damage outside it. Otherwise they could conceivably kill my armor-tanked gimmick Myrmidon if I engage like a moron without baiting them in first. That's no fun! |

Suyer
Explorer Corps Polarized.
2
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 02:54:00 -
[165] - Quote
>greentext story time as a tl;dr >playing eve, not in a huge napfest like bluedoo >want to fight >mfw I get blobbed anywhere I go >learn to adapt, fly fast long range ships to allow for my escape >mfw raivi and kil2 become CCP devs >hope they make the game harder for lamer pubbies who blue up at the first sign of trouble >mfw TE's going to be nerfed >mfw force multipliers like links are getting nerfed >mfw they nerf HMLs >mfw they nerf the hurricane and the drake in kiting setups >mfw they think I should be flying the prophecy and myrm (lol no way CCP, im not going into scram range ever) >mfw they're going to nerf T3's >mfw there are still no viable armor kite setups where I don't have to triple box my ship and skirm/legion links to make it work >mfw there is still SP loss when you use T3's (seriously this is a joke i've lost probably like 5mil sp, it's max dumb) >Why is CCP making it harder for me to kite nerds >mfw they think me winning 1v20 is unfair >don't realize that pubbies suck and I'm abusing my superior knowledge and experience to own them >don't realize 99.999999999999% of players are max risk averse and don't want to fit to win, but would rather fit a 10bil isk ratting carrier and then die to pizza >now I have to fight with my talos at 20km >mfw CCP doesn't realize that 20km isn't far enough to kite a 20 man gang at >what am i supposed to do now >mfw maybe I should actually focus on real life instead of this infuriating game
CCP pls stop making any sort of solo pvp in ships above frigate or cruiser size non-viable, tia, I don't like flying frigates except the arty wolf BUT TOO BAD IT RELIES ON 2 TE's .
This is a dumb change.
What should have happened is a significant buff to tracking computers to make them worth fitting over webs. There is no autocannon dominance, the only dominance in pvp I see right now is large blasters. It would be cool if you actually changed modules so that turret based ships that were armor tanked could actually increase their effective range on their weapons. Right now you can fit TC's, but that's literally dumb as balls because TC's suck and webs are way better.
Guess its cool that fozzie wants all small scale pvp to be brawl style pvp.... At this rate, loki links won't even need a nerf because the extra point range and speed won't even be able to be utilized because no ship will be able to shoot that far.
Now I'm going to have to actually fly for hours to find a fight where I won't get instantly blobbed when I go into scram range, instead of just going into a large alliances home system and sitting near the station till they undock and I can start kiting.
Maybe I'll have to fly the 100mn AB tengu again with the nerfed HML's. Too bad that last time I tried that I got volleyed by 4O1k when they undocked literally 50 muninns on me and volleyed my tengu.
|

raging star
BLOOM. Verge of Collapse
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 03:02:00 -
[166] - Quote
A TE nerf of any kind is not really needed, If you guys think some ships are over power in this area then target them specifically instead of all of them. MIN ships and gallente ships will be hurt really badly by TE nerf and tier 3 are find as they are. from my point of view the game is fine as it is let it be! |

Beekeeper Bob
Beekeepers Anonymous
557
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 03:03:00 -
[167] - Quote
As usual, CCP decides unilaterally that they need to nerf something, and then they go way over the top....
I wonder if they ever consider the big picture when doing this, or it's simply:
"Lets screw with this, and see what happens, we can always nerf everything else to match."
The single biggest danger to EVE is the proliferation of ALTS! Kill an alt today!
Petition for a Minimum bounty of 10 mil. Prevent useless bounties!
|

UR13L
THORN Syndicate THORN Alliance
15
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 03:07:00 -
[168] - Quote
Ap01110n wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Dabigredboat wrote: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? This change is specifically designed to change the balance between TEs and TCs. TEs still give very good range bonuses, decent tracking bonuses, and do it with less than half the fittings cost of a TC. I know that this will affect 0.0 fleet doctrines, but shaking up doctrines a bit isn't something we consider a negative. It wont shake up doctrines, only serve to solidify them. TC fit pulse NaPocs are currently solidly dominant in nullsec, only (ocassionally) challenged by Rokhs (which for the past 4 years havent been used at all until recently). If you want to shake up doctrines make torp Ravens useable and leave rokhs alone. T3 BCs probably need a range nerf, but not at the expense of every other skirmish style ship. Shields have never been dominant in anything but small scale hit and run tactics (except for Tengus which is a separate issue altogether). For the past 2+ years its been all amarr armor (or maels just to counter abaddons incredible buffer). Shield caps and supers are regarded as "unuseable" in major conflicts because there are no solid shield subcap doctrines. God forbid you buy a Hel, theyre pathetic compared to anything else.
Not to mention (especially sniper) HACs being completely outmoded by tier 3 battlecruisers - and now even moreso |

Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
498
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 03:19:00 -
[169] - Quote
Yeah everyone can agree that armor tanked ships were kind of stupid, and I think CCP were on the right track with the armor buffs (but didn't go far enough). The way to improve PvP / make formerly useless ships viable is to buff armor tanking, not run skirmish fits into the ground across the board.
I'd rather see a buff to tracking computers (allowing immobile ships to project damage better) than a range nerf to kiting ships.
Basically kiting is the EVE-equivalent of oversteer while driving cars (think drifting if you don't know what this means)-- tricky to get right, super rewarding when you do, and never gets old. |

Apoctasy
the united Negative Ten.
12
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 03:29:00 -
[170] - Quote
The 1/3rd reduction to tracking enhancer range is very extreme. I never met any pvper in game who thought current tracking enhancers are OP, and haven't heard much complaint ever in my years of playing. If you absolutely HAVE to nerf them, I would make it 12.5% and 25%
Your proposals nerf skirmish/kiting ships pretty hard, and they were already hurt hard enough by the Great Nano Nerf Also, non-tier 3 bc snipers are going to suffer and slip even further into non-use. Who the **** will fly a Huginn or Eagle in the future? |
|

Malakai Asamov
Van Diemen's Demise Scrap Iron Flotilla.
14
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 03:30:00 -
[171] - Quote
CCP Fozzie, I think nerfing anything by 33% is quite heavy handed in an iterative approach.
|

Chessur
Life of lively full life thx to shield battery
42
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 03:30:00 -
[172] - Quote
This is hilarious. Now the RLM cerb / caracal are basically unstoppable. In-fact with these changes, HMLs may again become king. If my drake / caracal / cerb / cyclone can now sit at 28K and have nothing but heavy fall off from guns, then dropping tank mods for TP's will be very viable- thus making up for HML short comings.
You know i was concerned with the missile changes at first (i didn't have any gun skills) but now I am glad I didn't waste much time traning into turrets.
CCP why is it your desire to destroy nano / kiting ships? You had relegated it down to a select few ships, but now you have basically booted most of those ships away. Turret based cruisers that are not the zealot are now unplayable.
As for all of the winmatards need dat nerf- have you ever looked at EFT? Do you realize that even with out the nerf most cruiser based minni ships (minus sleip) have horrible damage application at 24/28 k? Hurricane was never that good, and it certainly wasn't during the time of the drake.
CCP do you even play this game? |

Frocke
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
17
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 03:33:00 -
[173] - Quote
Interesting changes.
Praise be to Jesus. |

Apoctasy
the united Negative Ten.
12
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 03:34:00 -
[174] - Quote
Chessur wrote:This is hilarious. Now the RLM cerb / caracal are basically unstoppable. In-fact with these changes, HMLs may again become king. If my drake / caracal / cerb / cyclone can now sit at 28K and have nothing but heavy fall off from guns, then dropping tank mods for TP's will be very viable- thus making up for HML short comings.
You know i was concerned with the missile changes at first (i didn't have any gun skills) but now I am glad I didn't waste much time traning into turrets.
CCP why is it your desire to destroy nano / kiting ships? You had relegated it down to a select few ships, but now you have basically booted most of those ships away. Turret based cruisers that are not the zealot are now unplayable.
As for all of the winmatards need dat nerf- have you ever looked at EFT? Do you realize that even with out the nerf most cruiser based minni ships (minus sleip) have horrible damage application at 24/28 k? Hurricane was never that good, and it certainly wasn't during the time of the drake.
CCP do you even play this game?
Listen to this man. People look at EFT numbers and think, "WOW OP that minmatar boat gets 400-500 dps at 25km!" When in fact the truth is more like 150-250 due to being in deep falloff.
|

soviet56
Wrecking Shots Black Legion.
6
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 03:44:00 -
[175] - Quote
Thanks for nerfing my alliance.
Relevant: The Future is Munnin
Edit: well the past is munnin now vOv |

Taoist Dragon
The Church of Awesome
321
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 03:45:00 -
[176] - Quote
TE nerf? nah just a rebalance along with the ships really.
Now that I've thought about it more. Bring it on!
As for the people saying kiting will be killed or that scram range fighting is a no brainer......really?! you obviously have never kited in scram range before. Lrn2kite when people have a very slightly better chance to catch you!
This directly counters all the crap people have been posting about increasing point range DIRECTLY due to the increase of combat ranges to which TE are very responsible for. That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything. |

IrJosy
Club 1621 Goonswarm Federation
23
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 03:51:00 -
[177] - Quote
Tonto Auri wrote:IrJosy wrote: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. Accept the fact that there's ships that you won't be able to kill. Life is harsh, you have to live with it.
name one |

Chessur
Life of lively full life thx to shield battery
45
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 04:00:00 -
[178] - Quote
Here are some EFT numbers for you for damage application at 28K.
All level 5 skills, no implants, no drugs, no heat.
Minni
Hurricane 2TE 2Gyro Barrage: 228 DPS Cynabal 2TE 2Gyro Barrage: 270 DPS Stabber 2TE 2Gyro Barrage: 166 DPS Vaga 2TE 2Gyro Barrage: 277 DPS Nado 2TE 2Gyro Barrage: 581 DPS
Amarr
Omen: 2TE 2Heat Sink Scorch: 330 DPS Harb 2TE 2Heat Sink Scorch: 445 DPS Zealot 2TE 2Heat Sink Scorch: 412 DPS Omen Navy 2TE 2Heat Sink Scorch: 395 DPS Oracle 2TE 2Heat Sink Scorch: 649 DPS
Gal (Only one ship reaches out this far with guns that are actually usable... ie blasters) Talos 2TE 2Mag Stab Null: 678 DPS
Now for the lulzy part: Caldari
Caracal 2BCS with Fury rapid light missile: 236 DPS Cerberus 2BCS with Scourge Fury rapid light missile: 296 DPS
I will not include any HML because on paper damage is not nearly close to applied damage.
If any one at ccp can understand simple tables, you will notice one thing- giving any of these ships a decrease in optimal or fall off will make everything turn into a brawl. 33% decrease on range for these numbers will make kiting nearly impossible unless you are flying an oracle or zealot. (missile ships excluded)
Why do you hate kiting? Unless you fly a pimped out nado or talos, your pick of cruisers is so limited already. With the proposed changes, you will make almost all turret based ships that are not large size obsoleate, and HMLs / RLMs will rule the sky. Hell even SB's using torps will be viable now. Nothing is going to be hitting them out at 24K anyway.
Please justify this CCP. You clearly have not looked at any of these numbers. Because if you have looked at the these numbers and did still come to the conclusion to nerf TE's asnwer me this-
Why are armor brawling ships becoming the only mode to play this game?
Shockingly not every one that goes out to pvp likes to hit F1 and brawl (or in the case of solo / small gang) get blobbed. |

James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
4432
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 04:04:00 -
[179] - Quote
It's easy to use EFT to find out the effect this would have because the current meta 0 tracking enhancer is the same as the proposed T2 TE would be after the change (as far as the optimal and falloff bonuses are concerned).
With the SFI for example, the damage isn't exactly spectacular - with 3 T2 gyrostabs and 2 T2 TEs it gets 330 DPS with o/f of 3.9/30 with barrage. This amounts to 250 DPS at a typical kiting range of 20 km. With the nerf this gets reduced to an even more anemic 180 DPS. By comparison an Omen without any range mods at all and a single T2 heatsink gets 250 DPS at 24 km with scorch on HPLs. Malcanis for CSM 8 Module activation timers are buggy - CCP please fix |

Chessur
Life of lively full life thx to shield battery
45
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 04:12:00 -
[180] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:It's easy to use EFT to find out the effect this would have because the current meta 0 tracking enhancer is the same as the proposed T2 TE would be after the change (as far as the optimal and falloff bonuses are concerned).
With the SFI for example, the damage isn't exactly spectacular - with 3 T2 gyrostabs and 2 T2 TEs it gets 330 DPS with o/f of 3.9/30 with barrage. This amounts to 250 DPS at a typical kiting range of 20 km. With the nerf this gets reduced to an even more anemic 180 DPS. By comparison an Omen without any range mods at all and a single T2 heatsink gets 250 DPS at 24 km with scorch on HPLs.
No drugs, no heat, no implants all level 5 skills 28K
SFI 2TE 2Gyro gets (with 425mm ) : 151 DPS SFI 2TE 2Gyro gets (with 220 Vulcan) : 122 DPS
Your numbers are way way off. SFI has no fall off bonues, and any sfi that can fit anything is not fit with 425's. Also you can't really kite at 20K. Sure if you are fighting just one or two ships, but normally you will not be at that range.... ever. Unless you have an absolutely amazing tank.
|
|
|
|
|
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 |