EVE Search - Sticky:[Odyssey] Module Rebalancing Part One: RSBs and TEs

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Odyssey] Module Rebalancing Part One: RSBs and TEs

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

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)
Rroff Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 222	Posted - 2013.03.27 04:15:00 - [181] - Quote Chessur wrote: 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. I get the feeling someones been blatted too many times by navy apocs, sniper rail rokhs and kiting tier3s and completely forgot the effect this has on small and medium sized weapons on many setups - for instance dual T2 TEs on blaster boats with the 10% per level falloff bonus like the diemos have a role (mostly anti-tackle) and/or for fighting outnumbered that this change will affect quite heavily.
sten mattson 1st Praetorian Guard Curatores Veritatis Alliance 26	Posted - 2013.03.27 04:15:00 - [182] - Quote Quote: 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. the reason it meant the dominance of minmatars is because they mainly use falloff , and the TE gives 30% more falloff compared to lazors who uses optimal range and only gets 15% more range TEs on lazors arent OP , it was on AC ships and blasters. imho you should have just reduced the TE bonuses to 15% optimal / 20 or 15% more falloff instead of 30% i.e : dont touch the optimal range bonus on the TE , its small enough as is IMMA FIRING MA LAZAR!!!
Sinigr Shadowsong War Tactical Groups SOLAR FLEET 69	Posted - 2013.03.27 04:15:00 - [183] - 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. Great falloff is the only Minmatar's weapon advantage if you ignore capacitor-free turrets, selectable damage type and by far easiest fitting requirements.
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance 4432	Posted - 2013.03.27 04:18:00 - [184] - Quote Sinigr Shadowsong wrote: 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. Great falloff is the only Minmatar's weapon advantage if you ignore capacitor-free turrets, selectable damage type and by far easiest fitting requirements. None of which matter if you can't deal damage to your target anyway.. 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 04:19:00 - [185] - Quote Rroff wrote: Chessur wrote: 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. I get the feeling someones been blatted too many times by navy apocs, sniper rail rokhs and kiting tier3s and completely forgot the effect this has on small and medium sized weapons on many setups - for instance dual T2 TEs on blaster boats with the 10% per level falloff bonus like the diemos have a role (mostly anti-tackle) and/or for fighting outnumbered that this change will affect quite heavily. you have no idea what your talking about. If you are seriously trying to justify using rail / beam ships for kiting.... Then you don't understand kiting. A kiting ship would not be readily killed by either of those two weapon systems. You need to do some math... Then go play more eve PvP
Rroff Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 222	Posted - 2013.03.27 04:23:00 - [186] - Quote Chessur wrote: you have no idea what your talking about. If you are seriously trying to justify using rail / beam ships for kiting.... Then you don't understand kiting. A kiting ship would not be readily killed by either of those two weapon systems. You need to do some math... Then go play more eve PvP Where was I talking about using rail/beam for kiting? tho to be fair my comment was a little off as many of the common fits for those setups use TCs more readily than TEs tho there are TE versions of many of those fits especially kiting tier3s.
Powers Sa GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 582	Posted - 2013.03.27 04:26:00 - [187] - 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. Is there a reason you went with 1/3 instead of 1/4 or 1/5 Vote Nullsec for CSM8 Mynnna Kesper North-á Malc00nis
Chessur Life of lively full life thx to shield battery 45	Posted - 2013.03.27 04:28:00 - [188] - Quote Rroff wrote: Chessur wrote: you have no idea what your talking about. If you are seriously trying to justify using rail / beam ships for kiting.... Then you don't understand kiting. A kiting ship would not be readily killed by either of those two weapon systems. You need to do some math... Then go play more eve PvP Where was I talking about using rail/beam for kiting? tho to be fair my comment was a little off as many of the common fits for those setups use TCs more readily than TEs tho there are TE versions of many of those fits especially kiting tier3s. Kiting t3's use TEs pluse short range guns. As for blaster boats, no other ship outside of the talos / adrestia can use blasters to kite. It seems that people are getting confused with the word kite. Perhaps a better word would be projection. A kiting sheep needs projection to at least 28K to be able to do much. While many gall ships do have some falloff bonus, kiting inside scram / web or less than 20K is really not kiting in the true sense. At those ranges you will be torn to shreds by an enemy gangs dps. Sorry for the confusion
DR BiCarbonate Basgerin Pirate SCUM. 54	Posted - 2013.03.27 04:29:00 - [189] - Quote After the garbage cyclone rework, I dont think i will ever fly shield minmatar ships any more after this patch. Sorry fozzie, your teams rebalancing was great until the BC nerf, now all i see is prophecy's with 100k ehp without even trying. I cant remember the last time i saw a stabber. rifter has been phased out. hurricane double nerf. cyclone rebalance as mentioned before is ******* garbage. jaguar fell off like a rock after crucible. i can see sleipnir nerf to the ground incoming aswell. not sure how i feel about typhoon as primary missile boat, could be good, have yet to see. now te nerf, lol. way to destroy playstyles there fozzie, great job, keep up the good work!
Rroff Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 222	Posted - 2013.03.27 04:32:00 - [190] - Quote Chessur wrote: Kiting t3's use TEs pluse short range guns. As for blaster boats, no other ship outside of the talos / adrestia can use blasters to kite. Deimos (see willl adama's fit) and while not very usual you can fit a prot out like Garmon's adrestia with interesting results. Thorax is also possible with more limited results.

Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 503	Posted - 2013.03.27 04:36:00 - [191] - Quote Chessur wrote: As for blaster boats, no other ship outside of the talos / adrestia can use blasters to kite. Not true... now. The Deimos, Vigilant, and Proteus can do shield-tanked kiting blaster setups. They do a little less dps than ACs at longer ranges (~30+) but are otherwise alright. With this TE nerf though they'll be utter garbage again, just like they were before the null buffs.
Chessur Life of lively full life thx to shield battery 45	Posted - 2013.03.27 04:40:00 - [192] - Quote Show me any fit that a gallente boat with blasters other than talos / adrestia (that is also sub BS size) can use to kite, and i will give you a cake.
Rroff Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 223	Posted - 2013.03.27 04:59:00 - [193] - Quote Quote: [Proteus, example] Damage Control II Federation Navy Magnetic Field Stabilizer Federation Navy Magnetic Field Stabilizer Tracking Enhancer II Tracking Enhancer II Nanofiber Internal Structure II Nanofiber Internal Structure II Republic Fleet Large Shield Extender Republic Fleet Large Shield Extender Corelum C-Type 10MN Microwarpdrive True Sansha Warp Scrambler Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II Medium Core Defense Field Extender II Proteus Defensive - Augmented Plating Proteus Electronics - Friction Extension Processor Proteus Engineering - Capacitor Regeneration Matrix Proteus Offensive - Hybrid Propulsion Armature Proteus Propulsion - Localized Injectors Warrior II x5 Warrior II x5 Hornet EC-300 x5 Just an example fit theres many variations on this fit possible depending on skill level and what you want from it (i.e. change the cap regen sub-system to supplemental for overload bonus). Load it up with snakes, gunnery implants, skirmish links, etc. and you have a very expensive cynabal that (until now) had the suprise factor (clocks up almost 6km/s + turns on a dime) and the choice of 30km scram or 80km point. If you have the skills to fly it lighter tanked you can get some pretty nasty levels of damage projection to.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 143	Posted - 2013.03.27 05:03:00 - [194] - Quote Oh wow, took you long enough. I think TEs will still be better than TCs by miles though. You should cut the falloff bonus by 2/3. Now you just need to fix t2 ammo. Regarding sensor boosters, have you actually fixed the stacking on scan res rigs? I remember that being pretty broken.
Chessur Life of lively full life thx to shield battery 45	Posted - 2013.03.27 05:10:00 - [195] - Quote Rroff wrote: Quote: [Proteus, example] Damage Control II Federation Navy Magnetic Field Stabilizer Federation Navy Magnetic Field Stabilizer Tracking Enhancer II Tracking Enhancer II Nanofiber Internal Structure II Nanofiber Internal Structure II Republic Fleet Large Shield Extender Republic Fleet Large Shield Extender Corelum C-Type 10MN Microwarpdrive True Sansha Warp Scrambler Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II Medium Core Defense Field Extender II Proteus Defensive - Augmented Plating Proteus Electronics - Friction Extension Processor Proteus Engineering - Capacitor Regeneration Matrix Proteus Offensive - Hybrid Propulsion Armature Proteus Propulsion - Localized Injectors Warrior II x5 Warrior II x5 Hornet EC-300 x5 Just an example fit theres many variations on this fit possible depending on skill level and what you want from it (i.e. change the cap regen sub-system to supplemental for overload bonus). Load it up with snakes, gunnery implants, skirmish links, etc. and you have a very expensive cynabal that (until now) had the suprise factor (clocks up almost 6km/s + turns on a dime) and the choice of 30km scram or 80km point. If you have the skills to fly it lighter tanked you can get some pretty nasty levels of damage projection to. right,,,, your dps is abysmal. 20K 343 DPS 30K 175 DPS Considering the amount of money you are pouring into this thing- the only useful part is the scram. Everything else (for the price) is very sub par. Explain to me how DPS like that is going to be effective? Especially for the cost? Why would you ever want to fly this on a regular basis?
Rroff Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 223	Posted - 2013.03.27 05:15:00 - [196] - Quote Chessur wrote: right,,,, your dps is abysmal. 20K 343 DPS 30K 175 DPS Considering the amount of money you are pouring into this thing- the only useful part is the scram. Everything else (for the price) is very sub par. Explain to me how DPS like that is going to be effective? Especially for the cost? Why would you ever want to fly this on a regular basis? As I said its an example fit, you can easily tweak it to do 400-500dps at 30km - don't forget medium 5% hybrid implant is cheap to and if your flying this might as well have the 5% all rate of fire, end of the day never said it was practical just possible.
Goldiiee Superior Ratio High Sec Dropouts 312	Posted - 2013.03.27 05:15:00 - [197] - Quote My initial reaction to this was Incredulous, so awe struck I stare at the Forums and try as hard as I can to think of how this affects my game play and those I fly with. Losing what? where? and how bad? is the first thing I am trying to figure out. Using EVE-HQ I substitute the meta -0 (20%falloff/10% optimal) not a perfect match but close enough for an estimate. The ship for the base is my Mach, not the best for figuring this out as it has native bonuses, but it is the ship I use predominantly so it affects me there the most. Results: Mach: Old: 59,002m falloff and 3899m optimal New: 50,709m falloff and 3586 optimal that makes a 14% loss of falloff at 30% nerf. I am assuming the target was 15% with a 33% nerf. It seems strange to me that in the middle of the ship balancing (teiracide) CCP nerfs the Tracking Enhancer, so tinfoil hat tells me itGÇÖs a stealth nerf, probably of a ship that would cause too much uproar to hit in the open, so instead nerf the module that makes the ship OP. Mission accomplished. Seems like a drastic hit to everyone for the sake of sparing the drama of a heavy ship nerf, but my tinfoil hat isnGÇÖt to tight so I will continue. Tracking computers are not being nerfed (yet) so the difference can be made up with a change to the mid slot, but that also means the loss of a point/web/propulsion or some shield tank. Seems to be a targeted destruction of Minmatar benefits, as stated in FozzieGÇÖs post. But is Minmatar really that OP? EVE kill would disagree at first glance with the Oracle being the heaviest hitter this month followed by the Naga then 3 Minmatar boats but all told Minmatar is still leading the pack with 216,117 kills and all the other races combined only amounting to 224,728 so a 3% difference between what Minmatar kills vs. all other races combined (sorry Caldari, you didnGÇÖt build a top ten killer this month). So I take off my tin foil hat and settle in with popcorn for a show, I guess the Minmatar race is being fixed so the other guys can get a shot at the trophy. Enjoyed you while it lasted Minmatar but it looks like the End is Nigh. I only hope the reverse is in store for Capital. Reason and logic never wins over Stubborn and Convinced (But I still try..)
Andracin Sickology 72	Posted - 2013.03.27 05:17:00 - [198] - Quote RSB Nerf : not going to change much...your still going to get caught cause if everyone in the gang brings one the tackler scan rez is still going to be through the roof. TE Nerf : TBH Ive never heard anyone cry about them until this post. Tbh well minmatar ships do fit them, especially the mach and cynabal which, while they are awesome sauce cost a wad of isk, Ive been killing more blaster setups with te's than minmatar setups. I have a feeling all the WTF and HELL NO posts are mostly talos pilots....I don't see the nerf changing the way I fit or fly in any meaningful way...
NORTEL The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos 9	Posted - 2013.03.27 05:19:00 - [199] - Quote This will indirectly boost TD's. As if they weren't already overkill. TEs are the 'bread and butter' of a nano gang. Which is one of the few remaining ways of running low-man PVP/solo fleets. If you were searching to pervert small gang warfare, congrats CCP, this update's a winner. NORTEL
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 143	Posted - 2013.03.27 05:39:00 - [200] - Quote NORTEL wrote: solo fleets

NORTEL The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos 9	Posted - 2013.03.27 05:45:00 - [201] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: NORTEL wrote: solo fleets Semantics much? NORTEL
Casha Andven the undivided Negative Ten. 0	Posted - 2013.03.27 05:49:00 - [202] - Quote Ganthrithor wrote: 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. This. CCP you are dumbing down the game. May I ask why?
Sigras Conglomo 392	Posted - 2013.03.27 06:12:00 - [203] - Quote Casha Andven wrote: Ganthrithor wrote: 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. This. CCP you are dumbing down the game. May I ask why? Just a question . . . if kiting is "uber 1337 PvP for the skilled players" then doesnt making kiting harder raise the skill required to pull it off? Doesnt that mean there is a clearer line between the "good PvPers who can kite" and the "bad PvPers who cant"? That being said, in small gangs, life is a function of speed + damage projection thats what makes the shield tanking required in small gangs, because they get speed from not having armor plates and damage projection because they have a TON of free low slots. This is now being brought into balance, so that armor tankers are now only down on one front not two.
SmarncaV2 Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel 21	Posted - 2013.03.27 06:14:00 - [204] - Quote Remote sebos are used for countering Sensor damping wich is OP at the moment and with the remote sebo neft you are making them even more powerfull.
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance 4433	Posted - 2013.03.27 06:17:00 - [205] - Quote Sigras wrote: Just a question . . . if kiting is "uber 1337 PvP for the skilled players" then doesnt making kiting harder raise the skill required to pull it off? Doesnt that mean there is a clearer line between the "good PvPers who can kite" and the "bad PvPers who cant"? That being said, in small gangs, life is a function of speed + damage projection thats what makes the shield tanking required in small gangs, because they get speed from not having armor plates and damage projection because they have a TON of free low slots. This is now being brought into balance, so that armor tankers are now only down on one front not two. Or it means that kiting is reduced to a very very select group of setups that most people would never use. It's not even that common to begin with. So it doesn't become "only the really good PVPers kite", it becomes "nobody kites because kiting has become worthless". Malcanis for CSM 8 Module activation timers are buggy - CCP please fix
Cal Stantson Spiritus Draconis Sicarius Draconis 28	Posted - 2013.03.27 06:18:00 - [206] - Quote It would have made a lot more sense to rebalance the modules before rebalancing the ships , rather than the other way around.
Ganthrithor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 508	Posted - 2013.03.27 06:30:00 - [207] - Quote Sigras wrote: Casha Andven wrote: Ganthrithor wrote: 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. This. CCP you are dumbing down the game. May I ask why? Just a question . . . if kiting is "uber 1337 PvP for the skilled players" then doesnt making kiting harder raise the skill required to pull it off? You can't kite if you can't project damage at all. Then it's just called "running away."
Volstruis The Tuskers 12	Posted - 2013.03.27 06:40:00 - [208] - Quote I seriously f'n hated reading this post. It's not TE's that are the problem it's the kiting meta. And I'm sorry, but everytime you whack Minnie pilots in the face like this in the name of balance it actually hurts that I spent 30 days training falloff 5 because there is now no significant reason without TE's to even try fly like that. In a fair and equal engagement pretty much every Minnie boat dies horrible deaths to Caldari boats. Every single one of em. If you keep going at this rate there will be no reason whatsoever to fly anything but Caldari in pvp. Or is that the plan? All hail the DraekTengu OVerlords? Hallowed be thy payload?
Taoist Dragon The Church of Awesome 322	Posted - 2013.03.27 06:45:00 - [209] - Quote LOL only kiting take brains! MY ARSE! it is often just as difficult to fight as a brawler than it is to kite. I fly both setups and they both are easy mode if you engage the opposite setup at your combat range.! This won't stop kiting as a valid tactic, it was a valid tactic before the TE got overbonused so it'll still be a valid tactic. Get over yourselves! Adapt or die! That is the Way, the Tao. Balance is everything.
Sigras Conglomo 392	Posted - 2013.03.27 06:45:00 - [210] - Quote I was just thinking of writing a treatise on why low slots are more valuable than mid slots in a PvP ship. Many people get this backwards because there are two modules that are basically required in PvP that are mid slot items(prop mod and point), while there are basically no "required" low slot items, but I say that low slots are more valuable because every other mid slot module provides only slight bonuses in combat while you can add 6-8 low slot modules which all really effect how well the ship performs. This is evidenced in most popular fits, and is probably most clear in the battlecruiser lineup. The hurricane is most commonly a shield tanking ship, despite its 7/4/6 slot configuration, This is because it uses all of its low slots for non tank applications and still gets to fit the 2 "required" mid slots. Nobody in their right mind would armor tank a ship with a 7/6/4 slot configuration unless they had bonused mid slots or a special role like the falcon, and even if you could fit a good tank with four slots, what would you put in the 4 free mids? a cap booster is probably the third most useful mid, and then what? two random jammers? maybe a web if you need to/can get that close? even the Brutix and the Hyperion, both of which have armor tanking bonuses, commonly field a shield tank + damage mods. I even have a dominix shield fit because it does insanity damage, but nobody would ever think of armor tanking a Maelstrom. This is a problem for small gang PvPers, but scales up even worse. In large fleets, you have dedicated tackle and dedicated e-war reducing the need for tackle mods in your general fleet. TL;DR lows are more valuable than mids because there are more combat effecting low slot modules; the TE nerf changes that.



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

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.