Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
858
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 21:01:00 -
[1] - Quote
My first impression as an Incursion armour FC & looking at the GALL MEGA & AMARR BS's is that I'll be less likey allow such ships in fleets & force them into faction/NAVY BS's
Does the shield BS tiercide look less grim for Incursion runners
===========================
This rebalance thing only for PvP? Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 Disclaimer: CCP Bias is a fictional character. In case that some CCP Bias does exist,-áis he an "ex"-Goon? |
Yusef Yeasef Yosef
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
214
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 21:08:00 -
[2] - Quote
Ah, The E-Tyrant...
|
vyshnegradsky
Pentag Blade Curatores Veritatis Alliance
68
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 23:25:00 -
[3] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:My first impression as an Incursion armour FC & looking at the GALL MEGA & AMARR BS's is that I'll be less likey allow such ships in fleets & force them into faction/NAVY BS's Does the shield BS tiercide look less grim for Incursion runners =========================== This rebalance thing only for PvP?
In a PvP game, the ships should be balanced around PvP, not PvE. This one's a bit over the edge guys.
Locked for breaking... well, pretty much all the rules.
- CCP Falcon |
Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
363
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 23:27:00 -
[4] - Quote
vyshnegradsky wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:My first impression as an Incursion armour FC & looking at the GALL MEGA & AMARR BS's is that I'll be less likey allow such ships in fleets & force them into faction/NAVY BS's Does the shield BS tiercide look less grim for Incursion runners =========================== This rebalance thing only for PvP? In a PvP game, the ships should be balanced around PvP, not PvE.
In a game where you can do both, should they be balanced for both? |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
858
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 04:28:00 -
[5] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:vyshnegradsky wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:My first impression as an Incursion armour FC & looking at the GALL MEGA & AMARR BS's is that I'll be less likey allow such ships in fleets & force them into faction/NAVY BS's Does the shield BS tiercide look less grim for Incursion runners =========================== This rebalance thing only for PvP? In a PvP game, the ships should be balanced around PvP, not PvE. In a game where you can do both, should they be balanced for both?
Because the DEVs hired are brought overwelmingly from the ranks of the PvPers maybe they arn't balanced lately? Ripard Teg-á for CSM 8 Disclaimer: CCP Bias is a fictional character. In case that some CCP Bias does exist,-áis he an "ex"-Goon? |
Tauranon
Weeesearch
147
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 07:20:00 -
[6] - Quote
Dominix has seriously been buffed by DDAs etc over the last year, its not entirely a 1 way street and PVE does in fact occur in missions.
Baking on the omnis though and removing the hybrid bonus removes any reason for the cap booster/armor fit to be used again, as shield fit is no longer fighting against omnis, nor is it fighting against the extra cap use of railguns.
So I don't think there will be any supply of armor PVE pilots, as the forums will soon train everyone coming through to shield fit and projectile arm their dominixes, and rail mega/hypers will likely be as terrible as they always have been.
|
Caitlyn Tufy
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
228
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 07:37:00 -
[7] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:vyshnegradsky wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:My first impression as an Incursion armour FC & looking at the GALL MEGA & AMARR BS's is that I'll be less likey allow such ships in fleets & force them into faction/NAVY BS's Does the shield BS tiercide look less grim for Incursion runners =========================== This rebalance thing only for PvP? In a PvP game, the ships should be balanced around PvP, not PvE. In a game where you can do both, should they be balanced for both?
Only if PvE is brought closer to PvP. :) |
Funky Lazers
shin-ra ltd
240
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 08:04:00 -
[8] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:vyshnegradsky wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:My first impression as an Incursion armour FC & looking at the GALL MEGA & AMARR BS's is that I'll be less likey allow such ships in fleets & force them into faction/NAVY BS's Does the shield BS tiercide look less grim for Incursion runners =========================== This rebalance thing only for PvP? In a PvP game, the ships should be balanced around PvP, not PvE. In a game where you can do both, should they be balanced for both?
In a PvP game, where 80% of players do missions or/and mainly do PvE stuff the ships should be balanced around PvE. Whatever. |
Goldiiee
Superior Ratio High Sec Dropouts
338
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 12:53:00 -
[9] - Quote
vyshnegradsky wrote:In a PvP game, the ships should be balanced around PvP, not PvE. Curious? How do you pay for your PVP? PLEX? If yes, thanks for providing me with free gameplay and ships. Reason and logic never wins over Stubborn and Convinced (But I still try..) |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
1597
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 12:59:00 -
[10] - Quote
Funky Lazers wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:vyshnegradsky wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:My first impression as an Incursion armour FC & looking at the GALL MEGA & AMARR BS's is that I'll be less likey allow such ships in fleets & force them into faction/NAVY BS's Does the shield BS tiercide look less grim for Incursion runners =========================== This rebalance thing only for PvP? In a PvP game, the ships should be balanced around PvP, not PvE. In a game where you can do both, should they be balanced for both? In a PvP game, where 80% of players do missions or/and mainly do PvE stuff the ships should be balanced around PvE.
99% of player could be doing pve, it's still a pvp game.
The game has to be balanced around PVP, consumption of materials via "big ship" losses is what fuels the EVE economy, it's what makes out mission, exploration and incursion isk, items and LP worth something.
If you balance ships around PVE they wouldn't be used as much in PVP (go check out Marauders stats on any widely used killboard), perhaps meaning less PVP, less grind for the economy and ultimatley less value for PVE players.
Lets try to understand how things work and be less short sighted.
As far as PVE goes, these changes are generally good. A less Crap hyperion, A Domi that can apply drone damage WAY better (at the small cost of a hybrid bonus many domi pilots didn't even use) and a Typhoon with a bonus that makes applying Cruise and Torp Damage much easier (TP+Rigor+typhoon new bonus is going to make it shine in missions compared to the Raven).
|
|
Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
920
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 13:36:00 -
[11] - Quote
ok is it just me being a privileged fuck or is this whole discussion pointless because most people are flying marauders or faction/pirate ships in pve anyway?
"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 |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
1598
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 13:41:00 -
[12] - Quote
Daniel Plain wrote:ok is it just me being a privileged fuck or is this whole discussion pointless because most people are flying marauders or faction/pirate ships in pve anyway?
Anyone with any sense is lol.
|
Funky Lazers
shin-ra ltd
241
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 13:41:00 -
[13] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Funky Lazers wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:vyshnegradsky wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:My first impression as an Incursion armour FC & looking at the GALL MEGA & AMARR BS's is that I'll be less likey allow such ships in fleets & force them into faction/NAVY BS's Does the shield BS tiercide look less grim for Incursion runners =========================== This rebalance thing only for PvP? In a PvP game, the ships should be balanced around PvP, not PvE. In a game where you can do both, should they be balanced for both? In a PvP game, where 80% of players do missions or/and mainly do PvE stuff the ships should be balanced around PvE. 99% of player could be doing pve, it's still a pvp game. The game has to be balanced around PVP, consumption of materials via "big ship" losses is what fuels the EVE economy, it's what makes out mission, exploration and incursion isk, items and LP worth something. If you balance ships around PVE they wouldn't be used as much in PVP (go check out Marauders stats on any widely used killboard), perhaps meaning less PVP, less grind for the economy and ultimatley less value for PVE players. Lets try to understand how things work and be less short sighted. As far as PVE goes, these changes are generally good. A less Crap hyperion, A Domi that can apply drone damage WAY better (at the small cost of a hybrid bonus many domi pilots didn't even use) and a Typhoon with a bonus that makes applying Cruise and Torp Damage much easier (TP+Rigor+typhoon new bonus is going to make it shine in missions compared to the Raven).
Well I agree that Raven is a crap boat and will be a crap boat with useless range bonus.
Also I agree Typhoon will rock the juice.
About PvE. All I'm saying is balancing ships for PvP hurts PvE. For instance Lasers have no damage selection which makes them the worst weapon system among the guns. In other words PvP balancing should take PvE into consideration Whatever. |
Goldiiee
Superior Ratio High Sec Dropouts
338
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 13:48:00 -
[14] - Quote
Daniel; I feel the same way sometimes, but I remember flying the damn Maelstrom for an eternity it seemed trying to save up for the Pirate BS. New players are going to have a seemingly insurmountable task trying to access a ship capable of doing PVE with a ship incapable of doing PVE, for both the cost in ISK and training will be to high. And the period it takes to attain these PVE capable skills and ships are possibly to long to keep noobs interested.
Hell some people think PVE is impossible now and they have had years to train for it. Reason and logic never wins over Stubborn and Convinced (But I still try..) |
Marc Callan
Interstellar Steel Templis Dragonaors
139
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 14:47:00 -
[15] - Quote
Daniel Plain wrote:ok is it just me being a privileged (ed: fbeep) or is this whole discussion pointless because most people are flying marauders or faction/pirate ships in pve anyway?
The point being, how do people get to the Marauders or faction/pirate ships or T3's for PVE? There's got to be an intermediate step between battlecruisers in L3's and the hyper-expensive specialty ships.
On the other hand, the Amarr are getting a potential first-class mission boat in the new Armageddon, the Raven will probably be able to adapt with that extra mid, the Dominix might actually improve with the drone buffs, and the Maelstrom is still the brick smokehouse that less space-rich folks like me have come to know and love. "Nevertheless a prince ought to inspire fear in such a way that, if he does not win love, he avoids hatred..." - Niccolo Machiavelli-á |
Goldiiee
Superior Ratio High Sec Dropouts
338
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 14:53:00 -
[16] - Quote
Anyone else think it is odd that we got a drone buff with DDA's, and then a drone nerf with the new AI, essentially making drones outside of rep range useless to any mission or hub runner.
I mean really, thanks CCP for getting drones up to par in DPS, but did you have to make them as useless as **** on a Boar in the same year. Reason and logic never wins over Stubborn and Convinced (But I still try..) |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
1598
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 16:06:00 -
[17] - Quote
Goldiiee wrote:Anyone else think it is odd that we got a drone buff with DDA's, and then a drone nerf with the new AI, essentially making drones outside of rep range useless to any mission or hub runner.
I mean really, thanks CCP for getting drones up to par in DPS, but did you have to make them as useless as breasts on a Boar in the same year.
edit; '**** on a Boar', doesn't work but, 'Breast on a Boar' does LOL
They aren'y useless if you know how to propery generate threat to take aggro off your drones.
In high sec and low sec missions and null sec ratting i've lost 5 drones in the last month and a half (on those rare occasions i couldn't get the npcs to switch off my drones), only 1 was a sentry drones as i tend to like to move around. The webs and/or target painters I use to generate threat to the npcs don't even get used all that often.
i just don't see why people are still complaining about drones.
|
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
1598
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 16:13:00 -
[18] - Quote
Funky Lazers wrote: Well I agree that Raven is a crap boat and will be a crap boat with useless range bonus.
Also I agree Typhoon will rock the juice.
About PvE. All I'm saying is balancing ships for PvP hurts PvE. For instance Lasers have no damage selection which makes them the worst weapon system among the guns. In other words PvP balancing should take PvE into consideration
If you give lasers damage selection, who would use anything else? You can change crystals instantly (where as changing ammo/missiles type takes 10 seconds, 5 for hybrids), and lasers never have to stop to reload.
ALL pvp would be lasers so you wouldn't need to carry ammo (leaving more room for captured loot. ALL pve would be laser because even if you made other weapons stronger to compensate, they'd still have ammo costs which lower pve profits etc etc.
This is a really good example as to why EVE ships are and should be balanced for pvp 1st and for most, balancing ships to kill computer generated NPCs leads to ships that real players would abuse, forcing ccp to rebalance stuff all the time.
The only ships that should be balanced with pve in mind at Marauders and Mining ships. Maybe one day ccp could add smaller Marauder type pve ships (call them "Bandits" or something lol).
|
Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
920
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 16:39:00 -
[19] - Quote
Marc Callan wrote:There's got to be an intermediate step between battlecruisers in L3's and the hyper-expensive specialty ships.
says who? as far as i am concerned, by the time a player is able to fly battleships, he should be able to come up with the ISK to buy at least a navy hull.
"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 |
March rabbit
epTa Team Inc.
617
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 16:41:00 -
[20] - Quote
Daniel Plain wrote:Marc Callan wrote:There's got to be an intermediate step between battlecruisers in L3's and the hyper-expensive specialty ships. says who? as far as i am concerned, by the time a player is able to fly battleships, he should be able to come up with the ISK to buy at least a navy hull. you mean these 1-2 weeks through frigate 4 -> cruiser 4 -> battleship 4?
if i remember correctly i could afford battleship like after 1-2 months of Eve..... |
|
Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
922
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 16:48:00 -
[21] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:Daniel Plain wrote:Marc Callan wrote:There's got to be an intermediate step between battlecruisers in L3's and the hyper-expensive specialty ships. says who? as far as i am concerned, by the time a player is able to fly battleships, he should be able to come up with the ISK to buy at least a navy hull. you mean these 1-2 weeks through frigate 4 -> cruiser 4 -> battleship 4? if i remember correctly i could afford battleship like after 1-2 months of Eve..... yea because obviously, you can fly lvl4 missions without a tank, cap, drones or weapons.
"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 |
Funky Lazers
shin-ra ltd
241
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 18:03:00 -
[22] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote: If you give lasers damage selection, who would use anything else? You can change crystals instantly (where as changing ammo/missiles type takes 10 seconds, 5 for hybrids), and lasers never have to stop to reload.
ALL pvp would be lasers so you wouldn't need to carry ammo (leaving more room for captured loot. ALL pve would be laser because even if you made other weapons stronger to compensate, they'd still have ammo costs which lower pve profits etc etc.
This is a really good example as to why EVE ships are and should be balanced for pvp 1st and for most, balancing ships to kill computer generated NPCs leads to ships that real players would abuse, forcing ccp to rebalance stuff all the time.
The only ships that should be balanced with pve in mind at Marauders and Mining ships. Maybe one day ccp could add smaller Marauder type pve ships (call them "Bandits" or something lol).
This is a good example how PvP hurts PvE. Also when I did PvP with some friends I flew Domi/Ishtar/Curse. I used to carry 2 types of drones for resistance purposes. So whenever I saw low damage I changed my drones and usually there was an increase of damage. Changing drones takes around 4-6 sec (assuming you're on a close range), which is very fast, yet nothing is overpowered.
I'm sure there are many solutions to give lasers damage selection without making them overpowered. Whatever. |
Din Chao
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Test Alliance Please Ignore
205
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 18:21:00 -
[23] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:Daniel Plain wrote:Marc Callan wrote:There's got to be an intermediate step between battlecruisers in L3's and the hyper-expensive specialty ships. says who? as far as i am concerned, by the time a player is able to fly battleships, he should be able to come up with the ISK to buy at least a navy hull. you mean these 1-2 weeks through frigate 4 -> cruiser 4 -> battleship 4? if i remember correctly i could afford battleship like after 1-2 months of Eve..... You mean frigate 3 -> destroyer 3 -> cruiser 3 -> battlecruiser 3 -> battleship ? |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
1599
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 18:28:00 -
[24] - Quote
Some of you are jumping to the insane conclusion that the T1 battleships won't be able to be used in PVE. That doesn't make any sense, nothing about the changes proposed scream "Oh, I better not take this into a mission". |
Goldiiee
Superior Ratio High Sec Dropouts
339
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 20:01:00 -
[25] - Quote
Jen aSide I agree, I donGÇÖt think the new BSGÇÖs canGÇÖt complete missions. But I do see them not doing it as well, especially when combined with a tracking enhancer tweak, the last missions AI tweak, the bounty tweak, and loot drop tweak (drone ORE), all these tweaks keep making missions more difficult and less profitable.
I do incursions pretty much exclusively for PVP ISK nowadays, and I use a market toon to generate most of my extraneous ISK needs. I personally donGÇÖt have difficulty doing missions, but I do hear from noob corpies that they are having problems making enough ISK as well as completing missions before the wrecks de-spawn. I attribute this to Noobness, and offer assistance in fittings and techniques, as well as the occasional fleeted missions to show and tell as we go. But bitter vet syndrome might be blinding me to a more underlining problem, is PVE getting to hard to be economically viable for a noob?
I donGÇÖt think the new ship attributes are going to stop PVE but it would seem PVE has taken a lot of hits as of late. And PVP? Well they lost 15% and 10% respectively from the tracking enhancer that allowed some ships to kite. (Yes I know they lost other things but some sarcasm was needed here)
PVE creates ISK, ISK stimulates the market and provides incentive to build, and building provides ships to PVP and PVE in, which in turn destroys ISK. But if you keep turning down the ISK faucet the whole enchilada fall apart. (GÇÿEnchiladaGÇÖ seemed funnier than macro/micro economic model)
Reason and logic never wins over Stubborn and Convinced (But I still try..) |
marVLs
115
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 20:59:00 -
[26] - Quote
Ain't domi getting buff for missions? I mean now with optimal/tracking bonus for drones and without bonus for hybrits You don't need to fit drone tracking links and won't be limited by ther/kin damage (only projectiles will be proper way = no cap consumption, selectable damage) |
Kyttain
We Are Derp
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 22:49:00 -
[27] - Quote
Am I the only seeing these posts about how hard L4s are as ridiculous?
A purely meta 4 fit Maelstrom or Raven can run L4's and barely touch a shield booster with a properly used MJD.
Raven might even be torp viable with the extra mid, and faster on top of that. Domi looking strong as ever. New Phoon could be nasty.
Can't personally speak to those gold phallic things as I don't fly them... but to the damage selection arguments, there are several groups of NPCs that are weak to lasers, it it really that hard to run missions in the space these NPCs inhabit?
Seriously PVE in eve is not hard. Basic tactics and reasonable SP make L4's trivial. Anyone saying it's near impossible, as stated earlier in this thread, is quite literally doing it wrong.
Granted, it might take a while to run a L4 at 3-4 million SP, it should. |
Null MDK
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 22:49:00 -
[28] - Quote
My take on it is that for your beginner incursioner the changes to Amarr are mixed (and mild):
1) Abaddon: Not much change here so far just a slight loss of buffer on a tanky ship. This ship has always had cap problems, the typical solution (unless you want rely on your L5 Guards) was to put one or two Energy Discharge rigs on it and/or spend isk on implants. That doesn't change.
2) Apoc: Gets a boost for non-mwd VG fleets with the extra tracking. To a lesser extent, gains the cap problem of the Abaddon. Apoc/Napoc could do MWD fleets fine with the cap bonus. It will now be ill suited for those as well.
3) Armageddon: don't think this ship will be used at all anymore.
TBH, I don't see a lot of T1 Amarr hulls in incursions (Not in the US TZ) anyways. So I doubt this will change much.
Considering the top tier Amarr armor incursion battleships are Paladin, Napoc and NGeddon the real question is what will happen with the navy hulls and Paladin. Paladin needs a buff as it compares poorly to a Nightmare (on applied dps and fitting) and NApoc (cost and training time vs utility).
Time will tell. |
sabre906
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
947
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 23:07:00 -
[29] - Quote
Null MDK wrote:My take on it is that for your beginner incursioner the changes to Amarr are mixed (and mild):
1) Abaddon: Not much change here so far just a slight loss of buffer on a tanky ship. This ship has always had cap problems, the typical solution (unless you want rely on your L5 Guards) was to put one or two Energy Discharge rigs on it and/or spend isk on implants. That doesn't change.
2) Apoc: Gets a boost for non-mwd VG fleets with the extra tracking. To a lesser extent, gains the cap problem of the Abaddon. Apoc/Napoc could do MWD fleets fine with the cap bonus. It will now be ill suited for those as well.
3) Armageddon: don't think this ship will be used at all anymore.
TBH, I don't see a lot of T1 Amarr hulls in incursions (Not in the US TZ) anyways. So I doubt this will change much.
Considering the top tier Amarr armor incursion battleships are Paladin, Napoc and NGeddon the real question is what will happen with the navy hulls and Paladin. Paladin needs a buff as it compares poorly to a Nightmare (on applied dps and fitting) and NApoc (cost and training time vs utility).
Now for the solo L4 runner however the Apoc just got a kick in the nuts. That tracking bonus is useless, the cap bonus was on the other hand was really nice and allowed to use your mids very effectivly for something other than cap boosters and rechargers.
Legions are still the staple of armor VG fleets. Navy geddon, which hopefully won't change, is also fairly popular. Standings Improvement Service https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=19454 |
Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
366
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 23:11:00 -
[30] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Some of you are jumping to the insane conclusion that the T1 battleships won't be able to be used in PVE. That doesn't make any sense, nothing about the changes proposed scream "Oh, I better not take this into a mission".
People are indeed jumping to conclusion like in any other discussion. This is nothing new. People will shed insane amount of tears for meaningless stuff. My point on the first page was just to show how stupid the coment I replied to was. PvP should definately matter in balance changes because it's the competitive side of the game where stuff being the most balanced possible is actually important. To that tho, I think there is still some consideration that will always need to be given to the PvE crowd because in the end, they actaully put the isk in economy by generating the vast amjority of it.
None of the battleship change seen up untill now render any of the ships useless for PvE but soem fo them will indded affect the efficiancy at completing PvE content. Was this an intended effect of those changes making them an actual nerf to PvE or was is overseen when the number were put forth for the balance pass and it's only collateral damage? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |