|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Fornic McKraken
Deadman W0nderland
Tribal Band
0
   |
Posted - 2013.04.30 13:23:00 -
[1] - Quote
It seems CCP has the wrong idea of how to balance ships. When a ship or style of fighting becomes OP, they need to improve other ships and styles rather than make the ships everyone loves to fly (cough cough... Hurricane) worse. If many pilots are flying a ship because it is successful, why nerf it?
Tracking enhancers are a large part of PVP and removing the optimal range bonus will make many ships close to impossible to fly. Almost none of the ships that change will impact the most have the mid slots to add tracking computers. Furthermore, when people have skilled into certain ships, such as Minmatar, the last thing they want to see is all of their favorite ships nerfed.
CCP Stop nerfing minmatar ships. Seriously. What is the point? All you are doing is pissing people off instead of making the game more fun. How about you increase armor HP. Or increase the bonus for the honeycombing skill. Or improve web drones. I have been playing Eve for a year and a half, (I know that isn't long compared to some) but it seems CCP is trying to make small gang PVP worse. And if you are going to nerf something how about nerf jamming. Nothing else in EWAR takes a ship completely out of the fight. That could easily be balanced by creating targeting assist drones that significantly increase your sensor strength. |
Fornic McKraken
Deadman W0nderland
Tribal Band
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 17:25:00 -
[2] - Quote
Wow a lot of minm haters. Yeah Minm was OP.
and Lady Naween you are right. There are plenty of ways to do small gang pvp that are fun and don't involve cynabals, talos or vagas.
That doesn't mean they should nerf an entire style of fighting. How much tank will a vaga have now that is has to use a mid slot for range? 17K EHP? . I offered several options that would give ships that fall victim to kiting a better chance and I'm sure there are plenty more out there.
and Kosetzu, there is no need try and attack my intellect instead of making decent points. There will always be ships that are better at some things, like pvp, than others. Even after the changes.
Part of what is fun about Eve is there are so many different ways to fight. If you are trying to take down a spider tanking Ishtar fleet, you use blackbirds or lockbreaker bombs. If fighting a cynabal gang, you use huginns, lachs and oracles. There are many ways to pvp and there will always be ones that are more often successful than others.
If TEs make ACs OP then don't nerf missles to begin with. Take a mid slot from the drake instead of crushing HM dps. A cane vs drake used to be a good fight if you were any good at flying them.
|
Fornic McKraken
Deadman W0nderland
Tribal Band
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 19:43:00 -
[3] - Quote
Thank you for a more productive reply. |
Fornic McKraken
Deadman W0nderland
Tribal Band
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 07:46:00 -
[4] - Quote
Most of you are missing my point. I never said kiting AC ships were not OP. I never said there wasn't a need for balancing. I said, in order to balance the ships they should improve others rather than nerf.
Not that anyone is paying attention to this post anymore. But stupid comments like the one posted by Lallante are not productive. So people like me are the problem with games? what because you lose to them? My KB isn't even all that good. I like good fights and don't rely on ganking. I lose ships all the time because I enjoy pvp and don't really care.
Yes I may have exaggerated the potential impact of the TE nerf on some ships but I still dislike the idea of making ships worse just cause they are too good at killing. How about make the ships losing all the time better instead. There are many ways of doing that but instead of offering good ideas, many people just cried like babies. "Whaaa Whaaa, I die to AC ships, they need to be nerfed." Instead of trying to belittle me for trying to think of ways to make ships better able to fight kiting ships, how about you offer new ideas. |
|
|
| |
|