| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 [30] .. 34 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Tilo Rhywald
Corpus Alienum
Game 0f Tears
28
   |
Posted - 2013.05.19 11:42:00 -
[871] - Quote
Inactivity in this thread is an indicator for the deep resignation many subscribers feel towards the issue at hand... Player feedback is being ignored despite huge issues being raised.
It is the change in Odyssey that affects the most ships and in a drastic enough way to severly hit their effectiveness throughout their previous/current range of usage. At the same time this "balancing" will do nothing to change large fleet doctrines.
It is the thread with the least response (none) from CCP to the clear majority of replies that are strongly opposed to this bad alteration of a bonus that has worked so well for so long. And no, there is absolutely no reason to wait "how those changes will play out once they've gone live on TQ"! Everybody who ever flew a ship with a resistance bonus with skill level 4 before training 5 knows the difference!! I certainly do!
There are some great updates planned for Odyssey, and up to this point I have always been benevolent towards any expansion. This time however - while the expansion probably "adds more cool stuff" than many of the past updates - I absolutely dread its arrival. Let me rephrase that: This "balancing pass" of a completely unnecessary and undifferentiated nerf to the resistance bonus utterly ruins Odyssey for me even before launching. A shame for all the great work that has been done in so many other areas (art e.g.).
Cheers
Tilo R. |
Mathias Orsen
Sacred Templars
Unclaimed.
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 12:18:00 -
[872] - Quote
I really can't help but feel at a loss as to why anyone would think that the 5% bonus to resist per level is overpowered but has nothing to say about the huge resist buffer on t2 ships. Both types of resist increase were put there for a reason and the 5% blanket is nowhere near as powerful as the two color boost to t2 resist. This, because it's much easier to fill a hole in resist than it is to try to raise it across the board.
The thing I disagree with most on this nerf is that it is being based on large scale fleet pvp as where ship for ship, 5% resist is in no way OP compared to 7.5% to shield boost or armor reps.
Most of these 5% bonus are on ships because it goes with their natural design. Just as Gallente are made for close range and blasters while caldari are made for long range and rails, you have ships that are made to do more boosting and less buffing and vice versa. An Abaddon holds a strong tank but has a harder time devoting cap to rep itself. Comparing it to a Hyperion of a Maelstrom which can keep on tanking while the Abaddon just gets whittled down, that resist is not overpowered in the least.
Brings it back to where it started. Fleet battles. It's not that 5% per level is to much. It's that ships that get 5% per level are designed to be a strong buffer. It's only natural that these ships get along well with Logistics. Ships that get rep and booster bonuses typically work with far less buffer. When everything comes together as a fleet and the problem is that resist gets a bonus from local reps, buffer and remote reps, the more logical thing to do would be to let active ships get a bonus from remote reps.
While it was said that someone at CCP feels that logi are already borderline OP, Adding a new bonus to active tanks would be ideal. Such as 7.5% to repair amount and 3-5% from remote repairer per level. What ever balances better. This would allow many ships such as the Hype and the maelstrom to drop the reps to add buffer and join in on fleet fights. After all, isn't that the goal, to get more diversity and make unused ships usefull again. I've only seen one hyperion in the last 3 years. nerfing the resist on an abaddon isn't gonna do anything for that. |
Shade Alidiana
PROSPERO Corporation
MinTek Conglomerate
44
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 18:50:00 -
[873] - Quote
Can't say I like this, my navy scorp fit might suffer a bit. This separates pve and pvp ships even further, considering rokh and abaddon's already not the most powerful defence/offence when it comes to long-term solo fights, but there's always a load of other ships to choose from... And it probably will make drake not that much like a BS. It might need some love then, though (IMO). |
John 1135
38
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 20:29:00 -
[874] - Quote
6.7% might not seem much, but in a Devoter....
There are factors to consider ship-by-ship. How good is it at controlling range. Can it break off the combat if it wishes. Or is it forced to sit and soak up the damage? And if the issue is fleet RR then FGS fix fleet RR. Resist may be strong but that makes it a define ships and create enjoyable play.
Making this a cross the board nerf is poor. It chills my excitement about Odyssey. Hope the patch is delayed. |
John 1135
38
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 05:49:00 -
[875] - Quote
On a more constructive note. This change seeems positioned as a mechanical correction rather than a nerf. No one is saying the ships involved are imba. Rather it is the interaction with other mechanics - repping - that causes issues.
Okay. So if the intention is not to nerf, give the ships affected +10% shield or armour HP in balance. |
Buhhdust Princess
Mind Games.
Suddenly Spaceships.
5323
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 10:32:00 -
[876] - Quote
This is still a thing? I seriously thought CCP was joking when they introduced this terrible Idea.
Do you know what, ignoring player interaction is just plain dumb. I don't care about CSM, at all, I don't want to tell just 1 person about it, because you don't listen to the CSM either. Ive posted like 6 times in this thread already, this idea was one of your OFF DAYS. Don't do it, keep 5%.
|
To mare
Advanced Technology
193
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 10:52:00 -
[877] - Quote
Major Thrasher wrote:Can't help but notice everything is getting dps increase and little to negative tanking to compensate.
anyone else sensing a ISK sink to try stabilize the eve economy, and reduce inflation ?
you have no idea of what is a isk sink.
plus tank got much much bigger buffs in the past than what gank its getting now |
Lugalzagezi666
128
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 12:20:00 -
[878] - Quote
Looking at the affected ships - yeah, totally deserved. No need to investigate which one should be balanced and which one not - they are all op pwnmobiles that pose danger to balanced pvp and pve. Thankfully, once again ccp saved us from universe ruled by punishers, mallers and rokhs.
|
TinkerHell
Nocturnal Romance
18
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 12:37:00 -
[879] - Quote
Buhhdust Princess wrote:This is still a thing? I seriously thought CCP was joking when they introduced this terrible Idea.
Do you know what, ignoring player interaction is just plain dumb. I don't care about CSM, at all, I don't want to tell just 1 person about it, because you don't listen to the CSM either. Ive posted like 6 times in this thread already, this idea was one of your OFF DAYS. Don't do it, keep 5%.
I still cant believe they are just applying a blanket nerf...including AT ships...
Wake up CCP, do balancing that affects the ships with the issue, not every ship that has the bonus including ones you just balanced.
By the way is the ibis tank really that OP? |
Tilo Rhywald
Corpus Alienum
Game 0f Tears
32
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 13:51:00 -
[880] - Quote
Actually, while the modus operandi of blanket nerfing is a huge mistake in itself, there is no reason whatsoever to lower the resistance bonus on any ship! Not even one of those hulls is overpowered because of it.
Cheers
Tilo R. |
Mordo Mordaeus
Mordo's Legion
Scandinavian dirtbags
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 17:46:00 -
[881] - Quote
This is well.. In line with what ccp usually do.. Why not accept that for example Commandships have that "special" thing about them? Everyone is free to train the skills aquired.
But no.. lets nerf everything that has something special about it and make everything equal.
Why don't you just take away all ships so we all can fly with chainsaw fitted pods instead?
Mordo Mordaeus
Pirate and humanitarian.. ;) |
Ocih
Space Mermaids
Somethin Awfull Forums
622
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 20:44:00 -
[882] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Resistance bonuses will always be better as they will help you survive high alpha, where no matter how high your active rep bonus is, if you cannot take the alpha you are dead.
44 pages later and the crux of the problem came up on page one.
Truth is, 5% won't make any difference because they will alpha you down anyway. The only difference will be did a gun or a drone get the last shot in. |
John 1135
42
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 20:52:00 -
[883] - Quote
To mare wrote:Major Thrasher wrote:Can't help but notice everything is getting dps increase and little to negative tanking to compensate.
anyone else sensing a ISK sink to try stabilize the eve economy, and reduce inflation ? you have no idea of what is a isk sink. plus tank got much much bigger buffs in the past than what gank its getting now
The tin-foil hattery is weak in these ones. Navy is the new black.
Ships bought with LP+ISK really are an ISK sink.
Fin. |
Hagika
LEGI0N
184
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 22:39:00 -
[884] - Quote
Shade Alidiana wrote:Can't say I like this, my navy scorp fit might suffer a bit. This separates pve and pvp ships even further, considering rokh and abaddon's already not the most powerful defence/offence when it comes to long-term solo fights, but there's always a load of other ships to choose from... And it probably will make drake not that much like a BS. It might need some love then, though (IMO).
Its ok though... the Alpha fleet champ Maelstrom will go untouched..Devs probably hated the fact the Abaddon and Rokh lasted longer than they wanted it too against the Mael |
Mathias Orsen
Sacred Templars
Unclaimed.
2
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 22:46:00 -
[885] - Quote
This one really burns me. Appearently, in CCP's eyes, if they ignore the negative feedback then there might as well not be any. Like it or not, right or wrong, if the change is made, people will learn to live with it.
My proposition is this, if a resistance bonus is considered overpowered it should be removed completely and replaced with a bonus that is not overpowered.
Give the gila and rattlesnake a missile damage bonus.
Give the Abaddon an optimal range or tracking bonus.
Give the Rohk a Damage bonus.
Give the maller and prophecy a weapon damage bonus.
|
Cearain
Black Dragon Fighting Society
The Devil's Tattoo
954
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 02:53:00 -
[886] - Quote
Cearain wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:
This affects 44 ships total.
Shield:
Ibis, Taipan, Merlin, Worm, Harpy, Cambion, Moa, Gila, Eagle, Onyx, Broadsword, Drake, Ferox, Nighthawk, Vulture, Tengu, Loki, Skiff, Mackinaw, Hulk, Rokh, Scorpion Navy Issue, Rattlesnake, Chimera, Wyvern.
Armor:
Impairor, Punisher, Vengeance, Malice, Malediction, Maller, Sacrilege, Mimir, Vangel, Devoter, Phobos, Prophecy, Absolution, Damnation, Loki, Legion, Proteus, Abaddon, Archon, Aeon.
While the majority of ships on this list rank among the more powerful in their classes, some (like the Eagle, Nighthawk and Vulture for instance) are already suffering. Those ships have problems that we believe to be separate from their resistance bonuses, and we are working hard to resolve those problems in the near future. Having the resistance bonus in a more balanced place will make our path to improving those ships much clearer.
I don't think most of the ships on this list are overpowered therefore I do not think nerfing them across the board is a good idea. If the eagle nighthawk and vulture are underpowered then leave the resists at 5%. The problem with buffing them in other ways is it reduces the variety. You will likely buff them by giving them the same bonuses you gave other ships like turrent bonuses reducing the variety. Leave the 5% resist bonus on ships that are not overpowered.
An example of this would be the merlin. It got made to be more similar to the incursus with the turret bonus as the incursus. Currently a merlin is just worse than an incursus. Now the imbalances will be widened.
Worm is just worse than the dram or daredevil now the imbalance is just widened.
Punisher is just worse than just about all the major frigates now that imbalance is widened.
Harpy is worse than the ishkur, hawk wolf and jag and now that imbalance is widened.
Moa is weaker than rupture, vexor and thorax and now that imbalance is widened.
Do I even need to talk about the eagle??
Maybe just nerf the few ships that appear overpowered like the vengeance rokh abaddon archon and aeon?
The other ships are not overpowered and are often already outlcassed.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Buhhdust Princess
Mind Games.
Suddenly Spaceships.
5388
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 09:29:00 -
[887] - Quote
Another day, another post ignored by CCP.
If you aren't ignoring this, just delete this thread, and pretend it NEVER happened, EVER.
Worst idea since blue cheese, and frankly that's disgusting.
All seriousness though, a LOT of people are saying this is a bad idea CCP. Now, I appreciate you don't want to look like the community is over ruling everything you say, and want to appear in control etc, but c'mon. This is probably one of the most insignificant, ******** nerfs you've ever thought of.
Can I just ask who actually first mentioned this? If it was Fozzie/Rise, you guys must've been fairly wrecked when you suggested it. If it was some dev that's never actually played EVE properly before, kill them. Seriously. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
6043
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 10:25:00 -
[888] - Quote
I've never stopped reading this thread, I have it open every day to keep an eye on new posts. I am very interested in what people have to say, but that's not the same thing as designing by straw poll.
I'm also primarily looking at arguments made, not frequency of posting. So volume doesn't get you some kind of advantage Buhhdust. The honest truth is that if we had seen a convincing argument for why this change is a bad idea we would have been open to adjustments as always, but at the end of the day we need to make the best decisions we can for EVE's balance and sometimes that means disagreeing with a subset of passionate players.
Also this idea originated with me, so if you want to give someone death threats I'm your huckleberry.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Mathias Orsen
Sacred Templars
Unclaimed.
2
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 10:46:00 -
[889] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:I've never stopped reading this thread, I have it open every day to keep an eye on new posts. I am very interested in what people have to say, but that's not the same thing as designing by straw poll.
I'm also primarily looking at arguments made, not frequency of posting. So volume doesn't get you some kind of advantage Buhhdust. The honest truth is that if we had seen a convincing argument for why this change is a bad idea we would have been open to adjustments as always, but at the end of the day we need to make the best decisions we can for EVE's balance and sometimes that means disagreeing with a subset of passionate players.
Also this idea originated with me, so if you want to give someone death threats I'm your huckleberry.
It's your idea. You are already biased toward the idea. I would be like giving someone a convincing argument to why they shouldn't burn kittens. Good idea or bad, it's not gonna break the game. People aren't gonna quit EVE over it. People aren't gonna stop flying Moas. It's something to deal with. |
Seth Asthereun
Oscura Simmetria
Yulai Federation
12
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 10:46:00 -
[890] - Quote
You didn't answer the most important concern. what will happen with ships that will get unbalanced but have their "class" already gone under the balance hammer?
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
6044
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 10:48:00 -
[891] - Quote
Seth Asthereun wrote:You didn't answer the most important concern. what will happen with ships that will get unbalanced but have their "class" already gone under the balance hammer?
We don't stop working on a ship after we've balanced it once. We'll keep making changes as needed to any and every ship.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Jonas Sukarala
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
193
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 10:54:00 -
[892] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Seth Asthereun wrote:You didn't answer the most important concern. what will happen with ships that will get unbalanced but have their "class" already gone under the balance hammer?
We don't stop working on a ship after we've balanced it once. We'll keep making changes as needed to any and every ship.
Is the drake under consideration for a nerf yet? :P
Also you will have to fix the tempest if you release it as it is
'Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line' CCP Ytterbium
Nerf missile range into place where is the TD missile change?-á ..projectiles should use capacitor.
ABC's should be T2 HABC and nerf web strength its still too high |
Doddy
Dark-Rising
838
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 11:20:00 -
[893] - Quote
Zloco Crendraven wrote:Marlona Sky wrote:Zloco Crendraven wrote:5% resist bonus ships are great anti blob ships. It is one of the few things that gives u any chance against a blob.
The problem is that the blob can bring that 5% resist ship too, right?
Yes, but the real problem is the accessibility of those ships.
T1 hulls are easy accessible to everyone and having blobs fly with T1 5% resist ships is the real problem.
The conclusion is to leave 5% resist bonuses to T2, T3 hulls and capitals and remove them from T1 hulls.
Why T2, T3 and capitals? Well u diminish the blob by alot if u decide to go out with T2, T3 or capital ships.
Resist bonuses need to stay in the game. That bonus is great to show out some skill and compete with blobs. Right, because you know the blob never uses those 5% resist ships either...  Read again pls!
You do realise that the "blobbers" fly archon fleets, tengu fleets, loki fleets, zealot fleets, navy apoc fleets, maesltrom fleets, titan fleets and tornado fleets, not one of which is a t1 ship with a resist bonus. The more sp a player has the more likely he is to be in a blob.
Anyway in what way does using an overpowered bonus show "skill"? |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
255
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 11:20:00 -
[894] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:I've never stopped reading this thread, I have it open every day to keep an eye on new posts. I am very interested in what people have to say, but that's not the same thing as designing by straw poll.
I'm also primarily looking at arguments made, not frequency of posting. So volume doesn't get you some kind of advantage Buhhdust. The honest truth is that if we had seen a convincing argument for why this change is a bad idea we would have been open to adjustments as always, but at the end of the day we need to make the best decisions we can for EVE's balance and sometimes that means disagreeing with a subset of passionate players.
Also this idea originated with me, so if you want to give someone death threats I'm your huckleberry.
You're seriously nerfing my eagle and ferox. Why would you do that? They're already awful. Could you perhaps not do the change on ships that are currently terrible, then do it when you get around to making them good? |
Hannott Thanos
Notorious Legion
564
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 11:25:00 -
[895] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:
You're seriously nerfing my eagle and ferox. Why would you do that? They're already awful. Could you perhaps not do the change on ships that are currently terrible, then do it when you get around to making them good?
So you are saying that my 1500m/s, 855 DPS, 64k EHP post Odyssey Ferox is bad?
Notsureifseriousorbad.jpd |
Jureth22
Mind Games.
Suddenly Spaceships.
83
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 11:31:00 -
[896] - Quote
no.keep the 5% |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
255
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 11:43:00 -
[897] - Quote
Hannott Thanos wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:
You're seriously nerfing my eagle and ferox. Why would you do that? They're already awful. Could you perhaps not do the change on ships that are currently terrible, then do it when you get around to making them good?
So you are saying that my 1500m/s, 855 DPS, 64k EHP post Odyssey Ferox is bad? Notsureifseriousorbad.jpd
links and thermodynamics are good, not your ferox, also lol @ blasters on caldari |
Hannott Thanos
Notorious Legion
564
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 11:48:00 -
[898] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:Hannott Thanos wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:
You're seriously nerfing my eagle and ferox. Why would you do that? They're already awful. Could you perhaps not do the change on ships that are currently terrible, then do it when you get around to making them good?
So you are saying that my 1500m/s, 855 DPS, 64k EHP post Odyssey Ferox is bad? Notsureifseriousorbad.jpd links and thermodynamics are good, not your ferox, also lol @ blasters on caldari
No links. Solo, no implants, just skill. |
Seth Asthereun
Oscura Simmetria
Yulai Federation
12
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 12:08:00 -
[899] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Seth Asthereun wrote:You didn't answer the most important concern. what will happen with ships that will get unbalanced but have their "class" already gone under the balance hammer?
We don't stop working on a ship after we've balanced it once. We'll keep making changes as needed to any and every ship.
That's partially true. And even if that was true why mess up with ships that were supposed to be balanced (in none of the previous balance iterations was mentioned a shield resist bonus nerf), releasing them in this state and only after balance them again.
That is not an efficient to work: not from a player side that has to deal with an ongoing change on the same ships, neither for ccp that has to do the same homework 2 times.
Sorry again for my english |
TinkerHell
Nocturnal Romance
20
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 12:09:00 -
[900] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Seth Asthereun wrote:You didn't answer the most important concern. what will happen with ships that will get unbalanced but have their "class" already gone under the balance hammer?
We don't stop working on a ship after we've balanced it once. We'll keep making changes as needed to any and every ship.
You are going to fix the AT ships you are nerfing with this resist nerf? I don't care that they don't get buffed, you have more important stuff to balance, by why nerf them? Leave them alone. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 [30] .. 34 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |