| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
|
CCP Eterne
C C P
C C P Alliance
2516
   |
Posted - 2013.06.03 17:03:00 -
[1] - Quote
There are a great many changes coming to ship balancing in Odyssey, with changes to all Navy ships, battleships, and tweaks to large weapons, attack battlecruisers, and more. CCP Ytterbium runs them down in his latest dev blog.
New Eden Community Representative GÇ+ New Eden Illuminati GÇ+ Fiction Adept
@CCP_Eterne GÇ+ @EVE_LiveEvents |
|
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
Aegis Solaris
1934
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 17:04:00 -
[2] - Quote
And I was so hoping the Navy Domi would become a super awesome drone boat...
First
http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
6312
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 17:10:00 -
[3] - Quote
That's 107 ships either added or comprehensively rebalanced in the last year.
Let's see if we can beat that next year.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Kethry Avenger
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
78
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 17:20:00 -
[4] - Quote
I thought the resistance change had been slowed down to just battleships? Is it going to be for all ships?
Also you all are pretty awesome. |
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
1955
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 17:22:00 -
[5] - Quote
Kethry Avenger wrote:I thought the resistance change had been slowed down to just battleships? Is it going to be for all ships?
Also you all are pretty awesome.
All ships with a resistance bonus indeed. |
|
Aethlyn
EVE University
Ivy League
225
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 17:27:00 -
[6] - Quote
Would be nice if you could provide that ship overview image in a more printer friendly (read: far lighter background). Might be something for newbies to print out and pin on the wall. I know everyone could do it on their own, but "everything from one source" might be the better approach.
Looking for more thoughts? Follow me on [url]http://twitter.com/Aethlyn[/url] |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
583
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 17:28:00 -
[7] - Quote
Still not convinced re: Tempest. Especially with the new Typhoon, Megathon and Hyperon.
Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado.
Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
Aegis Solaris
1935
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 17:33:00 -
[8] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:That's 107 ships either added or comprehensively rebalanced in the last year.
Let's see if we can beat that next year.
Looking at the chart you can see where the holes are. Like: No support destroyers or mining battlecrusiers.
Also there is a role that is not well filled by anything: Swiss army knife.
http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Jonas Sukarala
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
221
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 17:42:00 -
[9] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:That's 107 ships either added or comprehensively rebalanced in the last year.
Let's see if we can beat that next year.
That would be nice..
Fozzie
Maybe you could answer this since Rise didn't...
ABC's shouldn't they be T2? ....... compare to T2 logistics using oversized mods in highs..
'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 |
Burseg Sardaukar
Sardaukar Merc Guild
General Tso's Alliance
303
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 17:43:00 -
[10] - Quote
Quote:The Dominix... Adaptable in a myriad of ways, we nevertheless decided to swap its role from what essentially was a Turret plus Drones split weapon system to purely focus on the latter. It is now aiming to be much more efficient with Sentry drones than any other ship in-game, which is a distinct advantage.
And its ONLY advantage over the Armageddon. There is no reason to fly the Dominix in any small gang when presented with the option of the Armageddon.
So if the vision of the Domi being a mini-slowcat for null blobs doesn't work out as your null-based balance team envisioned, can I have my blaster bonus back?
Hey, as a dude that lives in lowsec, you should read my idea on how to "fix" it... in Blog format, complete with a spreadsheet!
http://3xxxd.blogspot.com/2012/09/how-to-buff-lowsec.html |
|
|
Callic Veratar
Power of the Phoenix
368
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 17:44:00 -
[11] - Quote
I was kinda hoping that you could make a blaster Navy Myrmidon. The Navy Scorpion certainly doesn't have ECM bonuses.
I wonder if there's room to split hybrids into two separate weapon classes. Gallente get thermal projectors with blasters and a new long range thermal weapon (high RoF, moderate DPS like a thermal lance?) and Caldari get mass drivers with rails and a new short range kinetic weapon (low RoF, huge alpha like a shotgun?).
It would certainly add more variability into the different ship lines, as balancing Caldari for blasters or Gallente for rails seems weird.
DirectX 11, it's not rocket appliance! |
Pyrus Octavius
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
39
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 17:46:00 -
[12] - Quote
Hi Dev's:
The Ancillary Armor Repair module is broken and in need of attention. It is pretty much a useless module unless it is paired with a Armor Repairer, and even with that, having both running requires a Cap Booster to keep them running. The use of Nanite Repair Paste is a nice alternative to using cap boosters, but unlike the Ancillary Shield Booster, doesn't substitute the need for the Ancillary Armor Repair module to use capacitor to function. Lastly, the nanite repair past reload time is atrocious. Will you be addressing any of these concerns?
Thank you. |
Circumstantial Evidence
64
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 18:00:00 -
[13] - Quote
Give a racial specialty or EWAR role to all the former Tier 1 battleships:
Scorpion started it with ECM jamming,
Armageddon now has neutralizing.
Dominix could have a small warp disruptor range bonus or sensor dampening,
Typhoon would like a target painting bonus.
|
Luc Chastot
Gentleman's Corp
373
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 18:02:00 -
[14] - Quote
CCP Fozzie, can you explain this contradiction please?
CCP Fozzie wrote:I'll start with this disclaimer, we will never feel that we need to make hull designs match the function of every ship. So there's no NEED to switch the hulls on any command ships. This is not something we've decided to do, but it is something we could do and would like your opinions on. Quote:Choosing between which hull to pick between the Brutix or Myrmidon proved to be tricky for Odyssey GÇô we finally picked the former as we foresaw some heavy role overlap for a possible Myrmidon Navy Issue with the Ishtar, Vexor Navy Issue, Gila or even Dominix. As a result, the Brutix Navy Issue is a ship that directly iterates on the strengths of its predecessor, with improved low slot layout and better damage application.
I still think we could have gotten a blaster Navy Myrmidon.
Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
857
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 18:09:00 -
[15] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:That's 107 ships either added or comprehensively rebalanced in the last year.
Let's see if we can beat that next year.
fozzie you promised that because you're making us rescan 170k moons you would cut down on moon probe scanning time where is that aaaugh
please please please get that fix in it is not in the notes oh god |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
6314
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 18:12:00 -
[16] - Quote
Luc Chastot wrote:CCP Fozzie, can you explain this contradiction please? CCP Fozzie wrote:I'll start with this disclaimer, we will never feel that we need to make hull designs match the function of every ship. So there's no NEED to switch the hulls on any command ships. This is not something we've decided to do, but it is something we could do and would like your opinions on. Quote:Choosing between which hull to pick between the Brutix or Myrmidon proved to be tricky for Odyssey GÇô we finally picked the former as we foresaw some heavy role overlap for a possible Myrmidon Navy Issue with the Ishtar, Vexor Navy Issue, Gila or even Dominix. As a result, the Brutix Navy Issue is a ship that directly iterates on the strengths of its predecessor, with improved low slot layout and better damage application. I still think we could have gotten a blaster Navy Myrmidon.
It's literally a modified Brutix. We're not going to confuse people for a new hull by making a navy Brutix in function look like a Myrm when we have the easy option of just using the Brutix hull.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Maximus Andendare
Future Corps
Sleeper Social Club
240
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 18:16:00 -
[17] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Luc Chastot wrote:CCP Fozzie, can you explain this contradiction please? CCP Fozzie wrote:I'll start with this disclaimer, we will never feel that we need to make hull designs match the function of every ship. So there's no NEED to switch the hulls on any command ships. This is not something we've decided to do, but it is something we could do and would like your opinions on. Quote:Choosing between which hull to pick between the Brutix or Myrmidon proved to be tricky for Odyssey GÇô we finally picked the former as we foresaw some heavy role overlap for a possible Myrmidon Navy Issue with the Ishtar, Vexor Navy Issue, Gila or even Dominix. As a result, the Brutix Navy Issue is a ship that directly iterates on the strengths of its predecessor, with improved low slot layout and better damage application. I still think we could have gotten a blaster Navy Myrmidon. It's literally a modified Brutix. We're not going to confuse people for a new hull by making a navy Brutix in function look like a Myrm when we have the easy option of just using the Brutix hull. Navy Brutix is a sexy ship and don't let anyone tell you differently!
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
857
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 18:17:00 -
[18] - Quote
i also adore the navy brutix and will be ganking a miner with one as soon as possible |
Alain Colcer
Agiolet Security and Logistics
72
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 18:24:00 -
[19] - Quote
I would like to raise a question regarding the extra-materials.
Extra-materials are not affected by ML research (less wastage on the BPO) and obviously are not returned when reprocessing the item, but those measures are meant to prevent players "creating" an influx of minerals in the game by building pre-patch and reprocessing post-patch.
Would CCP eventually remove the extra materials so if 2 years down the read i reprocess, say a hyperion, i could get the minerals including the extra materials? |
Infinion
My Little Pony - Friendship Force
38
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 18:26:00 -
[20] - Quote
Have there been any mentionable changes to the pirate faction battleships (or other pirate ship classes for that matter)?
Will they follow the same role trend as the standard and navy ships? |
|
|
Yonis Kador
KADORCORP
302
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 18:28:00 -
[21] - Quote
As I'm still primarily using Amarr hulls, I'm not too upset by these changes. (It may have something to do with the fact that EVE survived a near-death experience yesterday and as she just came out of a coma, I can't bring myself to anger - either that or it's because these changes will be implemented in mere minutes so there isn't much point in getting too excited...) For what it's worth,
My first impressions:
1.) Writing that the IN Slicer may have received a "tweak" to its fitting really isn't informative enough to draw any conclusions.
2.) The Amarr navy cruisers are getting badass bonuses. What's not to like?
3.) When I read about the changes to the Armageddon, and saw the words: "drone ship," my heart skipped a beat. Oh man, again? But my poor heart was shocked back into rhythm by the preceeding four words "more devious energy neutralizing." It's no secret that I'm not a fan of the Amarr people being turned into a drone race. They've always been best known for armor tanking and energy weapons imo. But at least when you pair drones with an energy weapon bonus (like neuts - I've always considered neuts energy weapons, they just do it in reverse) you bring an affordable, poor-man's Bhaalgorn to the party. And then at least there's a consistent theme between the Pilgrim, Dragoon, Armageddon, and the Bhaalgorn of these Amarr drone ships with energy sucking bonuses. This pve race is getting its pvp teeth one ship at a time. Hell, I say we're past the tipping point now. Just go for it and give the Punisher a neut bonus too. We'll have a whole pvp neut set then. In the end, it's difficult to be upset about a Neutageddon. I've used Neutageddon fits on the old Armageddons in pvp and they work well. They tend to surprise people. With the bonuses, they should work wonders.
(The Prophecy still sticks out like a red-headed stepchild though - I swear I'll never get over turning the eagle of the fleet into a drone carrier. I'm still wounded.)
4.) I was about to have an all-out stroke and fall out of my chair when I read that the Apoc's cap bonuses are being removed. The best thing about an Apoc is that you can fit a full set of T2s or Tachyons and do major dps with them. It still requires cap boosters of course (there's no such thing as cap stable in the Amarr empire! cap stability is for noobs!) but it performed well "because" of that cap bonus. (Same thing with the Navy Harb - no cap bonus, tracking instead.) But then I saw that fitting large energy turrets is being made orders of magnitude easier with requirements of TWENTY PERCENT less capacitor and TEN PERCENT less powergrid. And since this single change alone is like Christmas and my birthday all rolled into one, it's virtually impossible to be upset about anything else. How many Amarr ships have I fit with capacitor rigs and powergrid rigs, and powergrid modules and powergrid implants because the large energy turrets were so hungry they had to have it? How many times have I wished I could fit something like a rate of fire rig or an armor mod in the low slot that powergrid mod is occupying? As I've always had at least one Amarr character over the past five years: Too. Many. To. Count.
For that one reason alone, I'm thrilled. I can't wait to see how it affects all the fittings on all my ships and what alterations will be made possible because of it.
I can't believe I'm writing this but I'm actually looking forward to these ship changes.
Wow, huh?
YK
"He who fights and runs away lives to fight another day." |
Hiram Alexander
Dry Atomic Fusion
Gatekeepers Universe
348
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 18:28:00 -
[22] - Quote
Excellent stuff, just waiting on Medium Rails to get a bit of love, now...  |
Callic Veratar
Power of the Phoenix
368
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 18:38:00 -
[23] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Luc Chastot wrote:CCP Fozzie, can you explain this contradiction please? CCP Fozzie wrote:I'll start with this disclaimer, we will never feel that we need to make hull designs match the function of every ship. So there's no NEED to switch the hulls on any command ships. This is not something we've decided to do, but it is something we could do and would like your opinions on. Quote:Choosing between which hull to pick between the Brutix or Myrmidon proved to be tricky for Odyssey GÇô we finally picked the former as we foresaw some heavy role overlap for a possible Myrmidon Navy Issue with the Ishtar, Vexor Navy Issue, Gila or even Dominix. As a result, the Brutix Navy Issue is a ship that directly iterates on the strengths of its predecessor, with improved low slot layout and better damage application. I still think we could have gotten a blaster Navy Myrmidon. It's literally a modified Brutix. We're not going to confuse people for a new hull by making a navy Brutix in function look like a Myrm when we have the easy option of just using the Brutix hull.
How does that follow for the navy variants of the Armageddon, Augoror, Exequror, Osprey, Scorpion, and Scythe? None of them are variations on the T1 ships.
DirectX 11, it's not rocket appliance! |
Marlona Sky
D00M.
Northern Coalition.
3826
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 18:42:00 -
[24] - Quote
Aside from the soon to be retired to pathetic station games and gate camps T1 Dominix; good changes.
|
NightmareX
Blood Thirsty Pirates With Rum
120
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 18:56:00 -
[25] - Quote
Awesome changes for the ships.
Any eta on when the changes for the pirate ships are coming though?
Lets hope you CCP doesn't mess up the Vindicator now, because i'm a very happy user of it.
My current EVE videos.
Rebirth 4: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=131123
Bringers of Hatred: http://tinyurl.com/BOHINFOD |
Luc Chastot
Gentleman's Corp
374
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 18:58:00 -
[26] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Luc Chastot wrote:CCP Fozzie, can you explain this contradiction please? CCP Fozzie wrote:I'll start with this disclaimer, we will never feel that we need to make hull designs match the function of every ship. So there's no NEED to switch the hulls on any command ships. This is not something we've decided to do, but it is something we could do and would like your opinions on. Quote:Choosing between which hull to pick between the Brutix or Myrmidon proved to be tricky for Odyssey GÇô we finally picked the former as we foresaw some heavy role overlap for a possible Myrmidon Navy Issue with the Ishtar, Vexor Navy Issue, Gila or even Dominix. As a result, the Brutix Navy Issue is a ship that directly iterates on the strengths of its predecessor, with improved low slot layout and better damage application. I still think we could have gotten a blaster Navy Myrmidon. It's literally a modified Brutix. We're not going to confuse people for a new hull by making a navy Brutix in function look like a Myrm when we have the easy option of just using the Brutix hull.
You could have removed the armor reper bonus on the T1 Brutix and made a blaster Navy Myrm focused on survivability; or you could have done something else. It is a modified Brutix because you decided that's what a navy Gallente battlecruiser should be. Also, your argument contradicts what you already said about not needing to match hull design and function; but don't get me wrong, Fozzie, I really like most of the work you've done rebalancing ships. I just want to see a convincing argument for this decision, because otherwise I'll keep feeling Gallente pilots are consistently getting the short end of the stick.
Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot. |
Infinion
My Little Pony - Friendship Force
38
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 18:58:00 -
[27] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:Aside from the soon to be retired to pathetic station games and gate camps T1 Dominix; good changes.
That's a good point, if the Domi's success is going to be centered around fighting exclusively with the sentries, then having any mobility with a fleet is going to mean abandoning a LOT of drones.
Should the domi really be abandoning drones to compete with the mobility of other combat battleships?
The domi should at least have a role bonus that increases sentry velocity up from 1 m/s, at least when being recalled to the dronebay. |
Burseg Sardaukar
Sardaukar Merc Guild
General Tso's Alliance
304
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 19:09:00 -
[28] - Quote
Infinion wrote:Marlona Sky wrote:Aside from the soon to be retired to pathetic station games and gate camps T1 Dominix; good changes. That's a good point, if the Domi's success is going to be centered around fighting exclusively with the sentries, then having any mobility with a fleet is going to mean abandoning a LOT of drones. Should the domi really be abandoning drones to compete with the mobility of other combat battleships? The domi should at least have a role bonus that increases sentry velocity up from 1 m/s, at least when being recalled to the dronebay.
I feel like that is really shoehorning a bonus to make up for shoving the Domi into a ridiculously tiny niche role. Sentries should recall directly to dronebay anyway (with no way of cancelling the recall as a counter to just dragging them behind an Ishtar and having them move, snipe, move, snipe, move, snipe).
Hey, as a dude that lives in lowsec, you should read my idea on how to "fix" it... in Blog format, complete with a spreadsheet!
http://3xxxd.blogspot.com/2012/09/how-to-buff-lowsec.html |
Gargep Farrow
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 19:14:00 -
[29] - Quote
Combat ship changes seem to be getting all the coverage, (not that all the info is a bad thing) what has been lacking from the point of the initial ship change blog is what is happening with the non-combat ships, particularly the basic industrials. The origional blog stated that you would only need Gallante Industrial 1 as opposed to the current V that is needed now. Is this still going to happen, and have role changes been set up so that Itty's 1-4 do not become worthless hulls? |
Popsikle
Hard Knocks Inc.
9
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 19:48:00 -
[30] - Quote
Tech2 Cruisers need some love. Most of the HAC's are no longer the bad-assed machines they were, and I feel the recon classes need some love too, as they are a bit too slow to be useful in a lot of situations ;(
I know you said you will get to it, but is this something you will be getting to before the next exp or over the summer in small patches?
Also, please make the domi bonus to sentries being able to move while not attacking, pleaaaasssseee. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |