|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 20 post(s) |
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor
2406
   |
Posted - 2013.04.08 14:53:00 -
[1] - Quote
Do not like the Megathron changes one bit. That missing low-slot is going to seriously hurt, as is the loss of the launcher slot for those of us who wanted to go pure DPS - and if you're going to give a rate-of-fire bonus to a ship whose guns use capacitor, could you at least retool the capacitor recharge rate as well to compensate?
Mane 614
|
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor
2411
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 16:01:00 -
[2] - Quote
The Dominix could seriously use that drone MWD bonus we've seen on the Algos, to be honest.
Mane 614
|
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor
2427
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 10:04:00 -
[3] - Quote
Honestly, CCP Rise, I'm kind of unimpressed with your attitude so far.
Mane 614
|
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor
2427
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 10:36:00 -
[4] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:We are willing to consider many of the suggestions so far. Rolling another bonus into the rep bonus (like rep cap use) could be possible, changing the slot allocation, and adjusting fittings to give it more room are all on the table.
"+7.5% bonus to armour repair effectiveness and -n% reduction to armour repair capacitor use per level" might work.
Honestly, the reason active armour tanking is so much less popular than passive armour tanking is primarily because of concerns over scalability and sustainability. Active armour tanks do not scale very well when compared to a passive tank backed up by a logistics fleet. An active armour tank can only ever tank a flat amount of damage per second and its ability to be sustained by remote repair suffers due to its lack of buffer, and it can be shut off completely by capacitor warfare. You can't, of course, get rid of capacitor warfare without screwing over several other elements of the game (one of which, coincidentally, is making active tanking overpowered when used against smaller fleets). I've seen bonus-based solutions before such as "-7.5% to enemy energy vampire and energy neutraliser effectiveness" but that's an incredibly specialised bonus that isn't applicable in any situation where the enemy isn't using a nos or a neut.
The extra low-slot on the Hyperion is an improvement but isn't worth the cost of losing a mid-slot, especially if (but by no means solely because) we don't have some comensurate method of balancing our capacitor budget (as a side note, it will very likely make most perma-tanking missioning Hyperion fits stop working). Because most PvP Hyperion fits generally requires two cap injectors, it will have to give up either a web or a scram, or abandon a propulsion mod, which are sacrifices you can't afford to make in most of the situations in which PvP Hyperions are generally used.
As to the Megathron, losing a low is likely going to give it precisely the same problems as the Hyperion has now. The Megathron doesn't need that extra mid - it's nice, but it's survived for years without it and I don't doubt it will continue to do so. It cannot live without that extra low. I also seriously question the logic of giving a rate-of-fire bonus to a gun that requires capacitor to fire without giving it a comensurate increase in its innate cap regeneration or a bonus-based reduction in capacitor need to fire.
I see what you're trying to do with the Dominix but it needs more of that to maintain parity if it's no longer going to be a blaster platform. The drone MWD bonus the Algos has would be very useful, as would a drone armour/shield resistances bonus (as the Dominix will now have an even larger chunk of its DPS put in danger by smartbombs). What it most desperately needs, though, is a drone control radius bonus.
Mane 614
|
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor
2427
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 10:52:00 -
[5] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:Outside of large+extended fleet situations (ie: pos/cap bashing), how often would you say you have to reload guns mid-fight because you ran out of ammo?
Outside of when something was on fire, how often would you say you have to use a fire extinguisher?
Mane 614
|
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor
2427
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 11:29:00 -
[6] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote:I tend to analyze this as fear of change : mega pilots don't want their mega changed, and hyperion pilots don't want their hyperion changed.
People use the term "fear of change" as if it's meant to be some terrible character flaw. No, it isn't - sometimes the fear of certain changes is perfectly justified, especially if they're bad changes, and people have spent the last 40-ish pages explaining precisely why these are bad changes.
Yeah, we're afraid of CCP making these changes. They'll give us even less reason to use Gallente battleships.
Mane 614
|
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor
2429
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 11:41:00 -
[7] - Quote
To anyone suggesting that the Hyperion should lose hi-slots or turret hardpoints: no. It can't be done, currently, because art assets constain them from doing that. The Hyperion very, very clearly has eight turret hardpoints on the base model. Unless the ship was actively remodelled at the same time as the stats change, they can't get rid of guns or hardpoints.
Mane 614
|
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor
2429
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 15:55:00 -
[8] - Quote
Veshta Yoshida wrote:New Dominix reaches (optimal km/falloff km):
Warden: 112.5/30
Bouncer: 90/42
Curator: 78/24
Garde: 45/12
And that is without any modules fitted whatsoever.
Listen, I know they only let you fly Amarr ships in PIE so you may not be aware of this, but even if a sentry drone has the optimal to reach that far, it can't fire outside your drone control radius. Since the Dominix gets no bonus to drone control range, the effective range of any sentry drone is hard-capped in the ~60km area unless you fit a control range module.
Mane 614
|
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor
2431
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 16:25:00 -
[9] - Quote
Havegun Willtravel wrote:Morning Rise,
Thanks for keeping up with the feedback. Hopefully your revisions will be innovative.
"As I said in the OP, we are in a tough spot with the active armor bonuses. We don't want to throw them out, they are fun to play when they work, and we have hopes that we will continue to bring them into viability with other changes. That said, in the mean time we don't want to overcorrect for their current position in the meta."
A couple of things I would really like to get across.
'' When they work '' - they don't really. That's why the hype is mostly unused and will continue to be. Also why the proph is X times more popular than the Myrm.
"That said, in the mean time we don't want to overcorrect for their current position in the meta." This I really want an explanation to please.
Dragoon -> Proph -> Geddon. When looking for ways to innovate new game play styles and freshen up the mix with variety there doesn't seem to be an issue with Amar. However, if you play Galente you're effectively being told that an old legacy bonus that's never really worked well, still doesn't work very well. but maybe will get better is being hung around your neck Do or Die.
Ten years ago someone decided that Amar were armor tankers and gave them the two best bonus's you could ever ask for. Resists and Armor Hitpoints. Galente were also supposed to be armor tankers but someone seemed to think that DPS tanking with Blasters would make up for squishy tank. It hasn't in the least.
Add to this the fact that Galente across the board have lower pg and cap with the worst optimal and fall off and it's not hard to figure out why they've failed to have an impact or gain the popular following that other races have.
This is our chance to finally even things out but you're failing dismally to break the mold or forge a new direction. Instead we're being told that we're stuck with bad old legacy mechanics while other people move forward in new directions. This just isn't acceptable.
Armor Hitpoints would differentiate us as a tank philosophy. It would probably still make us second place to resists But, we could fit fewer plates and at least be fast enough to apply our myopic dps in more situations.
I don't want to be handcuffed to an old failed legacy anymore. I want innovation. I want to see solutions in action not promises that stuff that doesn't work might not be so bad later maybe.
Tiericide was supposed to open the door to new things. Lets see them please.
Have my babies please.
Mane 614
|
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor
2431
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 16:34:00 -
[10] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:Didn't it also lose all it's missile hardpoints? 
I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed this.
Mane 614
|
|
|
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor
2432
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 16:38:00 -
[11] - Quote
I don't see the obsession with keeping a uniform number of absolute slots, either. As long as ships do not vary massively in power and utility, it doesn't matter if they have a few more or few less slots.
Mane 614
|
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor
2435
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 17:24:00 -
[12] - Quote
You know what? I've got it.
Hyperion gets a Hybrid damage bonus and a Hybrid falloff bonus.
Sniperion becomes a reality.
Mane 614
|
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor
2437
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 22:29:00 -
[13] - Quote
Akirei Scytale wrote:Heh, you said "blaster" and "fleet" in the same sentence unironically.
The fact that this statement is a valid counterargument is the main reason CCP needs to take another look at blasters and Gallente ships in general.
Mane 614
|
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor
2438
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 12:24:00 -
[14] - Quote
The Hyperion shouldn't have to lose its eighth hi-slot. Look at the model. Having eight turrets is literally modelled into it. I'm OK with having the Megathron losing some drone capability and losing its launcher slots but you can't take away the Hyperion's eighth turret. It'll look wonky as hell.
The rate of fire bonus on the Megathron still needs to be addressed, as it causes a lot of issues.
Mane 614
|
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor
2493
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 08:39:00 -
[15] - Quote
You know, CCP, I had some pretty strong opinions on Gallente battleships and the changes didn't sit well with me, so I decided that instead of getting properly upset I'd give it a couple of weeks and then come back, hoping that when things had had some time to settle, things would get better.
They have not gotten better and I'm very deeply disappointed.
Let me break it down for you:
Hyperion
- Having two less turrets breaks the Hyperion's model, since it very clearly has eight turret hardpoints. It's literally built into the model. It needs to have eight turrets. That's the Hyperion's entire raison d'etre.
- Giving it a 10% damage bonus instead of a 5% one will not fix the ship, because the problem is nothing to do with the amount of damage it deals. When it's fitted for damage, it's one of the most dangerous ships in the game but it's let down by its serious lack of survivability.
- You give the excuse of not changing its repair bonus to something more useful because you guys want to fix both active tanking and armour tanking. Cool! I'm all for that - but don't leave a ship supporting a broken mechanic in the meantime unless you mean to fix active tanking and armour tanking at the same time.
- Another problem you haven't solved is that the Hyperion is still a less useful version of the Megathron. You need to give it a role far more differentiated from the Megathron. The Gallente currently lack a viable sniper platform - consider that.
Megathron
- A rate of fire bonus on turrets that use capacitor is a very bad idea unless you commensurately increase its capacitor recharge rate. It will also cause the guns to consume more ammunition which will have a negative effect on its battlefield endurance.
- The Megathron - and blaster boats in general - desperately need more manouverability. The only advantage the Megathron currently possesses over the Talos is that the Talos has vastly less survivability than the Megathron, but this is quickly negated by the fact that the Megathron is often dead long before it gets into range of what it's trying to shoot at.
- Dropping the drone bay is a bad idea.
Dominix
- The tracking speed/optimal range bonus is essentially entirely worthless for non-sentry drones. If you want the ship to buff sentry drones specifically, give it to it as a role bonus and free up the other Gallente Battleship skill bonus for something else.
- The Dominix, believe it or not, does benefit from its hybrid bonus, but if you're not going to give it back, consider giving it a remote repair bonus - this is one of the uses to which it's unusually suited.
Mane 614
|
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor
2493
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 09:02:00 -
[16] - Quote
Drake Doe wrote:I would like the Hyperion to trade one of it's bonuses for s fall off bonus (if the damage bonus was swapped, it should gain it's 8 turrets back) this way it can still remain a blaster platform but with a noticeably different role than the megathron.
A hybrid falloff bonus would be awesome on the Hyperion - it would give it greater range flexibility with blasters, but it would also make it a scarily effective rail sniper while still being different from the Rokh.
Mane 614
|
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor
2494
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 23:17:00 -
[17] - Quote
Roime wrote:Hi,
every single point on your list is uninformed bullcrap, it's like you didn't even read the changes.
Yeah, no. If you're going to troll, put some effort into it.
Mane 614
|
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor
2494
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 08:17:00 -
[18] - Quote
Roime wrote:Just stating a fact, mate, no more effort needed.
Generally for a statement to be a "fact" it has to have some relation to reality.
Mane 614
|
|
|
| |
|