| Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Ti anna
   |
Posted - 2005.11.03 17:10:00 -
[121]
Well, having a couple days to digest these proposed changes, I think there are a few items that are not being addressed.
I am going to use the Moros as an example because it is the most extreme case that this will seriously affect. All other Drone carriers that had the ability to launch more drones than normal due to bonuses will be affected to a lesser extent.
The moros was capable of launching 35 drones at max skills. With the drop from 35 - 5 a lot more is being affected than just the damage output, but the damage output seems to be the only thing that is being retained (even though it really isn't, not even close. If you doubt this, there is an excellent post detailing the timeline of killing off 5 drones verses 15 and the damage output during battle etc...).
Killing them off... Obviously it will be a lot faster and easier to kill off 5 drones than 35 drones, even if they have 7x the hitpoints of their counterparts.
Jamming them... It would be almost impossible to take 35 drones out of a battle by jamming them without using a FLEET. 5 drones? That can almost be completely neutralized by ONE ship. And this is not a nerf?
Mining... Obviously 35 drones will be able to mine a LOT more ore than 5, even if they are boosted to be 7x as efficient. The only way they would be equivalent is if their Capacity to hold ore, AND the rate of ore aquisition was multiplied by 7x. (therefore returning 7x as much ore to the ship per run in same amount of time as one currently does)
The addition of the new drones... I know they are not in currently, but they will be eventually. Limiting drone carriers to just 5 total is seriously denigrating their effectiveness and is putting them on almost the EXACT same footing as a non drone carrier. First of all, Drone carriers main damage output is from their drones. The use of just ONE of these new drones will effectively reduce their firepower by 20%!! switch out 2 or 3 and, well, you get the picture.
Reduction of Drone bays... OMG, where do I start, this is just so wrong on soooo many levels. I will leave the reasoning of this to those who have gone before.
I would like to also relay that I have never flown a Moros or a Domi, nor was I ever planning to. My biggest ship is a Mega, I love it and the only thing bigger I will ever fly is a Carrier or, dare I hope, a Titan :))
I understand that the sheer number of drones in use on the server needs to be reduced to help reduce lag. I just feel that the changes as proposed were not very well thought out, as exemplified by the rapid revision and addition of this second Blog. I think more thought needs to go into it before this drastic of a change is even tested.
|
Remember When
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 18:38:00 -
[122]
I understand the intent of reducing lag and it is a worthy cause. However I fly a DOM and my skills are tried for it to LVL 4. So for me it is a NERF.
The point that hurts the most is I trained long for the Ability for using LOTS of drones and now due to server loads you are changing the skill to something I might not of trained at all; perhaps I would of shifted the time into a different race ship. What attracted me in the first part to Gallant was the numerous drones.
That being said and my disappoint stated. What I would rather you not do is make the DOM bonus a one type. Rather gives us a "carrot" and make it all race damage. I work in space where I need "EXPLOSIVE" damage and the changes you are outlining are a major NERF to a DOM player that does not play AMAR space.
|
Jezala
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 19:04:00 -
[123]
 Originally by: Chade Malloy
Edited by: Chade Malloy on 03/11/2005 13:35:45
...so ofc a domi should be able to launch more drones than a Raven, but a raven wonŠt need them anyway in most cases. ...
I would argue that Raven needs those drones more than any other battship, except the Dom. This is based on the reality that the Raven engangement envelope is really 0km to 50km. The limit of this envelope is driven by the long flight times of torps and cruises. That means a Raven has to tangle with people up close, putting themselves within a reasonable grasp of tacklers. In PvE, drones are a must unless you can afford a 150 mil, 7.5km smartbomb.
The impact of these drone changes affect more than just the Gallente or the drone carriers. In fact, it is a pretty significant buff to those guys while a swift kick in the nuts nerf to anyone else.
|
eldaro
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 21:43:00 -
[124]
Well, I'm to WOW for 10 days  with my guest pass, if i don't get 10 drones on my Dom I'm staying 
"Ask not what you can do for your Corp......"
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 22:00:00 -
[125]
Originally by: eldaro
Well, I'm to WOW for 10 days with my guest pass, if i don't get 10 drones on my Dom I'm staying
Can I have your stuff?
Jezala, cruise are NOT that slow. Especially when the Raven's working with smaller ships which can hold things down to be hit.
Ti anna, well it won't keep 35. I'd argue it should keep 10.
"Corpse cannot be fitted onto ship. Only hardware modules can be fitted." |
w0rmy
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 22:44:00 -
[126]
Originally by: Tuxford
It's still not as many hitpoint as it was but it's not that worse. And having fewer tougher drones has the added advantage of not being taken out with one smartbomb.
But it gives pilots the ability to target, and take out all 5 drones, easier than targetting and shooting 15.
What scares you more? 5 cruisers or 15 ceptors?
|
Fellhand
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 22:54:00 -
[127]
Right, read the new dev blog.
This is still the worst idea ever. Leaving my sucky maths aside, 5 drones are a hell of a lot easier to kill than 15 and the psychological effect of the drone swarm is utterly gone. People who weren't flying drone ships now get what are effectively extra mid-slots while the drone ships are just [expletive].
I don't buy your "lag" excuse for doing this and nor do several others. This is probably going to take a fair amount of coding, far more than it would take to pop abandoned cans, orphaned drones and ad cans, which would likely solve more of the lag problem, certainly it should be your first resort rather than spending time recoding to break something that was perfectly balanced already.
CCP, this is your big chance to show that the opinion of the playerbase actually matters to you in the slightest. Virtually no-one wants these changes so here's your big chance, are you going to show you listen to the players and back off on these changes or show that you couldn't give a flying [expletive] what the players say or think and push ahead with them?
_______________________________________________
There is no such thing as too much cynicism
Flame me if you wish, I laugh with scorn at threats...
Beware of geeks bearing gifs
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 23:14:00 -
[128]
"I don't buy your "lag" excuse for doing this and nor do several others. This is probably going to take a fair amount of coding, far more than it would take to pop abandoned cans, orphaned drones and ad cans, which would likely solve more of the lag problem, certainly it should be your first resort rather than spending time recoding to break something that was perfectly balanced already."
So, maybe the very fact they put in extra work into this whole drone thing rather than do the 'simple things' you suggest... indicates the amount of resources tied up by drones is significant enough to make them go for it?
No one really does extra work when they can avoid it...
|
Fellhand
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 23:18:00 -
[129]
Originally by: j0sephine
So, maybe the very fact they put in extra work into this whole drone thing rather than do the 'simple things' you suggest... indicates the amount of resources tied up by drones is significant enough to make them go for it?
No one really does extra work when they can avoid it...
True enough but my experiance of the devs in this game leads me to believe that firstly, they just want to nerf drones because they aren't big guns and secondly, the devs have only one response to any kind of problem: Nerf the hell out of something. The idea that there might be other solutions wouldn't even occur to them. Thirdly, getting rid of ad cans, abandoned cans and orphaned drones is really something that should be tried before making such a massive and unbalancing change. But, like I said, the idea that there might be a solution that doesn't involve nerfing something is a foreign concept to the devs.
_______________________________________________
There is no such thing as too much cynicism
Flame me if you wish, I laugh with scorn at threats...
Beware of geeks bearing gifs
|
w0rmy
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 23:21:00 -
[130]
Originally by: j0sephine
So, maybe the very fact they put in extra work into this whole drone thing rather than do the 'simple things' you suggest... indicates the amount of resources tied up by drones is significant enough to make them go for it?
No one really does extra work when they can avoid it...
Perfectly valid answer, but it does lead me to one question.
100 v 100 fleet battles with drones used to work, they dont now. Perhaps the symptoms are being addressed, and not the true cause?
|
Ranger 1
|
Posted - 2005.11.03 23:56:00 -
[131]
I'm not going to argue with people that can't see the sense in what is being done. I will say something on behalf of those that object simply for the asthetic value of seeing a large swarm of drones attacking.
Since we are going with fewer, but nastier drones now... perhaps people's need for eye candy would be sated if drones were simply made graphically larger. Not frigate sized mind you, but something that you can actually see some of the time rather than a little icon on the screen.
It's a thought.
|
Miri Tirzan
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 00:53:00 -
[132]
I think this is the completely wrong approach. Why, because this nerfs drone users. It effects damage, flexibility, and effectiveness of using drones.
I suggest that instead of reducing the number of drones and then changing them as you are proposing, instead change the paradym. How? By restricting drones in space to swarms and limiting the number of swarms to five. That lets the player put as many drones into a swarm as they want and retains the flexibility.
Further, to keep things the same, make it that everytime a drone is killed in a swarm, the ship looses lock. This keeps the drones hard to kill with out being unkillible.
The down side of this is that you will have to do some programming rather than just changing some stats and screwing drone users over.
svetlana - "whining gets you stuff. that is why humans got to the top of the food chain and all the other animals got nerfed."
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 02:58:00 -
[133]
Originally by: w0rmy
Originally by: j0sephine
So, maybe the very fact they put in extra work into this whole drone thing rather than do the 'simple things' you suggest... indicates the amount of resources tied up by drones is significant enough to make them go for it?
No one really does extra work when they can avoid it...
Perfectly valid answer, but it does lead me to one question.
100 v 100 fleet battles with drones used to work, they dont now. Perhaps the symptoms are being addressed, and not the true cause?
So, tell CCP what the causes are and how to instafix them.
"Corpse cannot be fitted onto ship. Only hardware modules can be fitted." |
Sarkos
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 03:01:00 -
[134]
Forgive me for being a bit unknowledgeable about drones, but woul'dnt the simplist change have been the announcement that drones would need to be stacked into 'FLIGHTS', with each 'FLIGHT' containing 3 drones? Leave the bay size alone and what do you have?????
But, as I said, I know little of drones.
Either free the slaves or we will come and get them.
|
w0rmy
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 05:14:00 -
[135]
Originally by: Maya Rkell
Perfectly valid answer, but it does lead me to one question.
100 v 100 fleet battles with drones used to work, they dont now. Perhaps the symptoms are being addressed, and not the true cause?
So, tell CCP what the causes are and how to instafix them.
It was a question, or did the 'it does leads my to one question' and '?' not give that away to you?
|
Burkibi
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 08:08:00 -
[136]
I like the ideas of these changes. Less drone lag is good, but is it enough? Will it now be feasible for everyone in a large fleet to launch their drones in a fight and still function?
Also, the effect on drone combat ships has been gone through and covered, which is nice. What about a ship like the mining barge? Barges rely on their drones for defense in some cases. I can carry four drones if I remember, in my medium barge. I have trained up the basic drone controlling skill just for this one ship, as so few other ships I fly can use drones. I didn't do a lot of damage before, now it looks like I'm going to be limited to carrying two drones, which will be less effective unless I train up the advanced Drone Interfacing skill. Which is a lot of training for the effect I get, and for only one ship.
I guess I'm just asking if the mining barges have been considered.
|
Fillmeup
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 08:39:00 -
[137]
Originally by: w0rmy
Originally by: Maya Rkell
Perfectly valid answer, but it does lead me to one question.
100 v 100 fleet battles with drones used to work, they dont now. Perhaps the symptoms are being addressed, and not the true cause?
So, tell CCP what the causes are and how to instafix them.
It was a question, or did the 'it does leads my to one question' and '?' not give that away to you?
Nice response 
You have a very valid point .... if EVE wasn't in a constant state of flux, we could possibly pinpoint when 200 ship fleet-battles stopped working. This would give us a hint at the problem.
Unfortunately, your guess is as good as mine.
|
Martin Gore
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 09:35:00 -
[138]
1. This will severly nerf Domi's that are used to tank and mine solo. Increase the mining drones in proportion please.
2. Hunting in places where say the npc are Angels, drones will now be usless, what about all the race specific drone skills I've trained up. 4 mill in drones skills!!! and now this :(
Really think about this a bit more please
|
Spenz
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 09:57:00 -
[139]
Well Tux sorry but despite your revised dev blog the idea is STILL not liked by the majority. Your STILL gonna have an old fashioned mob gang on your hands, and practically noone who was against the changes are anymore convinced that they are for the good of the game, me included.
There are so, so, SO MANY other ways to deal with lag. Nerfing (a nerf is a nerf no matter how many ways you try to play the politician and spin it) a near-balanced element of gameplay that everyone uses (not just Gallente).
Stupid stupid idea. I hope it never makes it past Sisi.
|
Drilla
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 13:14:00 -
[140]
Edited by: Drilla on 04/11/2005 13:15:13
Things that need to be added to the dronepatch
- Drone carriers need a +5 drone limit for non combat drones. As mentioned earlier these dronge changes haven't been thought thrugh properly. A gankagedodn has 100% damage output AND can use the new EW drones. Drone carriers cant!
- Dronebays needs to be left alone on the drone carriers, making the changes a tactical advantage for them.
- Drone carriers should have a damage bonus across the board - not a specialized drone type (atleast the Ishtar and Dominix should have the 10% to all damagetypes).
- Make it possible to put drones into dronebay from cargo - make it a 10 seconds transfer timer like with ammo in guns.
- Make it possible to offline drones (or "drop" them) already in space if situation changes and you need to change dronetypes. An alternative could be a 'recall and launch' option for drones in bay so when drones dock your dronebay the new ones are automagically launched.
- Increase hitpoints with 100% further than the proposed changes.
I hope that my post is not so far behind in the thread that it doesn't get read by you dev guys 
Seek not to bar my way, for I shall win through - no matter the cost! |
Roxanne
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 13:18:00 -
[141]
Originally by: Spenz
Well Tux sorry but despite your revised dev blog the idea is STILL not liked by the majority.
So far those who cared to vote in the poll thread give a different picture than your opinion.
|
Roxanne
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 13:27:00 -
[142]
Originally by: Drilla
- Drone carriers need a +5 drone limit for non combat drones. As mentioned earlier these dronge changes haven't been thought thrugh properly. A gankagedodn has 100% damage output AND can use the new EW drones. Drone carriers cant![/quote}]
Drone carriers have 100% damage output through drones and can still use EWAR modules, while most gunships cannot! Especially since modules are a lot more effective than the proposed drones.
Originally by: Drilla
- Dronebays needs to be left alone on the drone carriers, making the changes a tactical advantage for them.
Most carrier already get a boost in waves they can deploy, allowing for more tactics than the current amount.
Originally by: Drilla
- Drone carriers should have a damage bonus across the board - not a specialized drone type (atleast the Ishtar and Dominix should have the 10% to all damagetypes).
Reading blogs and threads 4tw: carriers get an all across the board damage bonus.
Originally by: Drilla
- Increase hitpoints with 100% further than the proposed changes.
There will be new skills and modules, making drones tougher, too. For instance a skill that makes them faster and thus harder to hit. Dedicated drone users will get more survivable drones but it should be tested if this goes far enough. The survivability of the drones is a huge factor and should be one of the prime things for the devs to focus on.
|
Drilla
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 13:52:00 -
[143]
Edited by: Drilla on 04/11/2005 13:52:22
Originally by: Roxanne
Originally by: Drilla
- Drone carriers need a +5 drone limit for non combat drones. As mentioned earlier these dronge changes haven't been thought thrugh properly. A gankagedodn has 100% damage output AND can use the new EW drones. Drone carriers cant![/quote}]
Drone carriers have 100% damage output through drones and can still use EWAR modules, while most gunships cannot! Especially since modules are a lot more effective than the proposed drones.
Originally by: Drilla
- Dronebays needs to be left alone on the drone carriers, making the changes a tactical advantage for them.
Most carrier already get a boost in waves they can deploy, allowing for more tactics than the current amount.
Originally by: Drilla
- Drone carriers should have a damage bonus across the board - not a specialized drone type (atleast the Ishtar and Dominix should have the 10% to all damagetypes).
Reading blogs and threads 4tw: carriers get an all across the board damage bonus.
Originally by: Drilla
- Increase hitpoints with 100% further than the proposed changes.
There will be new skills and modules, making drones tougher, too. For instance a skill that makes them faster and thus harder to hit. Dedicated drone users will get more survivable drones but it should be tested if this goes far enough. The survivability of the drones is a huge factor and should be one of the prime things for the devs to focus on.
I'm not talking about the shipclass carriers - I'm talking about the drone carrying Battleship and Heavy Assault cruiser - they need the 10% damage across the board too.
And you skipped over my first and most important point - the +5 non-fighting drone bonus to Ishtar and Dominix.
Seek not to bar my way, for I shall win through - no matter the cost! |
Gizzit
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 14:50:00 -
[144]
Tell me there has been a mistake....the item database on this site is starting to reflect the "trimmed" drone-bay sizes - and it appears that the Thorax is not losing half, but 75 percent of its drone capacity.
Now instead of being able to carry 8 heavy drones, it can carry 2.
Or is this old news?
|
Roxanne
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 15:09:00 -
[145]
Originally by: Drilla
I'm not talking about the shipclass carriers - I'm talking about the drone carrying Battleship and Heavy Assault cruiser - they need the 10% damage across the board too.
And you skipped over my first and most important point - the +5 non-fighting drone bonus to Ishtar and Dominix.
They are getting it. The ships with a +1 drone controlled bonus get +10% to all drone damage with the changes.
My point ist that drone carriers already have a very high versatility. While gun or missile ships need to fit more than just guns and launchers to deal their damage (tracking mods, target painters, damage mods, etc) a drone ship can deal its primary damage without using modules and thus has a far greater degree of flexibility. It does sound strange that drone carriers probably gain the least from the new drones, but they will still have the greatest versatility to begin with. They can fit NOS, EW, Tank in any combination they like (and can fit, of course) and still deal their usual drone damage without any cap usage or needed modules. Add that many carriers have a very flexible slot layout as well and they do not really need the new types.
Although, admittedly, it does sound strange. Because one would expect the drone carriers to use all drones to their full extent.
|
Roxanne
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 15:12:00 -
[146]
Originally by: Gizzit
Tell me there has been a mistake....the item database on this site is starting to reflect the "trimmed" drone-bay sizes - and it appears that the Thorax is not losing half, but 75 percent of its drone capacity.
Now instead of being able to carry 8 heavy drones, it can carry 2.
Or is this old news?
Old news. The mk2 project reduces the drone bay by half and the drone changes by another half, making it 50. 5 Mediums might be better than 2 heavies, btw.
|
Terakin Bisto
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 15:45:00 -
[147]
Originally by: Roxanne
Originally by: Gizzit
Tell me there has been a mistake....the item database on this site is starting to reflect the "trimmed" drone-bay sizes - and it appears that the Thorax is not losing half, but 75 percent of its drone capacity.
Now instead of being able to carry 8 heavy drones, it can carry 2.
Or is this old news?
Old news. The mk2 project reduces the drone bay by half and the drone changes by another half, making it 50. 5 Mediums might be better than 2 heavies, btw.
Old news or not, I find it disturbing that the Item Database has been updated with these changes already. While I am sure that this is being tested, that Item Database update smacks of "This is going in, no matter what happens on test!".
|
Ti anna
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 15:50:00 -
[148]
Originally by: Roxanne
Originally by: Spenz
Well Tux sorry but despite your revised dev blog the idea is STILL not liked by the majority.
So far those who cared to vote in the poll thread give a different picture than your opinion.
Well, considering the POLL thread you are talking about is predominantly about the Addition of the new drone types (look at the replies if you don't believe me) -> your arguement has no value. Sure, I love the addition of the new drone types also, but add in this huge nerf as detailed elsewhere and most people are against it.
Penalty Misdirection skill -5% for being caught in a blatant attempt.
|
Dukath
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 16:04:00 -
[149]
Edited by: Dukath on 04/11/2005 16:04:19
To those who think this is not a nerf? Will you people accept a halving in turret slots and missile slots with extra damage as compensation? This will seriously reduce lag. For every two shots fired now only 1 will be fired after the 'boost' as you call it. For every two missiles now only 1 will be in the air after the 'boost'
It WILL reduce lag, not only in fleet battles but overall ingame too. And who cares about the 'aestetics of having 8 guns'? It reduces lag so its good!
Of course you will have less options outfitting your ship, but then again drone users are confronted with the same situation now, having less options in the types of drones they deploy. And for a lot of people it seems acceptable. Or is it only acceptable if it doesn't happen to your favourite weapon?
Thank god civ4 has been released...
|
Roxanne
|
Posted - 2005.11.04 16:25:00 -
[150]
Originally by: Dukath
Of course you will have less options outfitting your ship, but then again drone users are confronted with the same situation now, having less options in the types of drones they deploy.
And more options in the types of modules they use.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |