Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Ivan En'Vec
Dark-Force Noir. Mercenary Group
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 15:57:00 -
[1] - Quote
http://pastebin.com/TkY3rY6q
Edit: This was apparently pulled from sisi cache. As with all new changes I'm sure this is subject to tweaking before a live release. |
Embrace My Hate
Black Horizon. Test Friends Please Ignore
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:00:00 -
[2] - Quote
Edit - First in what is going to be a thread-naught. |
Solhild
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
36
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:03:00 -
[3] - Quote
Whoa ! |
Shionoya Risa
The Xenodus Initiative.
49
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:03:00 -
[4] - Quote
Interesting...
I'm going to say it's not real until it suddenly vanishes. However, there are things in there you wouldn't bother to make up, like the Rook change.
Edit: Hi thar Naga, Oracle and Talos. |
SilentSkills
Estrale Frontiers
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:07:00 -
[5] - Quote
God I sure hope so, I see that Gal got a much needed agility boost across the board.
Hybrids got their PG and CPU numbers lowered, and tracking booster a bit. Rails got higher damage multi
I may just start playing again |
Sentient Blade
Walk It Off Coalition of the Unfortunate
35
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:08:00 -
[6] - Quote
New T2 mods. Sweeeet.
Edit: Really want to hurt the person who put 'Reply' directly below 'Post'. |
Tore Vest
Vikinghall
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:09:00 -
[7] - Quote
Interesting |
TuonelanOrja
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:11:00 -
[8] - Quote
CCP! pls give us remap too.. what you think next will happen now |
SilentSkills
Estrale Frontiers
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:13:00 -
[9] - Quote
posting again because i really hope this is legit |
Isacc Lemmont
Artemis Veil Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:14:00 -
[10] - Quote
Posting in a soon to be threadnaught
hory sheet those changes look good, now I wonder if they are true... |
|
Embrace My Hate
Black Horizon. Test Friends Please Ignore
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:15:00 -
[11] - Quote
All rail platforms seem to get agility/speed bonuses. Dram gets nerfed really hard. All the stats for the new bc are i nthere, 8 high slots lol.
Destroyer buff omg no more ROF penalty!!! |
Karadion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
173
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:15:00 -
[12] - Quote
TuonelanOrja wrote:CCP! pls give us remap too.. Why? They're not changing skills. |
Morganta
Peripheral Madness The Midget Mafia
123
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:16:00 -
[13] - Quote
in before rumor lock The American public's reaction to the change was poor and the new cola was a major marketing failure. The subsequent reintroduction of Coke's original formula, re-branded as "Coca-Cola Classic", resulted in a significant gain in sales, leading to speculation that the introduction of the New Coke formula was just a marketing ploy |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
982
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:17:00 -
[14] - Quote
Did I read that right? A rather significant revamp of the Diemost?
Also, T2 ganglinksGǪ \o/
I do hope all of this is trueGǪ GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Shionoya Risa
The Xenodus Initiative.
49
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:17:00 -
[15] - Quote
Embrace My Hate wrote:All rail platforms seem to get agility/speed bonuses. Dram gets nerfed really hard. All the stats for the new bc are i nthere, 8 high slots lol.
Destroyer buff omg no more ROF penalty!!!
But a distinct lack of AF's apart from the Harpy? |
Golar Crexis
Broski Enterprises Elite Space Guild
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:17:00 -
[16] - Quote
I would like to thank the CSM and CCP for making these changes possible.
Thanks to the CSM for highlighting the the current problems with eve and the general player base dissatisfaction with the current version of wis (I'd like to see this done properly rather than rushed)
Thank you CCP for listening to the CSM and Player base and for making eve a fun and interesting game.
|
Karadion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
173
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:19:00 -
[17] - Quote
Golar Crexis wrote:I would like to thank the CSM and CCP for making these changes possible.
Thanks to the CSM for highlighting the the current problems with eve and the general player base dissatisfaction with the current version of wis (I'd like to see this done properly rather than rushed)
Thank you CCP for listening to the CSM and Player base and for making eve a fun and interesting game.
In other words, empire pubbie screams have multiplied by a thousand folds. |
Max Von Sydow
Droneboat Diplomacy
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:20:00 -
[18] - Quote
Woooo! Web bonuses for gallente! |
Karadion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
173
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:21:00 -
[19] - Quote
Robur Carolinum wrote:Naga, Oracle, Talos & Tornado? Yep, your new battlecruisers. |
Morganta
Peripheral Madness The Midget Mafia
120
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:21:00 -
[20] - Quote
Golar Crexis wrote:I would like to thank the CSM and CCP for making these changes possible.
Thanks to the CSM for highlighting the the current problems with eve and the general player base dissatisfaction with the current version of wis (I'd like to see this done properly rather than rushed)
Thank you CCP for listening to the CSM and Player base and for making eve a fun and interesting game.
hey rube... I mean buddy!
you look like the kind of successful upstanding kind of fellow what needs his own bridge. well are you in luck, just this morning I happened to come into sudden ownership of the Brooklyn Bridge and would like to offer it to you, really I could get more for it on the regular market, but I have a good feeling about you... The American public's reaction to the change was poor and the new cola was a major marketing failure. The subsequent reintroduction of Coke's original formula, re-branded as "Coca-Cola Classic", resulted in a significant gain in sales, leading to speculation that the introduction of the New Coke formula was just a marketing ploy |
|
Severian Carnifex
27
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:21:00 -
[21] - Quote
not bad... :) |
Myxx
Atropos Group
106
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:21:00 -
[22] - Quote
in before threadnaught. this will be interesting, I hope its true, otherwise its a really well done troll. |
Robur Carolinum
Drama Llamas
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:21:00 -
[23] - Quote
Naga, Oracle, Talos & Tornado?
Naga looks like split weapon if this is legit. |
Novantco
The Scope Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:22:00 -
[24] - Quote
That is some really nice looking stuff in that pastebin. Rails getting a damage increase, agility and speed boosts to Gallente ships plus a ton of other stuff. Worth a look. |
Morganta
Peripheral Madness The Midget Mafia
120
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:22:00 -
[25] - Quote
OH GOD, WHY DO I KEEP QUOTING WHEN I GO TO EDIT???!!!!
FOOKIN FAIL FORUMS!!!!!! The American public's reaction to the change was poor and the new cola was a major marketing failure. The subsequent reintroduction of Coke's original formula, re-branded as "Coca-Cola Classic", resulted in a significant gain in sales, leading to speculation that the introduction of the New Coke formula was just a marketing ploy |
bornaa
GRiD.
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:22:00 -
[26] - Quote
some nice things i see here... |
Qin Shi Huang
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:23:00 -
[27] - Quote
Caldari BC ("Naga") looks sweet. 8 Siege Launchers (or Hybrids), 6 Med and 4 Low slots. Bonus to torp velocity and explosion velocity ... wow
The changes looks good |
Isacc Lemmont
Artemis Veil Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:23:00 -
[28] - Quote
Talos looks sweeet
damn, I might actually have to train for t2 rails/blaster now. |
Slighet
Siempre Muerto
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:26:00 -
[29] - Quote
T2 warfare links, amongst other new T2 items.
Removed penalties for T2 missiles. Apparent range improvement for Hail. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
979
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:26:00 -
[30] - Quote
GǪnow we just have to bully Gripen into doing one of those GÇ£alternative data dumpGÇ¥ releases of EFT again. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
|
Golar Crexis
Broski Enterprises Elite Space Guild
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:26:00 -
[31] - Quote
Karadion wrote:Golar Crexis wrote:I would like to thank the CSM and CCP for making these changes possible.
Thanks to the CSM for highlighting the the current problems with eve and the general player base dissatisfaction with the current version of wis (I'd like to see this done properly rather than rushed)
Thank you CCP for listening to the CSM and Player base and for making eve a fun and interesting game.
In other words, empire pubbie screams have multiplied by a thousand folds.
No matter how much I try I can't stop smiling. |
Alexandra Alt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:27:00 -
[32] - Quote
Oh so nice, destroyers buff, T2 missile penalties removed (all missiles) finally, rails buffed (finally), blasters buffed (tracking), 4 new BC, new T2 mods, cap changes look nice too.
See how a small amount of people (doing this changes) can make bazilion customers all happy, if this would have been thought of 18 months ago while doing everything else there would be no drama. |
Sarmatiko
118
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:27:00 -
[33] - Quote
Ivan En'Vec wrote:Edit: This was apparently pulled from sisi cache. Not Sisi. There is other servers like Duality, Multiplicity, Entropy and other cool places
Changes are really cool but obviously this is work in progress stuff. |
TuonelanOrja
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:27:00 -
[34] - Quote
Thank you hiltmar and cpp what you think next will happen now |
Jack bubu
GK inc. Pandemic Legion
59
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:31:00 -
[35] - Quote
Sarmatiko wrote:Ivan En'Vec wrote:Edit: This was apparently pulled from sisi cache. Not Sisi. There is other servers like Duality, Multiplicity, Entropy and other cool places Changes are really interesting but obviously this is work in progress stuff.
It is from SiSi, when you login you will download about 1460 Bulk Data Blocks where this info comes from. |
Raid'En
Apprentice Innovations
81
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:31:00 -
[36] - Quote
Sarmatiko wrote:Ivan En'Vec wrote:Edit: This was apparently pulled from sisi cache. Not Sisi. There is other servers like Duality, Multiplicity, Entropy and other cool places Changes are really interesting but obviously this is work in progress stuff. there was a sisi build which stayed live only 4 hours yesterday, i wouldn't be surprised if it was taken from this build, before CCP realized they made a mistake :P
|
Jokerface666
Ever Flow Northern Coalition.
70
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:36:00 -
[37] - Quote
someone is going to brake my dramiel... >_< ------------------------------w00t w00t rapetrain------------------------------ |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. The Lostboys
101
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:38:00 -
[38] - Quote
What is this???
[+] Data Subverter I [+|n] hackOrbital [+|n] medPower [+|n] online [+] accessDifficultyBonus: 15.0
CCP employees should never proclaim a feature to be awesome. Only subscribers should. Subscribers can never answer a question posed to CCP. Only CCP can. |
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
436
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:39:00 -
[39] - Quote
Did you notice this?
1329. Scourge Fury Heavy Missile 1330. [-|n] increaseSignatureRadiusPassive 1331. [-] signatureRadiusBonus: 5.4 1332. 1333. Scourge Precision Heavy Missile 1334. [-|n] ammoInfluenceShipVelocity 1335. [-] maxVelocityBonus: 0.95
Looks like the penalties for the tech II missiles is going away if I'm reading that right. Drakes just got... smaller. Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
Karadion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
173
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:40:00 -
[40] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:What is this???
[+] Data Subverter I [+|n] hackOrbital [+|n] medPower [+|n] online [+] accessDifficultyBonus: 15.0
A new kind of codebreaker obviously. Codebreaker II has 7% Access difficulty Bonus. So I'm guessing one needs Hacking V for this to equip. |
|
Lithalnas
Privateers Privateer Alliance
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:40:00 -
[41] - Quote
holy balls!
did I just read this correctly that there are going to be T2 seige mods, T2 gang links, 4 new battlecruisers, a 50 km wide HIC bubble, and everything gets an agility boost How to build a PC for EVE thread (by Akira T) http://eve-search.com/thread/1559734-0/page/1
|
Sarmatiko
118
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:41:00 -
[42] - Quote
Jack bubu wrote:It is from SiSi, when you login you will download about 1460 Bulk Data Blocks where this info comes from. Current SiSi build = current TQ build = 306979 This info was taken from other test server today, which have different bulkdata, different files and you cant "login there and download cache" because server working in VIP mode. Please do some research before posting about SiSi next time. |
Raid'En
Apprentice Innovations
81
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:41:00 -
[43] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:What is this???
[+] Data Subverter I [+|n] hackOrbital [+|n] medPower [+|n] online [+] accessDifficultyBonus: 15.0
ninja PI module ? |
Novantco
The Scope Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:42:00 -
[44] - Quote
Ingvar Angst wrote:Looks like the penalties for the tech II missiles is going away if I'm reading that right. Drakes just got... smaller.
Yep that does seem to be the case for tech 2 missiles. |
enterprisePSI
Unimatrix 0.1
34
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:43:00 -
[45] - Quote
Small Tractor Beam II Drone Link Augmentor II Omnidirectional Tracking Link II Drone Navigation Computer II Data Subverter I (?) Triage Module II Siege Module II Expanded Probe Launcher II Core Probe Launcher II
Posting in an epic thread :D Ah, curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal! |
SilentSkills
Estrale Frontiers
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:44:00 -
[46] - Quote
Jokerface666 wrote:someone is going to brake my dramiel... >_<
Your tears here please , , , , , |~~~~| |____| |
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
436
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:45:00 -
[47] - Quote
So most weapons are getting a boost of some sort, most ships are getting agility buffs to make them a little harder to hit, the new BCs look nice and juicy... new Tech II stuffs...
I'll need more time to find something to complain about. Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
stoicfaux
317
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:46:00 -
[48] - Quote
Hrm, only the Talos has drones. So the new BCs aren't meant for mission running.
Tinfoil. It should be at the top of everyone's food pyramid.
|
Myxx
Atropos Group
106
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:47:00 -
[49] - Quote
nuking the capacitor and cpu need of hybrids, increasing tracking speed for blasters, increased damage output for rails.
|
Rhinanna
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
40
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:48:00 -
[50] - Quote
Quote:Yep that does seem to be the case for tech 2 missiles.
Doubt that will happen, otherwise it would be ******** still having the penalties on T2 gun ammo. Its not like missile boats are underpowered.... Maybe the naga is going to have a role-bonus that reduces these penalties or something and they wanted to balance test it but didn't have the code in to test it properly yet. -The sword is only as sharp as the one who wields it! Other names: Drenzul (WoT, WoW, Lineage 2, WarH, BloodBowl, BSG, SC2 and lots more)-á |
|
Rees Noturana
Red Rock Mining Company
70
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:49:00 -
[51] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Hrm, only the Talos has drones. So the new BCs aren't meant for mission running.
I'd say those new BC have quick and brutal PvP written all over them. These are not the ships mission runners are looking for. I'm sure some will try but will end up salvaging their own wrecks. I'm for Incarna but don't sacrifice the EVE we have. Keep the core healthy. Expand it when you have the resources and a plan.
|
Shadowsword
The Rough Riders Ares Protectiva
42
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:51:00 -
[52] - Quote
The T2 siege mod makes me drool. 840% damage, 3 targets and faster lock time. |
JC Anderson
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:53:00 -
[53] - Quote
Bomb Launcher II |
Denidil
The Graduates Morsus Mihi
111
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:53:00 -
[54] - Quote
if those are correct all gallente pilots just sploodged their pants. Anyone who is blue to DRF are cowards and have failed Eve.
MM Bombers, Best Bombers |
stoicfaux
317
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:55:00 -
[55] - Quote
maxPassengers? Is that a new attribute or an old one?
[+] Deimos Old [+] maxPassengers: 580.0
[+] Naga [+] maxPassengers: 450.0
[+] Oracle [+] maxPassengers: 450.0
[+] Talos [+] maxPassengers: 450.0
[+] Tornado [+] maxPassengers: 450.0
Tinfoil. It should be at the top of everyone's food pyramid.
|
Vicar2008
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
36
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:58:00 -
[56] - Quote
To the Gallente trainingg room Batman and make it fast |
Karl Planck
Labyrinth Obtaining Chaotic Kangaroos
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:59:00 -
[57] - Quote
This thread reminds me of the fake patch notes leak for Tyrannis |
stoicfaux
317
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 16:59:00 -
[58] - Quote
Novantco wrote:Ingvar Angst wrote:Looks like the penalties for the tech II missiles is going away if I'm reading that right. Drakes just got... smaller. Yep that does seem to be the case for tech 2 missiles.
Except that a lot of things got faster, which is a missile damage nerf.
Plus the new BCs have sigs of 180-190m versus 240-285 of current BCs. I guess that Fighters are going to have a bit more trouble hitting the new BC sub-caps.
Tinfoil. It should be at the top of everyone's food pyramid.
|
Poetic Stanziel
Arrakis Technology
150
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:03:00 -
[59] - Quote
The Hybrid changes are interesting.
For the most (all?) of the hybrids:
- a reduction in capacitor usage.
- a reduction in CPU requirements.
For some of the hybrids:
- a reduction in powergrid requirements.
For a most (all?) of the railguns:
- a damage multiplier increase.
For most (all?) of the blasters:
- an increase in tracking speed.
EVE Online: Incarna = New Coke. EVE Online: Winter Expansion = Coke Classic. |
Ardamalis
Vanguard Corp Bounty Hunters
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:04:00 -
[60] - Quote
Karl Planck wrote:This thread reminds me of the fake patch notes leak for Tyrannis
If it is a fake, then someone sure has a lot of time on their hands....
But if this is for real. CCP has delivered.
EDIT: (still reading through) Gallente pilots are gonna be happy! |
|
Dbars Grinding
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:05:00 -
[61] - Quote
I think we are getting trolled bros. |
Sarmatiko
118
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:06:00 -
[62] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:maxPassengers? Is that a new attribute or an old one? Old. All ships have this attribute. You can open EveMon and check ship stats
|
JC Anderson
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:06:00 -
[63] - Quote
Ardamalis wrote:Karl Planck wrote:This thread reminds me of the fake patch notes leak for Tyrannis If it is a fake, then someone sure has a lot of time on their hands.... But if this is for real. CCP has delivered. EDIT: (still reading through) Gallente pilots are gonna be happy!
As somebody else mentioned above, you would think that somebody faking this wouldn't have wasted their time to come up with some of the more benign changes. The Rook is a prime example.
|
Morganta
Peripheral Madness The Midget Mafia
130
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:06:00 -
[64] - Quote
Karl Planck wrote:This thread reminds me of the fake patch notes leak for Tyrannis
yeah, not to burst everyone's bubble here, but random crap in pastebin does not a devblog make
sure, it would be great, however have you ever seen CCP change this much at once? are you sure you want to see CCP change this much at once?
While I hope for the best and try and have an open mind, I also try and avoid having my mind so open that my brain falls out
The American public's reaction to the change was poor and the new cola was a major marketing failure. The subsequent reintroduction of Coke's original formula, re-branded as "Coca-Cola Classic", resulted in a significant gain in sales, leading to speculation that the introduction of the New Coke formula was just a marketing ploy |
JC Anderson
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:08:00 -
[65] - Quote
Morganta wrote:Karl Planck wrote:This thread reminds me of the fake patch notes leak for Tyrannis yeah, not to burst everyone's bubble here, but random crap in pastebin does not a devblog make sure, it would be great, however have you ever seen CCP change this much at once? are you sure you want to see CCP change this much at once? While I hope for the best and try and have an open mind, I also try and avoid having my mind so open that my brain falls out
No, havent seen them change this much at once.
But on that note I also have been astonished with the number of changes that they have announced within the last couple of weeks!
Especially all of the ones that for years we have been asking for. |
Rees Noturana
Red Rock Mining Company
70
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:09:00 -
[66] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Novantco wrote:Ingvar Angst wrote:Looks like the penalties for the tech II missiles is going away if I'm reading that right. Drakes just got... smaller. Yep that does seem to be the case for tech 2 missiles. Except that a lot of things got faster, which is a missile damage nerf. Plus the new BCs have sigs of 180-190m versus 240-285 of current BCs. I guess that Fighters are going to have a bit more trouble hitting the new BC sub-caps.
I see them as potential anti-cap ships. But, I'm not much of a fleet guy so I'm probably wrong.
But, a lot of people were asking for larger stealth bombers to take out the super caps. Just put a covert cloak on a T2 version of these bad boys, fit with citadel torps and go to town. I'm for Incarna but don't sacrifice the EVE we have. Keep the core healthy. Expand it when you have the resources and a plan.
|
Denidil
The Graduates Morsus Mihi
111
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:09:00 -
[67] - Quote
confirming that the new bc (particularly the caldari.. that's hard for a gallente pilot to admit) are cap killers.
watch out Nyx pilots, i've got a battlecruiser to ruin your day! Anyone who is blue to DRF are cowards and have failed Eve.
MM Bombers, Best Bombers |
Serial Chi
DeathStar Systems
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:11:00 -
[68] - Quote
yum T2 mining foreman links |
Sam Bowein
Sense Amid Madness
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:11:00 -
[69] - Quote
10% damage buff on railguns, and the removal of malus on their T2 ammo, that I like |
Zagam
Incompertus INC Fatal Ascension
204
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:12:00 -
[70] - Quote
Looking through the info...
BCs: All of the new BCs are designed for one thing, and one thing only : Turning other ships into salvage in PvP. Nothing else. Very little tank (I didn't see any of them with over 6 mid slots, and generally 4-5 low slots), and absolutely no defensive bonuses.
Frigs: Dram got beat down with the nerf bat All other frigs got an agility and/or speed boost. This just brings the Dram on par with everything else frig-sized. But the Dram still has drones There is no 4th Assault Ship bonus.
Supercap nerf : As published earlier in the dev blog, no surprise.
Hybrid changes : Rails got a dmg boost, cap use reduction, and fitting cost reduction. Blasters got a tracking bonus. Gallente pilots and Caldari rail-freaks need to clean their pants off now.
Destroyer changes : No more ROF bonus. Need to kill a frig, bring a destroyer. (Destroyers might actually have a use in fleets now)
Ammo changes : T2 ammo got some of its disadvantages (namely falloff/tracking) taken away.
New T2 mods : Lots of new mods, too many to list here.
In Summary - Lots of nice changes, but its definitely not complete. Still missing some things like the 4th AF bonus, and I sense there are more ship-level changes to come. |
|
JC Anderson
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:14:00 -
[71] - Quote
Zagam wrote:Frigs: Dram got beat down with the nerf bat
Not too surprised about the Dram.
CCP had already talked about some of the possible changes to the ship during one of the AT discussion panels. |
baltec1
155
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:15:00 -
[72] - Quote
My megathron is about to become faster, more agile, have better traking on my blasters along with even more room to fit things in the spare high. OH GOD YES!
Twilight Sparkle (my mega) is going to LOVE this winter |
Morganta
Peripheral Madness The Midget Mafia
130
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:17:00 -
[73] - Quote
there is also the remote possibility that this is just a test of the bulk data loader and may or may not reflect actual values.
dev comment or a definite origin of the data would help.
dammit now I'm excited...
The American public's reaction to the change was poor and the new cola was a major marketing failure. The subsequent reintroduction of Coke's original formula, re-branded as "Coca-Cola Classic", resulted in a significant gain in sales, leading to speculation that the introduction of the New Coke formula was just a marketing ploy |
Tore Vest
Vikinghall
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:18:00 -
[74] - Quote
Denidil wrote:confirming that the new bc (particularly the caldari.. that's hard for a gallente pilot to admit) are cap killers.
watch out Nyx pilots, i've got a battlecruiser to ruin your day!
I dont think you will see any Nyx.... or super after the patch. Maby a titan (bus) inside a pos shield
|
JC Anderson
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:19:00 -
[75] - Quote
Nyx armorHP: 1050000.0 => 840000.0 droneCapacity: 250000.0 => 150000.0 hp: 600000.0 => 480000.0 shieldCapacity: 540000.0 => 432000.0 shieldRechargeRate: 36000000.45 => 28800000.36 [+] allowedDroneGroup1: 549.0 [+] allowedDroneGroup2: 1023.0 [+] isCapitalSize: 1.0
|
Jokerface666
Ever Flow Northern Coalition.
70
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:19:00 -
[76] - Quote
is it april 1st??? please say no! ------------------------------w00t w00t rapetrain------------------------------ |
De'Veldrin
Norse'Storm Battle Group Intrepid Crossing
41
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:19:00 -
[77] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Did I read that right? A rather significant revamp of the Diemost? Also, T2 ganglinksGǪ \o/ I do hope all of this is trueGǪ
You and me both.
T2 Triage and Siege Modules i saw buried in there. |
Karl Planck
Labyrinth Obtaining Chaotic Kangaroos
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:21:00 -
[78] - Quote
Zagam wrote:Looking through the info...
Frigs: Dram got beat down with the nerf bat All other frigs got an agility and/or speed boost. This just brings the Dram on par with everything else frig-sized. But the Dram still has drones There is no 4th Assault Ship bonus. ...
Hybrid changes : Rails got a dmg boost, cap use reduction, and fitting cost reduction. Blasters got a tracking bonus. Gallente pilots and Caldari rail-freaks need to clean their pants off now.
Destroyer changes : No more ROF bonus. Need to kill a frig, bring a destroyer. (Destroyers might actually have a use in fleets now)
IF this is in fact true let me be reiterate again,
YOU THOUGHT THE DRAM WAS BAD, WELCOME TO FRIG HELL WITH THE DD.
Also, FW pilots can now start crying as Dessies will kill everything in minor plexes (yes even the corm)
|
Doddy
Excidium. Executive Outcomes
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:21:00 -
[79] - Quote
So, eafs? |
Ivan En'Vec
Dark-Force Noir. Mercenary Group
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:26:00 -
[80] - Quote
Hey guys, OP here. This is my take on the rumor mill: This list was circulating around a couple of private in-game channels, and was not created by me, nor do I know who pulled that info.
Personally I believe it's real, but it's from "not for public consumption" test sever data. Generally fakes are made for one purpose - attention - and that's not my goal here or the person who pulled the data. I do not believe that this is a full list, and the things that are here will very likely be tweaked before the expansion. Read it for fun and ideas, but wait for CCP's official release before any whines. However - should something on this list strike you as unbalanced - comment on it and bring it to CCP's attention BEFORE it goes live, while there's still time for changes. I'm sure they are monitoring this thread. :) |
|
De'Veldrin
Norse'Storm Battle Group Intrepid Crossing
41
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:28:00 -
[81] - Quote
Rees Noturana wrote:stoicfaux wrote:Hrm, only the Talos has drones. So the new BCs aren't meant for mission running. I'd say those new BC have quick and brutal PvP written all over them. These are not the ships mission runners are looking for. I'm sure some will try but will end up salvaging their own wrecks.
Based on the stats in the paste I have to agree and I couldn't be happier. I mostly fly BCs in PvP and I couldn't be happier about this.
Face, meet Melt. Melt Face.
|
Zagam
Incompertus INC Fatal Ascension
204
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:29:00 -
[82] - Quote
Karl Planck wrote:Zagam wrote:Looking through the info...
Frigs: Dram got beat down with the nerf bat All other frigs got an agility and/or speed boost. This just brings the Dram on par with everything else frig-sized. But the Dram still has drones There is no 4th Assault Ship bonus. ...
Hybrid changes : Rails got a dmg boost, cap use reduction, and fitting cost reduction. Blasters got a tracking bonus. Gallente pilots and Caldari rail-freaks need to clean their pants off now.
Destroyer changes : No more ROF bonus. Need to kill a frig, bring a destroyer. (Destroyers might actually have a use in fleets now)
IF this is in fact true let me be reiterate again, YOU THOUGHT THE DRAM WAS BAD, WELCOME TO FRIG HELL WITH THE DD. Also, FW pilots can now start crying as Dessies will kill everything in minor plexes (yes even the corm)
The agility and speed buffs frigs are getting will help with the destroyer buffs. And everyone I've talked to (even Dramiel pilots) agree the Dramiel is *very* OP. It was begging for a nerf.
|
Zagam
Incompertus INC Fatal Ascension
204
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:31:00 -
[83] - Quote
De'Veldrin wrote:Rees Noturana wrote:stoicfaux wrote:Hrm, only the Talos has drones. So the new BCs aren't meant for mission running. I'd say those new BC have quick and brutal PvP written all over them. These are not the ships mission runners are looking for. I'm sure some will try but will end up salvaging their own wrecks. Based on the stats in the paste I have to agree and I couldn't be happier. I mostly fly BCs in PvP and I couldn't be happier about this. Face, meet Melt. Melt Face. This. I fly mostly Drakes and Canes in PvP, and each BC looks like CCP took each race's best PvP BC, gave it steroids in the high slots, and then set it free.
|
Trainwreck McGee
Ghost Ship Inc.
81
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:32:00 -
[84] - Quote
Thank god i am so bored at work and this is awesome CCP Trainwreck - Weekend Custodial Engineer / CCP Necrogoats foot stool |
EI Digin
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
194
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:33:00 -
[85] - Quote
If these leaks are real, they are likely not the final product, and there are still some things to come, like EAF/AF changes.
I do like the changes made so far, especially to destroyers, although I would like to see them in action before release. |
Jada Maroo
Mysterium Astrometrics BRABODEN
348
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:35:00 -
[86] - Quote
Probably not final, but movement in a surprisingly good direction. |
Doddy
Excidium. Executive Outcomes
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:37:00 -
[87] - Quote
Even if this is just a brainstorming session in the office its a good sign. |
stoicfaux
317
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:39:00 -
[88] - Quote
Zagam wrote:De'Veldrin wrote:Rees Noturana wrote:stoicfaux wrote:Hrm, only the Talos has drones. So the new BCs aren't meant for mission running. I'd say those new BC have quick and brutal PvP written all over them. These are not the ships mission runners are looking for. I'm sure some will try but will end up salvaging their own wrecks. Based on the stats in the paste I have to agree and I couldn't be happier. I mostly fly BCs in PvP and I couldn't be happier about this. Face, meet Melt. Melt Face. This. I fly mostly Drakes and Canes in PvP, and each BC looks like CCP took each race's best PvP BC, gave it steroids in the high slots, and then set it free.
Yes, and no? A Torp Naga should clobber a Drake due to the Drake's large sig size. However, if the Drake pilot decides to fly a cruiser that day, the Torp Naga is going to be almost defenseless.
OTOH, getting double webbed by a blaster Talos is going to be bad...
Tinfoil. It should be at the top of everyone's food pyramid.
|
Jack bubu
GK inc. Pandemic Legion
60
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:39:00 -
[89] - Quote
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=255701#post255701
Just going to chime in here, these stats are a 1st pass taken from a chaos build, it hasn't been balanced in any sense and it's going to change before they go out to TQ.
There will be a dev-blog with final stats before they hit TQ.
that should clear that up :) |
Denidil
The Graduates Morsus Mihi
111
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:39:00 -
[90] - Quote
EI Digin wrote:If these leaks are real, they are likely not the final product, and there are still some things to come, like EAF/AF changes.
I do like the changes made so far, especially to destroyers, although I would like to see them in action before release.
just removing the ROF penalty from dessies is not sufficient to "Fix dessies"
they also need their mid and low slot counts looked at - particularly mids. Anyone who is blue to DRF are cowards and have failed Eve.
MM Bombers, Best Bombers |
|
Embrace My Hate
Black Horizon. Test Friends Please Ignore
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:40:00 -
[91] - Quote
Doddy wrote:Even if this is just a brainstorming session in the office its a good sign.
Couldn't have said it better myself. |
JC Anderson
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:43:00 -
[92] - Quote
Jack bubu wrote:https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=255701#post255701
Just going to chime in here, these stats are a 1st pass taken from a chaos build, it hasn't been balanced in any sense and it's going to change before they go out to TQ.
There will be a dev-blog with final stats before they hit TQ.
that should clear that up :)
TY for link to blue reply.
It's nice to get confirmation that they are real. Even if they will likely change before release. |
Zagam
Incompertus INC Fatal Ascension
204
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:44:00 -
[93] - Quote
Denidil wrote:EI Digin wrote:If these leaks are real, they are likely not the final product, and there are still some things to come, like EAF/AF changes.
I do like the changes made so far, especially to destroyers, although I would like to see them in action before release. just removing the ROF penalty from dessies is not sufficient to "Fix dessies" they also need their mid and low slot counts looked at - particularly mids. IMO, Destroyers are basically similar to honey badgers. They attack whatever they can, and don't care about anything else in the process, including likely death.
|
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
439
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:46:00 -
[94] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Zagam wrote:De'Veldrin wrote:Rees Noturana wrote:stoicfaux wrote:Hrm, only the Talos has drones. So the new BCs aren't meant for mission running. I'd say those new BC have quick and brutal PvP written all over them. These are not the ships mission runners are looking for. I'm sure some will try but will end up salvaging their own wrecks. Based on the stats in the paste I have to agree and I couldn't be happier. I mostly fly BCs in PvP and I couldn't be happier about this. Face, meet Melt. Melt Face. This. I fly mostly Drakes and Canes in PvP, and each BC looks like CCP took each race's best PvP BC, gave it steroids in the high slots, and then set it free. Yes, and no? A Torp Naga should clobber a Drake due to the Drake's large sig size. However, if the Drake pilot decides to fly a cruiser that day, the Torp Naga is going to be almost defenseless. OTOH, getting double webbed by a blaster Talos is going to be bad...
Removing the sig penalties for T2 missiles helps the drake out quite a bit, the question is will it's tank last longer against the torps than the Naga will against the T2 missiles?
When (optimism) these changes get on Sisi... Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
White Tree
XxBroski North Reloaded Federation NinjaGuldDotxX. Elite Space Guild
533
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:49:00 -
[95] - Quote
Welp. |
De'Veldrin
Norse'Storm Battle Group Intrepid Crossing
42
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:50:00 -
[96] - Quote
Jack bubu wrote:https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=255701#post255701
Just going to chime in here, these stats are a 1st pass taken from a chaos build, it hasn't been balanced in any sense and it's going to change before they go out to TQ.
There will be a dev-blog with final stats before they hit TQ.
that should clear that up :)
I don't care if these are back of the napkin brainstorming, CCP is finally, finally paying attention and at the very least contemplating fixing things (like hybrids) that have been broken forever. |
The Crimson Invaider
Broski Enterprises Elite Space Guild
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:51:00 -
[97] - Quote
After doing some maths on the changes they seem quite well balanced and bring things into line with other races equivalents more. |
Tobias Sjodin
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
44
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:52:00 -
[98] - Quote
To me this is EVE-sex. |
Michael Turate
The Bembridge Mining Company
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:54:00 -
[99] - Quote
As others have said, even if this is a work in progress, it's an awesome work in progress and you guys are really starting to hit the ball out of the park again.
The point we have often made is that new content is not needed because there is already tons of awesome content in the game but a lot of it is largely obsolete (dessies, deimos, some AFs) because it hasn't been loved enough and has been left to gather dust.
This could be one of the most significant boosts to PVP within the game for ages if it all works out. There will be tons of new fits flying about and tons of new emergent tactics. Much ignored and long forgotten ships will be back on the field with a role to play and the new ships are going to be great too. It's going to bring EXCITEMENT back into the game (hell, I'm excited already!) and that is surely the best strategy I can think of to bring the game back into rude health.
Nice work! |
|
CCP Guard
C C P C C P Alliance
464
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:55:00 -
[100] - Quote
Data from early test builds is always very likely to change. But that's no reason not to discuss possibilities.
At some point soon we'll publish a dev blog to tell you what we're thinking and to get feedback from you.
Eventually some version of these stats will also make its way to SiSi for you to test and play around with. CCP Guard | EVE Community Developer |
|
|
Morganta
Peripheral Madness The Midget Mafia
133
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:56:00 -
[101] - Quote
care to expand on that?
or will we have to wait until you tell CCP what we collectively think about it, and CCP tells us what you told them that we think about it?
The American public's reaction to the change was poor and the new cola was a major marketing failure. The subsequent reintroduction of Coke's original formula, re-branded as "Coca-Cola Classic", resulted in a significant gain in sales, leading to speculation that the introduction of the New Coke formula was just a marketing ploy |
InVictus Kell
Gladiators of Rage White Noise.
34
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:56:00 -
[102] - Quote
cap usage on hybrids is way down, so are fitting requirements. Gal ships get slight speed and agility boosts.
this is special indeed. |
Morganta
Peripheral Madness The Midget Mafia
133
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:58:00 -
[103] - Quote
CCP Guard wrote:Data from early test builds is always very likely to change. But that's no reason not to discuss possibilities.
At some point soon we'll publish a dev blog to tell you what we're thinking and to get feedback from you.
Eventually some version of these stats will also make its way to SiSi for you to test and play around with.
this lack of confirmation is indeed very confirming and very good news!
welcome back CCP, we missed you
The American public's reaction to the change was poor and the new cola was a major marketing failure. The subsequent reintroduction of Coke's original formula, re-branded as "Coca-Cola Classic", resulted in a significant gain in sales, leading to speculation that the introduction of the New Coke formula was just a marketing ploy |
Shadowsword
The Rough Riders Ares Protectiva
42
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 17:58:00 -
[104] - Quote
I like the new BC stats. They look like usefull ships, while not making tier2 BC obsoletes. Because with their low HP, a Tornado isn't going to kill a Hurricane 1v1. Quite the contrary.
But with their stats, maybe "heavy cruiser" is more accurate than "battlecruiser" as a class name. |
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
439
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:00:00 -
[105] - Quote
CCP Guard wrote:Data from early test builds is always very likely to change. But that's no reason not to discuss possibilities.
At some point soon we'll publish a dev blog to tell you what we're thinking and to get feedback from you.
Eventually some version of these stats will also make its way to SiSi for you to test and play around with.
Do you have any clue, any idea, how encouraging it is simply to see these things being tossed about, preliminary or not? Seriously, do you have any idea? It's like Christmas for the imagination.
Thanks, greatly.
By the way, what does setting the isCapitalSize flag do in game if I may ask? Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
De'Veldrin
Norse'Storm Battle Group Intrepid Crossing
42
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:02:00 -
[106] - Quote
What do small dragons and/or Orlando Bloom have to do with any of this?
|
Sarmatiko
119
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:04:00 -
[107] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:But with their stats, maybe "heavy cruiser" is more accurate than "battlecruiser" as a class name. It's more like "Heavy Destroyer" |
Raid'En
Apprentice Innovations
81
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:05:00 -
[108] - Quote
CCP Guard wrote:Data from early test builds is always very likely to change. But that's no reason not to discuss possibilities.
At some point soon we'll publish a dev blog to tell you what we're thinking and to get feedback from you.
Eventually some version of these stats will also make its way to SiSi for you to test and play around with. well at least from what i read on different forums, most people like what they saw in the leak and are optimistic |
Florestan Bronstein
The Waterworks
131
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:07:00 -
[109] - Quote
Quote:[+] TEST Damage Mod - 5 Players [+] TEST Damage Mod - 10 Players [+] TEST Damage Mod - 20 Players [+] TEST Damage Mod - 40 Players
that's what you get for having a CFC-dominated CSM. |
Koronakesh
Seekers of a Silent Paradise
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:08:00 -
[110] - Quote
Ingvar Angst wrote:By the way, what does setting the isCapitalSize flag do in game if I may ask? Since DD modules will only be able to shoot capital ships after the expansion, I assume the isCapitalSize is a check allowing or disallowing the use of the DD against a ship Amir al-Mu'minin of the Seekers of a Silent Paradise and Sr. Banker of EVE Online Hold'Em |
|
Zagam
Incompertus INC Fatal Ascension
205
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:09:00 -
[111] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:I like the new BC stats. They look like usefull ships, while not making tier2 BC obsoletes. Because with their low HP, a Tornado isn't going to kill a Hurricane 1v1. Quite the contrary.
But with their stats, maybe "heavy cruiser" is more accurate than "battlecruiser" as a class name. I think it would be too quick to say if a Tornado could kill a Hurricane or not. The cane has a better tank, but the Tornado will have a much better dps. Its basically going to boil down to the fit, and the dynamics of the fight itself.
|
Denidil
The Graduates Morsus Mihi
111
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:10:00 -
[112] - Quote
CCP Guard wrote:Data from early test builds is always very likely to change. But that's no reason not to discuss possibilities.
At some point soon we'll publish a dev blog to tell you what we're thinking and to get feedback from you.
Eventually some version of these stats will also make its way to SiSi for you to test and play around with.
thanks for confirming.
hey - this just means you guys have more time to process feedback from us. Anyone who is blue to DRF are cowards and have failed Eve.
MM Bombers, Best Bombers |
Denidil
The Graduates Morsus Mihi
111
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:13:00 -
[113] - Quote
Zagam wrote:Shadowsword wrote:I like the new BC stats. They look like usefull ships, while not making tier2 BC obsoletes. Because with their low HP, a Tornado isn't going to kill a Hurricane 1v1. Quite the contrary.
But with their stats, maybe "heavy cruiser" is more accurate than "battlecruiser" as a class name. I think it would be too quick to say if a Tornado could kill a Hurricane or not. The cane has a better tank, but the Tornado will have a much better dps. Its basically going to boil down to the fit, and the dynamics of the fight itself.
i'd say it depends on fitting and range. Anyone who is blue to DRF are cowards and have failed Eve.
MM Bombers, Best Bombers |
Aeril Malkyre
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:13:00 -
[114] - Quote
The important bits from the new Tornado entry:
Large Projectile Turret CPU Need bonus Large Projectile Turret Power Need Bonus 8/5/4, 8 turrets/0 missiles
No drones 535 m3 cargo bay -> bigger than the other two 6 Targets, 60K range 170m sig radius -> Much smaller than either of the others, which is good
225 m/s -> Much faster than I thought they'd give it.
Armor: 2272 Shield: 2165 -> Much lower HP than I guessed, and sort of nonsensical having 5 mids but lower shields. But the difference isn't huge.
Overall, pretty badass. |
stoicfaux
318
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:13:00 -
[115] - Quote
Ingvar Angst wrote: By the way, what does setting the isCapitalSize flag do in game if I may ask?
Probably related to the proposed Titan Superweapon Nerf: "To fix this, we are changing the superweapon so that it cannot fire upon sub-capital ships (capital ships being Freighters, Jump Freighters, Carriers, Dreadnoughts, Capital Industrial Ships, Supercarriers and Titans)."
Tinfoil. It should be at the top of everyone's food pyramid.
|
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
439
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:13:00 -
[116] - Quote
Koronakesh wrote:Ingvar Angst wrote:By the way, what does setting the isCapitalSize flag do in game if I may ask? Since DD modules will only be able to shoot capital ships after the expansion, I assume the isCapitalSize is a check allowing or disallowing the use of the DD against a ship
Ah crap! Completely forgot about that. Thanks much! Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
984
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:14:00 -
[117] - Quote
bleh GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Karadion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
173
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:15:00 -
[118] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Ingvar Angst wrote: By the way, what does setting the isCapitalSize flag do in game if I may ask?
Probably related to the proposed Titan Superweapon Nerf: "To fix this, we are changing the superweapon so that it cannot fire upon sub-capital ships (capital ships being Freighters, Jump Freighters, Carriers, Dreadnoughts, Capital Industrial Ships, Supercarriers and Titans)." Correct. Any ship with that tag are at risk of being fired upon by a doomsday. |
Denidil
The Graduates Morsus Mihi
111
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:16:00 -
[119] - Quote
suiciding freighters just got cheaper. Anyone who is blue to DRF are cowards and have failed Eve.
MM Bombers, Best Bombers |
Calapine
Xeno Tech Corp Flatline.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:17:00 -
[120] - Quote
Quote: 125mm Railgun II
capacitorNeed: 2.15 => 1.505 cpu: 17.0 => 16.0 damageMultiplier: 2.4 => 2.64 That's a straight 10% damage increase to rail guns, but no such change to blaster damage.
Hmpff, I am not sure a wee bit more tracking is enough to make me fall in love with blasters again. |
|
Billy Colorado
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:20:00 -
[121] - Quote
So... Tight... |
Perdition64
The Xenodus Initiative. ORPHANS OF EVE
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:23:00 -
[122] - Quote
CCP Guard wrote:Data from early test builds is always very likely to change. But that's no reason not to discuss possibilities.
At some point soon we'll publish a dev blog to tell you what we're thinking and to get feedback from you.
Eventually some version of these stats will also make its way to SiSi for you to test and play around with.
I think you guys have done well so far.
Some thoughts:
With regards to hybrids, it seems like its a good start. Few minor details I think:
- Damage bonus on spike ammo I think, really create a competitive role for long range sniping. Not over the top, just a some damage over the top, I think an extra 10% bonus for spike ammo should do it.
- Agility and velocity changes seem solid, allows blaster boats to get in easier. Could need a little more nudging forward, but I think for a "first pass", this seems good.
Dramiel:
- Smacked hard by the nerfbat, but not too hard, its now an alternative, rather than a superior I think.
Tier 3 BC's:
- Very nicely done I think. They're not better, they're different. Tier 2 tanks better, but deals a bit less, Battleships are slower, but tank better. CCP have created a glass cannon role that works well, yet has counters. I like it. Sniping BS's still have their place, as these things will get vaporised instantly.
There are obviously areas to improve, but I'm impressed considering its a first go at things. I do think the damage buff to spike is needed though.
T2 missiles:
- Perhaps re-add the penalty for these, I don't think Drake needed any buffs. |
Junko Sideswipe
Broski Enterprises Elite Space Guild
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:26:00 -
[123] - Quote
Big thanks to CSM6 for tirelessly pointing out the need for these changes all year. VERY BIG thanks to White Tree who has been fighting tooth and nail for a hybrid rebalance and a need to make gallente a flyable race once again.
Thank you CSM6. |
David Grogan
The Motley Crew Reborn
110
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:30:00 -
[124] - Quote
Junko Sideswipe wrote:Big thanks to CSM6 for tirelessly pointing out the need for these changes all year. VERY BIG thanks to White Tree who has been fighting tooth and nail for a hybrid rebalance and a need to make gallente a flyable race once again. Thank you CSM6.
it wasn't all down to csm6............ i thank all those that unsubbed and made hilmar pull his head out of his ass and see the light again Everytime you buy something that says "made in china" you are helping the rising unemployment in your own country unless your from china, Buy locally produced goods and help create more jobs. |
NoLimit Soldier
Concentrated Evil
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:32:00 -
[125] - Quote
Shut up and take my money CCP. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
985
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:34:00 -
[126] - Quote
NoLimit Soldier wrote:Shut up and take my money CCP. ^^ It's really this simple. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Zagam
Incompertus INC Fatal Ascension
206
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:35:00 -
[127] - Quote
Calapine wrote:Quote: 125mm Railgun II
capacitorNeed: 2.15 => 1.505 cpu: 17.0 => 16.0 damageMultiplier: 2.4 => 2.64 That's a straight 10% damage increase to rail guns, but no such change to blaster damage. Hmpff, I am not sure a wee bit more tracking is enough to make me fall in love with blasters again.
Blasters biggest issue wasn't the damage, it was even hitting the target (your effective range was tanked due to the bad tracking)..
|
Tristan North
The Scope
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:36:00 -
[128] - Quote
Max Von Sydow wrote:Woooo! Web bonuses for gallente! Where did you read it? Can't see it
|
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos BricK sQuAD.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:36:00 -
[129] - Quote
Quote: Oneiros lowSlots: 4.0 => 5.0 maxVelocity: 214.0 => 230.0 medSlots: 5.0 => 4.0 powerOutput: 850.0 => 1050.0 signatureRadius: 80.0 => 70.0 warpSpeedMultiplier: 1.0 => 1.25 Oneiros overhaul! Whee!
Also, the addition of 'Old Deimos' (I think the stats are status quo) hints that they're reworking this too.
Hybrid buff + overall speed and agility buff + Oneiros buff + possible Deimos buff = Absolutely f*****g awesome for Gallente pilots. |
De'Veldrin
Norse'Storm Battle Group Intrepid Crossing
43
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:36:00 -
[130] - Quote
Koronakesh wrote:Ingvar Angst wrote:By the way, what does setting the isCapitalSize flag do in game if I may ask? Since DD modules will only be able to shoot capital ships after the expansion, I assume the isCapitalSize is a check allowing or disallowing the use of the DD against a ship
I was thinking the same thing. Seems plausible at any rate. Unsub or don't.-á I don't care what your reasons are, and neither does anyone else.-á Just click the button and go away - or don't. |
|
Ashera Yune
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:37:00 -
[131] - Quote
Tristan North wrote:Max Von Sydow wrote:Woooo! Web bonuses for gallente! Where did you read it? Can't see it [+] Talos [+|n] bcLargeHybridTurretCPUNeedBonus [+|n] bcLargeHybridTurretCapacitorNeedBonus [+|n] bcLargeHybridTurretPowerNeedBonus [+|n] leadershipCpuBonus [+|n] massFactor [+|n] shipHybridDamageBonusBC2 [+|n] shipStasisWebSpeedFactorBonusBC1 |
Baneken
The New Knighthood The Polaris Syndicate
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:37:00 -
[132] - Quote
Oneiros + 1 low and -1 mid slot and lower sig along with tad more speed. Ships getting slight agility & speed boost across the board; with dramiel getting the shaft and not much changes for minmatar. Hybrids getting vastly reduced in both capacitor and grid consumption, tracking buffs for blasters. Javelin & quake getting a tracking buff and no more cap drain penalty for javelins.
Looks nice to me.
|
Killstealing
Broski Enterprises Elite Space Guild
99
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:41:00 -
[133] - Quote
THANK YOU BASED CSM 6 |
Denidil
The Graduates Morsus Mihi
112
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:52:00 -
[134] - Quote
Calapine wrote:Quote: 125mm Railgun II
capacitorNeed: 2.15 => 1.505 cpu: 17.0 => 16.0 damageMultiplier: 2.4 => 2.64 That's a straight 10% damage increase to rail guns, but no such change to blaster damage. Hmpff, I am not sure a wee bit more tracking is enough to make me fall in love with blasters again.
blasters might need some additional range. Anyone who is blue to DRF are cowards and have failed Eve.
MM Bombers, Best Bombers |
Denidil
The Graduates Morsus Mihi
112
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:54:00 -
[135] - Quote
Calapine wrote:Quote: 125mm Railgun II
capacitorNeed: 2.15 => 1.505 cpu: 17.0 => 16.0 damageMultiplier: 2.4 => 2.64 That's a straight 10% damage increase to rail guns, but no such change to blaster damage. Hmpff, I am not sure a wee bit more tracking is enough to make me fall in love with blasters again.
blasters might need a little range loving. Anyone who is blue to DRF are cowards and have failed Eve.
MM Bombers, Best Bombers |
Calapine
Xeno Tech Corp Flatline.
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:54:00 -
[136] - Quote
Zagam wrote: Blasters biggest issue wasn't the damage, it was even hitting the target (your effective range was tanked due to the bad tracking)..
Even in a world where tracking is not an issue the very small "on paper" DPS advantage blasters have over a weapons system as, lets say, pulse lasers doesn't outweigh the downsides of minuscule range. Not to mention there isn't even a theoretical DPS lead when using any ammo but antimatter.
Outside a few select choice scenarios (docking games, 1vs1, etc..) the few percent of extra damage blasters do isn't worth giving up the benefit of range and versatility of instant ammo switches. In most cases it's better to cause 100% damage right after lock on, instead of 110% damage after slow-boating into range for half a minute.
And that's before the tracking issues you rightly mentioned come into play. In short: tracking buff, yes, but don't stop there.
Cala |
Blue Binary
Polychoron
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:59:00 -
[137] - Quote
1424. * Production Efficiency 1425. + manufactureCostBonusShowInfo: -5.0
If I read this right, that means the Production Efficiency skill will increase from 4% to 5% per level, giving an additional 5% at level 5 to become 25%.
Meaning less demand for minerals = cheaper manufactured goods and (initial) fall in price of minerals. |
NoLimit Soldier
Concentrated Evil
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 19:03:00 -
[138] - Quote
Blue Binary wrote:1424. * Production Efficiency 1425. + manufactureCostBonusShowInfo: -5.0
If I read this right, that means the Production Efficiency skill will increase from 4% to 5% per level, giving an additional 5% at level 5 to become 25%.
Meaning less demand for minerals = cheaper manufactured goods and (initial) fall in price of minerals.
Get out of here carebear. This is a PVP thread and we no room for your types here.
|
Blue Binary
Polychoron
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 19:12:00 -
[139] - Quote
NoLimit Soldier wrote:Blue Binary wrote:1424. * Production Efficiency 1425. + manufactureCostBonusShowInfo: -5.0
If I read this right, that means the Production Efficiency skill will increase from 4% to 5% per level, giving an additional 5% at level 5 to become 25%.
Meaning less demand for minerals = cheaper manufactured goods and (initial) fall in price of minerals. Get out of here carebear. This is a PVP thread and we no room for your types here. Get out of here troll. This is a discussion thread and there is no room for your type here.
|
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 19:12:00 -
[140] - Quote
Calapine wrote:Zagam wrote: Blasters biggest issue wasn't the damage, it was even hitting the target (your effective range was tanked due to the bad tracking)..
Even in a world where tracking is not an issue the very small "on paper" DPS advantage blasters have over a weapons system as, lets say, pulse lasers doesn't outweigh the downsides of minuscule range. Not to mention there isn't even a theoretical DPS lead when using any ammo but antimatter. Outside a few select choice scenarios (docking games, 1vs1, etc..) the few percent of extra damage blasters do isn't worth giving up the benefit of range and versatility of instant ammo switches. In most cases it's better to cause 100% damage right after lock on, instead of 110% damage after slow-boating into range for half a minute. And that's before the tracking issues you rightly mentioned come into play. In short: tracking buff, yes, but don't stop there. Cala
Large Neutron blaster Range with NULL is still below 30 KM (without additional mods) ---> easily kitable
Hybrid T2 Ammo (both types) still retains the negative tracking attribute (-25%)
Hybrid ammo volume still the same
|
|
Wacktopia
Sicarius. Legion of The Damned.
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 19:28:00 -
[141] - Quote
Hope is true...
Blasters wih more trackong and lower power needs. Gallente are fast ;). Rails do more damage. New BC's. Oneiros with more lows and fewer mids.
HELL YEAH GALLENTE! |
Wacktopia
Sicarius. Legion of The Damned.
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 19:32:00 -
[142] - Quote
Dare Devel wrote:Calapine wrote:Zagam wrote: Blasters biggest issue wasn't the damage, it was even hitting the target (your effective range was tanked due to the bad tracking)..
Even in a world where tracking is not an issue the very small "on paper" DPS advantage blasters have over a weapons system as, lets say, pulse lasers doesn't outweigh the downsides of minuscule range. Not to mention there isn't even a theoretical DPS lead when using any ammo but antimatter. Outside a few select choice scenarios (docking games, 1vs1, etc..) the few percent of extra damage blasters do isn't worth giving up the benefit of range and versatility of instant ammo switches. In most cases it's better to cause 100% damage right after lock on, instead of 110% damage after slow-boating into range for half a minute. And that's before the tracking issues you rightly mentioned come into play. In short: tracking buff, yes, but don't stop there. Cala Large Neutron blaster Range with NULL is still below 30 KM (without additional mods) ---> easily kitable Hybrid T2 Ammo (both types) still retains the negative tracking attribute (-25%) Hybrid ammo volume still the same
Power and CPU is right down though so you can fit bigger guns that will have a bit more range and damage so it is effectively a damage and range buf also.
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
135
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 19:35:00 -
[143] - Quote
Zagam wrote:Shadowsword wrote:I like the new BC stats. They look like usefull ships, while not making tier2 BC obsoletes. Because with their low HP, a Tornado isn't going to kill a Hurricane 1v1. Quite the contrary.
But with their stats, maybe "heavy cruiser" is more accurate than "battlecruiser" as a class name. I think it would be too quick to say if a Tornado could kill a Hurricane or not. The cane has a better tank, but the Tornado will have a much better dps. Its basically going to boil down to the fit, and the dynamics of the fight itself.
other than the fat that large guns have a problem hitting a hurricane |
tika te
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 19:36:00 -
[144] - Quote
the problem with blasters is not their cap usage or their cpu need, but tracking and ridculous low range. in todays eve warfare, fights below 10km only happen with frigs...deimos should be able to hit at least 12-20km, not below 10km.. large blaster with optimals way below 20km..well..bs are simply to slow (even with agility boost) to compensate that; a hyperion with neutrons and lead ammo has about 10km optimal + falloff and speed/agility of cotton wool... 50-100m/s more topspeed with mwd won't make any real difference here. |
Krell Kroenen
Miners In Possession
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 19:46:00 -
[145] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:I like the new BC stats. They look like usefull ships, while not making tier2 BC obsoletes. Because with their low HP, a Tornado isn't going to kill a Hurricane 1v1. Quite the contrary.
But with their stats, maybe "heavy cruiser" is more accurate than "battlecruiser" as a class name.
More like pocket battleship like the Graf Spee
|
JC Anderson
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 19:47:00 -
[146] - Quote
Tippia wrote:NoLimit Soldier wrote:Shut up and take my money CCP. ^^ It's really this simple.
Indeed it is. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 19:52:00 -
[147] - Quote
starting gall bs 5, followed by large hybrid 5. tis a good day. |
XavierVE
Reasonable People Of Sound Mind
30
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 19:55:00 -
[148] - Quote
WTB: time travel machine, slightly used is fine.
"Winter" can't come soon enough :( |
JC Anderson
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 19:56:00 -
[149] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:starting gall bs 5, followed by large hybrid 5. tis a good day.
<---Not regretting training hybrids to max a couple years ago now. ;)
XavierVE wrote:WTB: time travel machine, slightly used is fine.
"Winter" can't come soon enough :(
Just try the plan Cartman had in the SP episode where he had butters freeze him so he would wake up after the new Nintendo was released. |
Xorth Adimus
Blackwater USA Inc. Against ALL Authorities
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 19:56:00 -
[150] - Quote
MotherMoon wrote:Zagam wrote:Shadowsword wrote:I like the new BC stats. They look like usefull ships, while not making tier2 BC obsoletes. Because with their low HP, a Tornado isn't going to kill a Hurricane 1v1. Quite the contrary.
But with their stats, maybe "heavy cruiser" is more accurate than "battlecruiser" as a class name. I think it would be too quick to say if a Tornado could kill a Hurricane or not. The cane has a better tank, but the Tornado will have a much better dps. Its basically going to boil down to the fit, and the dynamics of the fight itself. other than the fat that large guns have a problem hitting a hurricane
Take a well fit 30 man battlecruiser fleet up against a well fit 20 man nanotempest fleet, your BC fleet is going to get raped, large autocannons have no problem at all hitting those fat BC hulls.. but the tier3 BC hulls are indeed smaller and potentially faster with high DPS..
In other news ... All hail the Tornado the new god of nanopvp!
Quite interested in the nano possibilities with the other new BCs too..
With hybrids I'd like to see a range of new ammo bonuses (tracking/ optimal) for the middle of the range unused ammos, like CCP did with projectiles:
-Spike lead and AM are the only general ammo most people use for rails.
-For blasters its null or AM.
Doesn't seem right.
|
|
Killstealing
Broski Enterprises Elite Space Guild
100
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 19:57:00 -
[151] - Quote
easier pos shooting woop |
JC Anderson
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 19:59:00 -
[152] - Quote
One area where these new BC will be useful is in wormhole POS shooting.
It has always been an issue to get enough BS through without collapsing the entrance/exit when moving to reinforce a WH pos. |
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
443
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 20:02:00 -
[153] - Quote
JC Anderson wrote:One area where these new BC will be useful is in wormhole POS shooting.
It has always been an issue to get enough BS through without collapsing the entrance/exit when moving to reinforce a WH pos.
Of course... the pos guns will rip one apart however where a BS could survive.
I think they actually put some good thought into balancing them to be honest. Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
JC Anderson
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 20:05:00 -
[154] - Quote
Ingvar Angst wrote:I think they actually put some good thought into balancing them to be honest.
Thats shocking isn't it? ;) |
Aamrr
HnL Enterprise
108
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 20:11:00 -
[155] - Quote
I'm concerned that the new Oracle BC isn't getting a damage bonus. The Tornado will be getting 10.67 effective hardpoints with its RoF bonus -- the Oracle will be stuck with 8.0.
5% Damage bonus per level? Please don't give us another apocalypse. =\ |
Sable Blitzmann
Massively Dynamic Reverberation Project
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 20:30:00 -
[156] - Quote
I'm interested in the new t2 probe launchers... they now have 5% scan strength, same as the Sisters variety. What makes the sisters worth 40mil over the new t2 one, which will be around the 1 mil mark presumably? |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous
326
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 20:46:00 -
[157] - Quote
All I saw was the new Meta 6 warp disruptor that gets an extra 20k range when overheated.
42km long point + Tech 2 Skirmish warfare links = Winmatar!! |
E man Industries
SeaChell Productions
115
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 20:47:00 -
[158] - Quote
I really hope the tornado is viable over the tengue for WH PvE.
In a shield fleet of RR tengue's with the new ship have the tank required for class 5+ that the tengu's run?
Or is the tengu still the only real option? I have actually Un-subbed my acounts, We need more to do, not more to wear. E-mail me when CCP has decent content a casual player can access in a 1-2h play period that is actually fun and contributes to long term goals. |
Soporo
Perkone Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 20:49:00 -
[159] - Quote
I'll be glad to finally change my best ranged Ferox fit from Projectiles to the ship bonused Rails.
Might try the Eagle again, even.
Another torp shooter without an explosion radius bonus ... meh. Capital/POS work is right. |
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos BricK sQuAD.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 20:50:00 -
[160] - Quote
Sable Blitzmann wrote:I'm interested in the new t2 probe launchers... they now have 5% scan strength, same as the Sisters variety. What makes the sisters worth 40mil over the new t2 one, which will be around the 1 mil mark presumably?
CPU need. |
|
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 20:54:00 -
[161] - Quote
Wacktopia wrote:Dare Devel wrote:Calapine wrote:Zagam wrote: Blasters biggest issue wasn't the damage, it was even hitting the target (your effective range was tanked due to the bad tracking)..
Even in a world where tracking is not an issue the very small "on paper" DPS advantage blasters have over a weapons system as, lets say, pulse lasers doesn't outweigh the downsides of minuscule range. Not to mention there isn't even a theoretical DPS lead when using any ammo but antimatter. Outside a few select choice scenarios (docking games, 1vs1, etc..) the few percent of extra damage blasters do isn't worth giving up the benefit of range and versatility of instant ammo switches. In most cases it's better to cause 100% damage right after lock on, instead of 110% damage after slow-boating into range for half a minute. And that's before the tracking issues you rightly mentioned come into play. In short: tracking buff, yes, but don't stop there. Cala Large Neutron blaster Range with NULL is still below 30 KM (without additional mods) ---> easily kitable Hybrid T2 Ammo (both types) still retains the negative tracking attribute (-25%) Hybrid ammo volume still the same Power and CPU is right down though so you can fit bigger guns that will have a bit more range and damage so it is effectively a damage and range buf also. Fit bigger guns ? Neutron Blaster is THE largest blaster gun
I do understand that this is not an official release of hybrid balancing. I would think that the "most requested" hybrid balancing MUST contain... 1) Range correction inline with autocannon and pulse (if I would suggest 60% base optimal increase and 70% base falloff increase) 2) Remove Tracking penalties from T2 blaster ammo since they directly affect DPS. 3) Reduce the volume of ammo by 50% so that 2x qty of ammo charges can be loaded at a time. 4) Cap consumption reduction of hybrids by at least 40%.
If any of the above are missing then hybrid will remain uncompetitive against other short range platforms. |
Aeril Malkyre
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 20:54:00 -
[162] - Quote
E man Industries wrote:I really hope the tornado is viable over the tengue for WH PvE.
In a shield fleet of RR tengue's with the new ship have the tank required for class 5+ that the tengu's run?
Or is the tengu still the only real option? Umm, the Tornado is Tier 3, not Tech 3. It's not even remotely related to the logis.
It has way more damage than say a Hurricane, but half the tank. Would you take a half tank Hurricane into a Class 5+? |
Tarchus
3 Parshi
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 20:59:00 -
[163] - Quote
Hope i'll be able to fit railguns on vindicator without extra powergrid modules and implants !!!
|
Soporo
Perkone Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 21:01:00 -
[164] - Quote
Who fly's a Harpy, what's your take on this? lolHawk, btw. |
Wa'roun
Quantum Cats Syndicate
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 21:05:00 -
[165] - Quote
Still no extra slots for a Deimos though. |
rodyas
The Scope Gallente Federation
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 21:13:00 -
[166] - Quote
Sable Blitzmann wrote:I'm interested in the new t2 probe launchers... they now have 5% scan strength, same as the Sisters variety. What makes the sisters worth 40mil over the new t2 one, which will be around the 1 mil mark presumably?
Faction always give great boost with little skills needed. T2 can be better then faction but need lvl 5 skills. People will still buy sisters if they dont train to lvl 5. |
Dragonzchilde
BURN EDEN Northern Coalition.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 21:15:00 -
[167] - Quote
If those changes need to bring me back ...
nope
Still one easy big nerf bat solution instead of actually thinking it through and making the game as it used to before all those fail patches and crappy "fixes"
Red moon rising ... go back to that expansion and then start think it through again and pls stop listening to that ****** CSM |
FlameOfSurvival
Kriegsmarinewerft Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 21:15:00 -
[168] - Quote
Good that this is not the final list :)
otherwise I really need to ask for WTF the T2 triage module has a Targeting Range bonus (and some other small useless bonus...) |
JC Anderson
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 21:17:00 -
[169] - Quote
One of the more subtle changes, but one that I really do like is that they increased the warp speed on logistics ships... Brings them in line with other cruisers now. |
quickshot89
No trouble in the midst STR8NGE BREW
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 21:20:00 -
[170] - Quote
t2 warfare links, im assuming that includes the mining one, so now the t2 links give the same as t1 + mindlink? or is the mindlink still going to be worth plugging in? |
|
thoth rothschild
Imperial War Wolf
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 21:30:00 -
[171] - Quote
I <3 the changes to Hail L/M/S Ammo and the T2 Links !!! |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
25
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 21:30:00 -
[172] - Quote
I'm hoping the cap drain on rails has been reduced enough so that I don't have to waste a fitting slot on a cap booster. Will open up possibilities for nano rail Navy Exe (as well as other ships).
|
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
245
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 21:31:00 -
[173] - Quote
Blasters still need to be brought up to par with Autocannons and Pulses.
Just more tracking won't fix that.
Very pleased with the Railgun buff however. I would also like to see Gallente AHACs and Battleships be up to par with Amarr in armor fleets.
The Abaddon can do similar damage to a blasterboat, superior tank, has instant ammo switch, has scorch. Fix this. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
991
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 21:39:00 -
[174] - Quote
quickshot89 wrote:t2 warfare links, im assuming that includes the mining one, so now the t2 links give the same as t1 + mindlink? or is the mindlink still going to be worth plugging in? The T2 links give a much smaller increase than the mindlink. Somewhere in the region of 10GÇô25% compared to the mindlink's 50%. And the mindlink gives the [x warfare] skill bonusGǪ and can of course be used together with the T2 link for a total base command bonus that's in the region of 60-90% higher than just the base T1 module.
E.g. Siege Warfare GÇö Active Shielding: 2% base bonus; 3% with mindlink. Siege Warfare GÇö Active Shielding II: 2.5% base bonus; 3.75% with mindlink.
Likewise, Laser Optimization: 2% base bonus, 3% with mindlink. Laser Optimization II: 2.5% base bonus, 3.75% with mindlink.
So yes, the mindlink is still worth it. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Buzzmong
Aliastra Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 21:41:00 -
[175] - Quote
tika te wrote:the problem with blasters is not their cap usage or their cpu need, but tracking and ridculous low range. in todays eve warfare, fights below 10km only happen with frigs...deimos should be able to hit at least 12-20km, not below 10km.. large blaster with optimals way below 20km..well..bs are simply to slow (even with agility boost) to compensate that; a hyperion with neutrons and lead ammo has about 10km optimal + falloff and speed/agility of cotton wool... 50-100m/s more topspeed with mwd won't make any real difference here.
Actually, range is only a side issue with blasters. The things that hurt them were the web changes, the loss of sig bloom (scram changes) and the buffs to autocannons (ammo changes, TE's giving a big boost to falloff, and resulting in autocannon kiting being very feasible) and Pulse lasers having their tracking boosted. Both of which had the factor of eating into blasters niche or removing the "greyzones" from combat.
However, these new changes look promising. If you didn't notice:
12% PG reduction on all medium and large hybrids (as well as some smalls) Small CPU reduction 30% reduction in cap use
These 3 alone change things as it means more fitting options (no more mandatory PG rig on Cruisers!) and that they should be slightly tankier and can shoot for longer. Also means you shouldn't be gimping the rest of your fit just so you can fit mid tier weapons (Ion cannons etc)
All Gallente ships will be gaining 10m/s on their base speeds All Gallente ships getting a 5% agility buff. Blasters have got a 20% tracking boost.
These three however are the icing on the cake.
Other things still need to be changed (TE's falloff bonus needs to be halved for starters) and Pulse might need tweaking to reintroduce the "greyzones" where none of the weapons are working at their peaks.
But I think it's a good starting move don't you?
Railguns might be worthwhile using outside of special fits again too. |
Paragon Renegade
The Multinational Company.
46
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 21:42:00 -
[176] - Quote
I WANT IT SO BAD
CCP, MAKE THIS REAL "Man, you aren't actually trying to do this, right? Nobody is that stupid right?"
"How wrong you are" |
JC Anderson
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 21:44:00 -
[177] - Quote
Paragon Renegade wrote:I WANT IT SO BAD
CCP, MAKE THIS REAL
Theyve already replied..It IS REAL, but these numbers are all first pass and will still likely see a lot of changes. ;) |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
991
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 21:45:00 -
[178] - Quote
Buzzmong wrote:All Gallente ships getting a 5% agility buff. No. They get their inertia modifier stat increased GÇö this reduces their agility. They're getting a 5% agility nerf.
You want the inertia modifier and mass as low as possible, since they're multiplied together to calculate the ship's agility. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 21:55:00 -
[179] - Quote
right. blaster boats arent supposed to outmaneuver the opponent...with the buff, they'll just get there a little faster. but this is not enough. unless blaster optimal (or null ammo) is buffed significantly, blaster boats will still be shut down by scrams.
if agility is gonna get nerfed, blaster boats should probably be the fastest in the game |
Paragon Renegade
The Multinational Company.
46
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 21:57:00 -
[180] - Quote
JC Anderson wrote:Paragon Renegade wrote:I WANT IT SO BAD
CCP, MAKE THIS REAL Theyve already replied..It IS REAL, but these numbers are all first pass and will still likely see a lot of changes. ;)
I love you, and I love CCP's face.
"Man, you aren't actually trying to do this, right? Nobody is that stupid right?"
"How wrong you are" |
|
Covert Kitty
SRS Industries SRS.
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 21:57:00 -
[181] - Quote
Quote:Twilight Sparkle (my mega) is going to LOVE this winter You could almost call these changes CCP's winter wrapup ;) |
Sarmatiko
119
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 21:59:00 -
[182] - Quote
AC Tornado fit looks cool
|
Kumq uat
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 21:59:00 -
[183] - Quote
I would put a bit more DPS on the blasters and a touch more straight line speed on Gallente hulls. Not bad though. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
991
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 22:01:00 -
[184] - Quote
Too much HP, as expectedGǪ
GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Calapine
Xeno Tech Corp Flatline.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 22:02:00 -
[185] - Quote
Buzzmong wrote:
Other things still need to be changed (TE's falloff bonus needs to be halved for starters) and Pulse might need tweaking to reintroduce the "greyzones" where none of the weapons are working at their peaks.
But I think it's a good starting move don't you?
While I agree with your solutions here, they probably wouldn't be too popular and lead to lots of pissed-off pulse pilots and angry autocannon...eh..aviators.
Since I doub't CCP has the stomach for another round of 'this-sucks-I-quit' posts, it might be easier to just give Blasters a hearty damage buff and be done with it.
Cala |
Millur
Blue Beret UFO Retrieval Team
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 22:06:00 -
[186] - Quote
Oooo goodie! Just got home from work and this will be a good read before bed time This is indeed a step in the right direction CCP, just letting you know You cant arrange them by *****... |
Shadowsword
The Rough Riders Ares Protectiva
42
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 22:14:00 -
[187] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Too much HP, as expectedGǪ
Large shield extenders are way too easy to fit, and autocanons take too little powergrid.
As long as those two points aren't fiwed, Minmatar/Angel ships will always be OP.
An Oracle or Talos would cripple itself trying to fit one 1600 plate, and the pair of LSE give more HP for less disadvantages. |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
25
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 22:15:00 -
[188] - Quote
One fewer fitting slot for Gallente hulls! Put a tracking enhancer if you want more range, or a mag stab if you want more damage, or a nanofiber if you want more agility/speed! (don't know if these changes will get me there, but I love the possibilities). |
Tamiya Sarossa
Hedion University Amarr Empire
46
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 22:15:00 -
[189] - Quote
T2 ganglinks... I'm going to love those so much but please please make them only work on grid - I'll take that nerf for the sake of the rest of the game. |
Bacchanalian
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 22:20:00 -
[190] - Quote
Here's hoping the Talos is phallic-shaped like the Thorax hulls and most Proteus fits.
Fleet of Sex mk III: Talos blob!
That said, I'm probably the only person in EVE sad about the Oneiros slot changes. It's gonna nerf my Combat Lolneiros fit by forcing me to drop either dual-prop, my web, or the cap injector. Guess I should get out there and lose my last one before the expansion hits and get as much fraps as I can! |
|
Large Collidable Object
morons.
439
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 22:23:00 -
[191] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:Tippia wrote:Too much HP, as expectedGǪ Large shield extenders are way too easy to fit, and autocanons take too little powergrid. As long as those two points aren't fixed, Minmatar/Angel ships will always be OP. An Oracle or Talos would cripple itself trying to fit one 1600 plate, and the pair of LSE give more HP for less disadvantages.
Agreed - I also would have hoped to see the new BC's balanced in such a way that fitting the highest Tier T2 weapons would have severe drawbacks on the rest of the fitting, so the smaller Tier BS guns finally see some more use.
But we'll see - things are not set in stone yet.... morons-áare recruiting. We're good at breeding! |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
991
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 22:27:00 -
[192] - Quote
Bacchanalian wrote:Here's hoping the Talos is phallic-shaped like the Thorax hulls and most Proteus fits. NahGǪ not really. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Calapine
Xeno Tech Corp Flatline.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 22:31:00 -
[193] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Bacchanalian wrote:Here's hoping the Talos is phallic-shaped like the Thorax hulls and most Proteus fits. NahGǪ not really.
Reminds me of this! (Good old X-COM...)
Cala |
Sebastien Audaille
ZERO HEAVY INDUSTRIES
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 22:32:00 -
[194] - Quote
Tornado has falloff bonus, large autocannons and a very high base speed.
This is going to get messy |
Hiram Alexander
Capital Enrichment Services
51
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 22:33:00 -
[195] - Quote
http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/5238/taloample.jpg -- Talos -- fun fit... 90% web :)
These new ships all look a whole lot of fun... and this one's tank isn't silly.
|
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
25
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 22:34:00 -
[196] - Quote
BTW, where is the speed buff to the Myrm? |
Headerman
Quovis Shadow of xXDEATHXx
280
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 22:34:00 -
[197] - Quote
No changes to Minmatar caps though? The Apostle : I want a kangeroo Captain Kirk : Silly Austrians Sarmatiko : Let me guess: you're from US? Captain Kirk : Yeah Riverside IA - why? |
Pere Madeleine
Silver Snake Enterprise Against ALL Authorities
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 22:42:00 -
[198] - Quote
Personally, I think the blaster changes should be something similar to the artillery changes from a couple of years ago. Give them massive alpha, but lower RoF, keeping the overall DPS the same, along with a tracking boost so as they can actually apply their damage. In other words, make them like shotguns.
Then combine that with tweaks to blaster ships to make them fast in a straight line (possibly even faster than most minnie ships, apart from the specialised speedsters like the vaga), but with lower agility, allowing them to close range quickly and get a big initial volley in, but not be able to dictate range over the course of a longer fight, turning them into something of a battering ram.
Also, Gallente are supposed to be the drone race, yet, all that seems to mean is that they get better DPS from drones than other races. In fact, due to the balancing that has to been done to stop that being overpowered, it effectively means Gallente ships need to use DPS drones to keep on par with the other races, which in turn means they never use ewar drones.
Perhaps, rather than giving the Gallente blaster boats a bigger drone bay and bandwidth than the other races equivalents, only do that on the Drone boats. Instead, why not fill out the gaps in the ewar drones lineup (specifically small and medium webbing drones), and let the non-drone Gallente ships rely on drones less? Using the Thorax as an example, why not cut its drone bay in half and tweak its blaster bonus so that its overall DPS remains the same when using 5 light combat drones as it currently is using 5 mediums, which would free up the drone bay to be used for something like webbing drones, which would let it close range faster? |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
135
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 22:55:00 -
[199] - Quote
Hiram Alexander wrote:http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/5238/taloample.jpg -- Talos -- fun fit... 90% web :)
These new ships all look a whole lot of fun... and this one's tank isn't silly.
I odn't care if the aito Tempest does 900 dps at 10-20km tha thing does 1500 dps under 10km O.O awesome |
Ryunosuke Kusanagi
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 23:11:00 -
[200] - Quote
Covert Kitty wrote:Quote:Twilight Sparkle (my mega) is going to LOVE this winter You could almost call these changes CCP's winter wrapup ;)
funny you should mention that, that's what I named my dictor ;) *edit* you could say, you will also get free shipping
*hides* |
|
Buzzmong
Aliastra Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 23:38:00 -
[201] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Buzzmong wrote:All Gallente ships getting a 5% agility buff. No. They get their inertia modifier stat increased GÇö this reduces their agility. They're getting a 5% agility nerf. You want the inertia modifier and mass as low as possible, since they're multiplied together to calculate the ship's agility.
Is it? Balls.
Can understand why they've done that, it was asked for. |
Bacchanalian
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 23:42:00 -
[202] - Quote
Buzzmong wrote:Tippia wrote:Buzzmong wrote:All Gallente ships getting a 5% agility buff. No. They get their inertia modifier stat increased GÇö this reduces their agility. They're getting a 5% agility nerf. You want the inertia modifier and mass as low as possible, since they're multiplied together to calculate the ship's agility. Is it? Balls. Can understand why they've done that, it was asked for.
Think the point is to give the Gallente ships better straight-line speed for overtaking something, but not better agility as skirmishing is not what they were looking for. |
tika te
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 00:18:00 -
[203] - Quote
nerfing agility to gallente with 10m/s base speed increase?? srsly??!! have you guys ever seen an blaster-hyperion accelerating with mwd on? its like throwing a feather against the wind...10m/s more base speed with skill (+25%) maybe 15m/s large speed without mwd, with mwd roughly about 100m/s higher top speed?? this won't change anything. basicaly it should be like this: race with fastest and most agile ships -> weapons with shortest range race with moderate speed -> moderate ranged weaposn race with slowest ships -> longest weapon range and vice versa..
but atm this relation simply is not correct regarding gallente <-> minmataar. minmaatar has fastest ships, does not need any cap for weapons, has best ammo diversity (range modifiers, all dmg types), has decent range and dmg output. gallente however have some of the slowest ships (due to armot tanking/plates), need cap for weapons, have crapy range on blasters, crapy dmg on rails. am i the only one who thinks that there is sth broken by design here?? the solution is simple: either make blasterboats the fastest ships ingame, or significantly boost blaster range/tracking or do a combination of both... --> the key aproach for balancing should be to make the races competitive; competitive in real fighting scenarios, not only on paper..
ps: regarding drones: i'm playing as a 100m+ sp gallente char and i tell you: drones are highly overrated. they need alot micromanagement, they limit your ability to quickly retreat from fight - u can lose them faster than you want, they're only third-choice weapon system in fleet fights, they generate lag. even if this won't ever hapen but i'd like to see drones replaced by any other weapon system. the only benefits you have from drones: they can attack when you're jammed and you can coose the dmg type. ok, i must admit they can be useful in solo pvp or small engagements - which is seldom happening nowdays.. it realy hurts to see frgs being faster than small sttack drones... --> drones should be much faster across the board... (but this is just my opinion) |
Headerman
Quovis Shadow of xXDEATHXx
280
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 00:18:00 -
[204] - Quote
Also, no changes to T2 rigs either The Apostle : I want a kangeroo Captain Kirk : Silly Austrians Sarmatiko : Let me guess: you're from US? Captain Kirk : Yeah Riverside IA - why? |
Bacchanalian
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 00:24:00 -
[205] - Quote
Headerman wrote:Also, no changes to T2 rigs either
They can't change/fix everything in the game all at once. Compared to the last year's worth of changes, this is several orders of magnitude higher than any of the previous patches. In fact, I think even going as far back as late 2006 I don't recall ever seeing this many changes being introduced at once (of course, we're assuming all of these are slated for the winter xpac, which might be a bit presumptuous). Give em time. |
Tristan North
The Scope
27
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 00:27:00 -
[206] - Quote
tika te wrote:nerfing agility to gallente with 10m/s base speed increase?? srsly??!! Agree.
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
59
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 00:36:00 -
[207] - Quote
Morganta wrote:care to expand on that? or will we have to wait until you tell CCP what we collectively think about it, and CCP tells us what you told them that we think about it?
Ac's and Arty Canes fleets replaced by those new throw away hit n'blow.
Why not, I can see a lot of good options with new destroyers buff to gank some of those bs's with cheaper throw away |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 00:42:00 -
[208] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Too much HP, as expectedGǪ
Not just too much EHP, too much DPS also. As long as blasters do not have range, ACs have no right to blaster-like DPS at close range while also having massive falloff and being mounted on much superior hulls. |
Ivan En'Vec
Dark-Force Noir. Mercenary Group
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 00:44:00 -
[209] - Quote
One thing I see lacking here is that the Coercer only has one mid slot. People have been clamoring for 2 mid slots on both this and the Retribution so they can be included with all the other ships of their type as viable PvP options. CCP - You'd make a lot of people very happy if those changes get included. |
Cloora
APEX Unlimited APEX Conglomerate
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 00:45:00 -
[210] - Quote
Why would we nerf Caldari hybrid platform ships' agility with no corresponding speed buff? I'm not excited about my Fat 1600mm plated Falcon being even more fat. CEO and Major ShareholderAPEX ConglomerateMaker of Starsi softdrinks and Torped-Os! Cereal http://www.altaholics.blogspot.com
|
|
Calapine
Xeno Tech Corp Flatline.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 01:09:00 -
[211] - Quote
Re: Gallente Agility
Sooo....have been playing around with this:
Quote:The following formula, assuming the ship is starting from standstill, describes how acceleration works in EVE: Vt = Vmax * (1 - e^(-t * 10^6 / (I*M) )
Source
Based on the new and old agility data of Megathron it seems that in absolute numbers acceleration will increase slightly (i.e. going from 0 to 100 km/s the new Mega will reach the speed faster), but in relatives terms, for example time-to-warp which is always 0.75 of vmax the new Gallente lineup will feel more sluggish.
Cala |
Roosterton
Eternal Frontier
119
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 01:12:00 -
[212] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:Tippia wrote:Too much HP, as expectedGǪ Not just too much EHP, too much DPS also. As long as blasters do not have range, ACs have no right to blaster-like DPS at close range while also having massive falloff and being mounted on much superior hulls.
Except that the Naga is capable of ~600 more DPS than the Tornado, and gets a web bonus.
|
Wacktopia
Sicarius. Legion of The Damned.
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 01:22:00 -
[213] - Quote
Bacchanalian wrote:Buzzmong wrote:Tippia wrote:Buzzmong wrote:All Gallente ships getting a 5% agility buff. No. They get their inertia modifier stat increased GÇö this reduces their agility. They're getting a 5% agility nerf. You want the inertia modifier and mass as low as possible, since they're multiplied together to calculate the ship's agility. Is it? Balls. Can understand why they've done that, it was asked for. Think the point is to give the Gallente ships better straight-line speed for overtaking something, but not better agility as skirmishing is not what they were looking for.
I mis-read that part too (about the agility being a nerf). I think the straight-line speed thing will be quite a poor benefit imo. It will mean that no only can Gallente be kited with their slightly faster 10% better speed but they can be out manoeuvred too.
Hmmm. Will have to get on Sisi and see how the low agility plays. I'm not liking the sound of it for just 10% speed buff. :-/ |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
76
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 01:26:00 -
[214] - Quote
Bacchanalian wrote:Buzzmong wrote:Tippia wrote:Buzzmong wrote:All Gallente ships getting a 5% agility buff. No. They get their inertia modifier stat increased GÇö this reduces their agility. They're getting a 5% agility nerf. You want the inertia modifier and mass as low as possible, since they're multiplied together to calculate the ship's agility. Is it? Balls. Can understand why they've done that, it was asked for. Think the point is to give the Gallente ships better straight-line speed for overtaking something, but not better agility as skirmishing is not what they were looking for. If blasterboats will have their agility lowered they need to be faster than equivalent minnie ships. |
Ninghong
Hyo Innovations
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 01:43:00 -
[215] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Buzzmong wrote:All Gallente ships getting a 5% agility buff. No. They get their inertia modifier stat increased GÇö this reduces their agility. They're getting a 5% agility nerf. You want the inertia modifier and mass as low as possible, since they're multiplied together to calculate the ship's agility.
But the only data I see on the files is a +5% to the agility of Gallente Ships, there's no data directly related to Inertia or Mass for most of the ships.
|
Calapine
Xeno Tech Corp Flatline.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 01:51:00 -
[216] - Quote
Ninghong wrote:Tippia wrote:Buzzmong wrote:All Gallente ships getting a 5% agility buff. No. They get their inertia modifier stat increased GÇö this reduces their agility. They're getting a 5% agility nerf. You want the inertia modifier and mass as low as possible, since they're multiplied together to calculate the ship's agility. But the only data I see on the files is a +5% to the agility of Gallente Ships, there's no data directly related to Inertia or Mass for most of the ships.
Agility = Inertia Modifier.
Fire up your Evemon and compare the numbers given to the Inertia Modifier listed under the structure section. You will find they match every time.
Cala |
David Grogan
The Motley Crew Reborn
113
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 02:16:00 -
[217] - Quote
Hiram Alexander wrote:http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/5238/taloample.jpg -- Talos -- fun fit... 90% web :)
These new ships all look a whole lot of fun... and this one's tank isn't silly.
LOL @ 90% Web effect any freighter pilot will want of these escorting it.... insta warp freighter all the way to jita Everytime you buy something that says "made in china" you are helping the rising unemployment in your own country unless your from china, Buy locally produced goods and help create more jobs. |
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
73
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 02:22:00 -
[218] - Quote
Hmm lots of new T2 mods, and no T2 BPOs for those. Looks like a buff the inventors to
I'm guessing the T2 ganglinks are gonna be popular (+25% effect - miners and combat pilots rejoice), as well as MAPCs, probe launchers, siege and triage modules, tractor beams and the warp disruption field generator. |
Ninghong
Hyo Innovations
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 02:26:00 -
[219] - Quote
Yup Cala, you're right. Thanks for the correction. |
Ranka Mei
TANoshii Incorporated New Eden Research.
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 02:38:00 -
[220] - Quote
Quote:1329.
Scourge Fury Heavy Missile 1330. [-|n] increaseSignatureRadiusPassive
1331. [-] signatureRadiusBonus: 5.4
What's this then?! Do all heavies get a signatureRadiusBonus now??! I hope not! It's preceded by a [-], but the missile itself has a [*] in front of it (= changed). So, what's changing?
-- "All your monies AUR belong to us!" -- CCP |
|
Spc One
The Chodak Void Alliance
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 02:48:00 -
[221] - Quote
Ranka Mei wrote:Quote:1329.
Scourge Fury Heavy Missile 1330. [-|n] increaseSignatureRadiusPassive
1331. [-] signatureRadiusBonus: 5.4
What's this then?! Do all heavies get a signatureRadiusBonus now??! I hope not! It's preceded by a [-], but the missile itself has a in front of it (= changed). So, what's changing? No. All missiles will loose negative effects to ship hulls.
|
Ranka Mei
TANoshii Incorporated New Eden Research.
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 02:50:00 -
[222] - Quote
Spc One wrote:Ranka Mei wrote:Quote:1329.
Scourge Fury Heavy Missile 1330. [-|n] increaseSignatureRadiusPassive
1331. [-] signatureRadiusBonus: 5.4
What's this then?! Do all heavies get a signatureRadiusBonus now??! I hope not! It's preceded by a [-], but the missile itself has a in front of it (= changed). So, what's changing? No. All missiles will loose negative effects to ship hulls.
Oh good; thx. :) My Tengu will be happy with that! I'll go tell her rightaway!
-- "All your monies AUR belong to us!" -- CCP |
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University Ivy League
146
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 03:12:00 -
[223] - Quote
Reilly Duvolle wrote:Hmm lots of new T2 mods, and no T2 BPOs for those. Looks like a buff the inventors to
Yes, I'm always happy when I see new T2 items that don't have the baggage of the old T2 BPO issues. Gives the inventors something where they're somewhat on even footing with the rest of the competition.
I think the warfare links will be popular along with some of the others. |
TR4D3R4LT
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 03:23:00 -
[224] - Quote
Cloora wrote:Why would we nerf Caldari hybrid platform ships' agility with no corresponding speed buff? I'm not excited about my Fat 1600mm plated Falcon being even more fat.
I wrote partially constructive ramble of over 4000 character long. Forum ate it. Now I just ask, CCP, what, if any, is your planned role for Caldari hybrid boats. Are they blaster/shield, rail/shield, combo or something else? Do you even have a plan for them? When I can actually use my Eagle in a way that doesn't get it laughed off by every other ship, including certain t1 cruisers? I recommend you take Eagle, Cerb, Deimos and Ishtar. Fit each for 3 different type of combat scenarios. Close range dps, long range dps and some other form of fleet role. Check which comes last for all 3 categories...
As someone asked for Harpy pilot. I've flown steadily blarpy as a tackle/some dps boat in small gank gang for years and at least for that role the blaster changes wont affect, the agility nerf will a bit. However it's spray and pray anyway so I wont notice much difference whether I live 40 or 42 seconds after someone actually starts to take me down. 1 vs 1 honor-fight performance I cant say anything as those happen in magical lala-land where unicorns fly, I've never been there. Either the blarpy nukes some silly toon at point blank range who doesnt know better or anyone more competent just kites the blarpy to oblivion. I've heard Ralpy fares better in 1 vs 1's but that might be rumor. |
Pr1ncess Alia
Perkone Caldari State
31
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 03:49:00 -
[225] - Quote
I am so close to reactivating billing for my account.
Keep it up CCP, you're almost there.
Then do this every year. |
Elyssa MacLeod
GloboTech Industries GloboTech Trade Federation
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 04:10:00 -
[226] - Quote
TR4D3R4LT wrote:Cloora wrote:Why would we nerf Caldari hybrid platform ships' agility with no corresponding speed buff? I'm not excited about my Fat 1600mm plated Falcon being even more fat. I wrote partially constructive ramble of over 4000 character long. Forum ate it. Now I just ask, CCP, when the hell are you going to get stable ******* forums?? You used to have them. This is not progress!
Sorry, that was my addition
**** FiS Its Called EVE |
Captain Alcatraz
Muppet Ninja's Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 07:04:00 -
[227] - Quote
2 accounts were running out of time in 3 days, 2 accounts resubbed.
Make it happen CCP |
Tekota
The Freighter Factory
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 07:06:00 -
[228] - Quote
Blue Binary wrote:1424. * Production Efficiency 1425. + manufactureCostBonusShowInfo: -5.0
If I read this right, that means the Production Efficiency skill will increase from 4% to 5% per level, giving an additional 5% at level 5 to become 25%.
Meaning less demand for minerals = cheaper manufactured goods and (initial) fall in price of minerals.
My best guess is a display change only, Production Efficiency currently improves the base multiplier of 1.25 by 4% per level - this results in an effective mineral change of 5% (4% of 1.25 is 0.05) and as such, for clarity it's simpler to describe this on the skill as a 5% per level change rather than 4%. |
Sarmatiko
119
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 07:51:00 -
[229] - Quote
This will add even more love to CCP: http://img573.imageshack.us/img573/3701/eveuiscaling.png
|
Arugas Koken
Peregrine Guard
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 08:05:00 -
[230] - Quote
OMG. |
|
Roime
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 08:10:00 -
[231] - Quote
This is just purely awesome, I think the wip buffs look already very very good <3
Best regards,
A Gallente pilot |
Tristan North
The Scope
28
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 08:12:00 -
[232] - Quote
Roime wrote:This is just purely awesome, I think the wip buffs look already very very good <3
Best regards,
A Gallente pilot 10 m/s is good? For escape? Hybrids are fine, but gallentes ships need way more speed, for what is now looks more like a nerf. |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 08:12:00 -
[233] - Quote
Roosterton wrote:Gypsio III wrote:Tippia wrote:Too much HP, as expectedGǪ Not just too much EHP, too much DPS also. As long as blasters do not have range, ACs have no right to blaster-like DPS at close range while also having massive falloff and being mounted on much superior hulls. Except that the Naga is capable of ~600 more DPS than the Tornado, and gets a web bonus.
Only one problem. The linked Talos fit has so little EHP that it would lose a straight-up fight to the linked Tornado at blaster optimal. "Better than a blasterboat at being a blasterboat".
But the fits are problematic (T2 rigs etc), let's equalise them a bit. A gank Tornado with dual LSE, triple extender rigs and triple gyros (normally you'd have at least one TE for range but we're fitting it to mimic a blasterboat) would have 980 DPS with Hail and 46k EHP overheated. In comparison, a 1600 mm neutron Talos with dual MFS, plate, DC, EANM and trimarks would have 1160 DPS and 41k EHP. The Tornado fit doesn't have a web, but since ACs don't have a problem tracking similar size ships, it doesn't really need one.
Ignoring damage types, the times-to-die at close range are: Talos 42 s; Tornado 40 s. If we don't ignore damage types, as we have to, then it becomes obvious that since the Tornado is hitting the Talos's lowest resist, the Tornado will actually will win a straight-up fight at blaster optimal. Not content with "better than a blasterboat at being a blasterboat", the Tornado then gets selectable damage types, capless weapons, much faster and more agile and massive falloff to boot.
This is just another example of the fundamental problem with blasters - ACs are too good at applying damage at blasters' optimal. This cannot be solved by boosting blasters, ACs have to be nerfed. |
Pr1ncess Alia
Perkone Caldari State
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 08:50:00 -
[234] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:Roosterton wrote:Gypsio III wrote:Tippia wrote:Too much HP, as expectedGǪ Not just too much EHP, too much DPS also. As long as blasters do not have range, ACs have no right to blaster-like DPS at close range while also having massive falloff and being mounted on much superior hulls. Except that the Naga is capable of ~600 more DPS than the Tornado, and gets a web bonus. Only one problem. The linked Talos fit has so little EHP that it would lose a straight-up fight to the linked Tornado at blaster optimal. "Better than a blasterboat at being a blasterboat". But the fits are problematic (T2 rigs etc), let's equalise them a bit. A gank Tornado with dual LSE, triple extender rigs and triple gyros (normally you'd have at least one TE for range but we're fitting it to mimic a blasterboat) would have 980 DPS with Hail and 46k EHP overheated. In comparison, a 1600 mm neutron Talos with dual MFS, plate, DC, EANM and trimarks would have 1160 DPS and 41k EHP. The Tornado fit doesn't have a web, but since ACs don't have a problem tracking similar size ships, it doesn't really need one. Ignoring damage types, the times-to-die at close range are: Talos 42 s; Tornado 40 s. If we don't ignore damage types, as we have to, then it becomes obvious that since the Tornado is hitting the Talos's lowest resist, the Tornado will actually will win a straight-up fight at blaster optimal: Talos 37 s; Tornado 41 s. This is stupid. Not content with "better than a blasterboat at being a blasterboat", the Tornado then gets selectable damage types, capless weapons, much more speed and agility, and massive falloff to boot. I didn't include overheating weapons but this just gives the Tornado an even greater advantage, as drones can't be overheated. This is just another example of the fundamental problem with blasters - ACs are too good at applying damage at blasters' optimal. This cannot be solved by boosting blasters, ACs have to be nerfed.
you 1) have way too much time on your hands and 2) are making an argument based of the most selective of information
this doesn't even bring into discussion you're comparing a 1v1 (yeah, ok. that always works right?) and not even bringing up the fact that the talos both gets a drone bay and the most incredible hull bonus of all the tier 3 BCs. we won't even mention how you just tried to justify a nerf by pointing out a 4second discrepancy in projected survival time in said lol 1v1.
your argument has tunnel vision, is not practical and is invalid |
Pepinillos
Republic University Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 08:58:00 -
[235] - Quote
No comments about the Oracle? It seriously needs a damage bonus IMO |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 08:59:00 -
[236] - Quote
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
you 1) have way too much time on your hands and 2) are making an argument based of the most selective of information
this doesn't even bring into discussion you're comparing a 1v1 (yeah, ok. that always works right?) and not even bringing up the fact that the talos both gets a drone bay and the most incredible hull bonus of all the tier 3 BCs. we won't even mention how you just tried to justify a nerf by pointing out a 4second discrepancy in projected survival time in said lol 1v1.
your argument has tunnel vision, is not practical and is invalid
Well, someone has to do your thinking for you.
Outside a 1v1, in gang, the Tornado is unquestionably superior, as it has far greater mobility and DPS projection. This should be obvious to you. The 90% web is not hugely useful if the Talos cannot win a close-range encounter with the Tornado, even if it can actually get to close range. The 90% web is certainly useful for applying damage to smaller ships,but the falloff and mobility of the Tornado means that it can also do this, and across a much greater volume of space. |
Shadowsword
The Rough Riders Ares Protectiva
43
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 09:02:00 -
[237] - Quote
Pepinillos wrote:No comments about the Oracle?
You mean aside from the fact that it does harbinger dps, only with more range? I can see see being a cheap alternative to a Zealot (you sacrifice frigate-killing ability for more dps and insurance), but not a major threat to other BC within 25km range. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
995
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 09:04:00 -
[238] - Quote
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:your argument has tunnel vision, is not practical and is invalid How so?
Oh, and I certainly see drones and hull being mentioned thereGǪ
Pepinillos wrote:No comments about the Oracle? It seriously needs a damage bonus IMO It's hilarious with Tachyons. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Pr1ncess Alia
Perkone Caldari State
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 09:06:00 -
[239] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:Well, someone has to do your thinking for you.
Outside a 1v1, in gang, the Tornado is unquestionably superior, as it has far greater mobility and DPS projection. This should be obvious to you. The 90% web is not hugely useful if the Talos cannot win a close-range encounter with the Tornado, even if it can actually get to close range. The 90% web is certainly useful for applying damage to smaller ships,but the falloff and mobility of the Tornado means that it can also do this, and across a much greater volume of space.
I bolded the terrible part. Do you even read what your typing? Tornado is UNQUESTIONABLY SUPERIOR IT SHOULD BE OBVIOUS. THE 90% WEB BONUS IS UESLESS BECAUSE OF FALCON AND 1V1. FALLOFF NULLIFIES EVERYTHING
yeah, next you'll tell me the advantage of the talos' drone bay is completely cancelled out by teh tornado having a .02 different agility modifier
you haven't even seen anyone fly these ships and its soooo obvious to you how one is completely useless.
I get the feeling you die in all the ships you fly, and then you blame the ship. |
Pepinillos
Republic University Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 09:10:00 -
[240] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:Pepinillos wrote:No comments about the Oracle? You mean aside from the fact that it does harbinger dps, only with more range? I can see see being a cheap alternative to a Zealot (you sacrifice frigate-killing ability for more dps and insurance), but not a major threat to other BC within 25km range.
As it is, the Oracle is either a shield Harbinger with a little more range but less EHP and speed/agility, or a Zealot with more range/dps but a lot less speed/agilty and even less ehp.
I fail to see the point of this.
|
|
Pr1ncess Alia
Perkone Caldari State
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 09:10:00 -
[241] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Pr1ncess Alia wrote:your argument has tunnel vision, is not practical and is invalid How so? Oh, and I certainly see drones and hull being mentioned thereGǪ
it takes circumstantial hypotheticals and makes broad sweeping generalizations. that's how so
yes, he mentions you can't overheat drones and that webs don't count because large acs can track identically sized ships... again vs the 1v1 argument which, for 8 years running, has been the weakest and worst way to try and discuss ship balance.
tunnel vision
he looks at the tip of the iceberg and is SO CERTAIN how big the rest of it is. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
995
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 09:16:00 -
[242] - Quote
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:it takes circumstantial hypotheticals and makes broad sweeping generalizations. that's how so But the thing is, you didn't really address any of his pointsGǪ GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Daniel L'Siata
Don't Regret Until Next Keg Dragoons.
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 09:17:00 -
[243] - Quote
Oh lord, this is going to be interesting.
I am fitting up a Tachyon Oracle and a 1400 Tornado the *second* I get my hands on one.
I'm curious as to whether the requirements for the T2 Triage and Siege will be IV or V. |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
102
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 09:20:00 -
[244] - Quote
tbh blasters still need a damage boost and a range cut, but if these stats go final, it's a good middle term.
rails would go for increasing RoF instead damage tho. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Shadowsword
The Rough Riders Ares Protectiva
43
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 09:21:00 -
[245] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Pepinillos wrote:No comments about the Oracle? It seriously needs a damage bonus IMO It's hilarious with Tachyons.
212km optimal and 520 dps with paper-thin Tach sniper fit and Aurora.
Not sure it's really practical when today's "long range" is 80km, however.
On a side note, considering Tornado's and Talos's efficient range/ehp, the dps difference between the two should be greater. i'd suggest replacing the Torando RoF bonus by a damage one, but alpha fleets are already FOTM enough. Maybe removing a gun? The Talos having a web bonus is fine and dandy, but in fleet pvp you won't often have targets in range to use it. Better something that can be used in both blaster and rail fits. How about a second 5% damage bonus?
Daniel L'Siata wrote:I'm curious as to whether the requirements for the T2 Triage and Siege will be IV or V.
According to the file, it's V. Get started on training long-ass skills. |
Pr1ncess Alia
Perkone Caldari State
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 09:28:00 -
[246] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Pr1ncess Alia wrote:it takes circumstantial hypotheticals and makes broad sweeping generalizations. that's how so But the thing is, you didn't really address any of his pointsGǪ
What would be the benefit in me doing so? What exactly should I elaborate on here?
I didn't say he was wrong in his microscopic selective analysis, just that he's using a tiny set if data to make broad conclusions.
What part of this are you failing to understand? I'd be happy to explain it a 4th time. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
995
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 09:30:00 -
[247] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:212km optimal and 520 dps with paper-thin Tach sniper fit and Aurora.
Not sure it's really practical when today's "long range" is 80km, however. It would make it a contender to the Cerb's old anti-support/anti-ECM role (which admittedly sees less use these days), only with instant damageGǪ
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:What would be the benefit in me doing so? What exactly should I elaborate on here?
I didn't say he was wrong in his microscopic selective analysis, just that he's using a tiny set of data points to make broad sweeping conclusions. How about discussing how/why he's wrong about the effects when we move into larger groups and disprove or at least present a solid case against his claim that the Tornado is unquestionably superior for the reasons he mention?
The benefit of this would be to make you seem able to hold a rational discussion. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Pepinillos
Republic University Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 09:34:00 -
[248] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Shadowsword wrote:212km optimal and 520 dps with paper-thin Tach sniper fit and Aurora.
Not sure it's really practical when today's "long range" is 80km, however. It would make it a contender to the Cerb's old anti-support/anti-ECM role (which admittedly sees less use these days), only with instant damageGǪ
That would be its only viable use if it ends up being as it is now. Its nothing special with pulses fitted. |
Shadowsword
The Rough Riders Ares Protectiva
43
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 09:35:00 -
[249] - Quote
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:Tippia wrote:Pr1ncess Alia wrote:it takes circumstantial hypotheticals and makes broad sweeping generalizations. that's how so But the thing is, you didn't really address any of his pointsGǪ What would be the benefit in me doing so? What exactly should I elaborate on here? I didn't say he was wrong in his microscopic selective analysis, just that he's using a tiny set of data points (in an isolated 1v1 scenario, I might add.... again) to make broad sweeping conclusions. What part of this are you failing to understand? I'd be happy to explain it a 4th time.
It's just that you're reasoning, based on "you can't speak about 1v1", is wrong, at least when similar sizes, roles and costs are concerned.
If ship A is better than ship B in 1v1, then a fleet of 50 ships A will also be better than a fleet of 50 ships B. |
Nyla Skin
Special Taskforce
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 09:41:00 -
[250] - Quote
CCP Guard wrote:Data from early test builds is always very likely to change. But that's no reason not to discuss possibilities.
At some point soon we'll publish a dev blog to tell you what we're thinking and to get feedback from you.
Eventually some version of these stats will also make its way to SiSi for you to test and play around with.
This is CCP guard, confirming that the info is true?
I read from EN24 that this info was reverse-engineered from CCP's internal test server somehow by someone naughty.
Someone said that this is a troll because CCP would never do so many things right at the same time. I hope its not a troll.
I hope they go forward with this patch cause not only would it make me happy, it would make many more happy and do wonders to CCPs public image. |
|
Roime
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 09:45:00 -
[251] - Quote
Tristan North wrote:Roime wrote:This is just purely awesome, I think the wip buffs look already very very good <3
Best regards,
A Gallente pilot 10 m/s is good? For escape? Hybrids are fine, but gallentes ships need way more speed, for what is now looks more like a nerf.
Escape? What is that? I want to dive right in and blast the enemy into bloody pulp, and die in flames. It's great to see these changes don't change that scenario, only make the blaster boat style more viable.
+10m/s makes Brutix the second fastest T1 BC, which I think is right. If it was as fast or even nearly as fast as Scythe, it would be OP. Same with Thorax, Incursus has been fine... except fitting issues. Fixes to these hybrid fitting is my main source of joy, along with the very sensible hybrid buffs.
Also, T2 drone upgrades \o/
|
TehPsycho
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 09:53:00 -
[252] - Quote
It's interesting how everybody's worried about buffing blasters to the point they start stepping into AC role, yet we can see AC's step into blasters role better than blasters can. I think keeping the ships speed is fine, its their thing, but nerf the weapon damage of AC's IMO, its just too high at face-range where gallente should have a clear advantage - the fact that they can stay out of face-range easily enough makes this unecessary. |
Nyla Skin
Special Taskforce
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 10:02:00 -
[253] - Quote
Indeed, yet another piece of awesomeness.
In regards to Gallente, I do not possess intricate knowledge to eve game mechanics as some people do, but from what I see it doesn't look like Gallente are buffed enough yet to be compared to minmatar. Need more love. Changes to blasters seem fine but propably not enough for people want to fly gallente.
I like the concept of making gallente ships fast in a straight line but have less agility though.
ps. No ship should exist with only one midslot. |
Onictus
Legendary Knights Vorpal's Edge
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 10:14:00 -
[254] - Quote
Nyla Skin wrote:Indeed, yet another piece of awesomeness. In regards to Gallente, I do not possess intricate knowledge to eve game mechanics as some people do, but from what I see it doesn't look like Gallente are buffed enough yet to be compared to minmatar. Need more love. Changes to blasters seem fine but propably not enough for people want to fly gallente. I like the concept of making gallente ships fast in a straight line but have less agility though. I think they propably still wont be fast enough. ps. No ship should exist with only one midslot.
I fly both.
Gallente's native armor tanking means that the shoehorned shield tanks aren't going anywhere.
So sure the Brutix will be the 2nd fastest BC...whoo who, I will only have 4 midslots so your options will still be shield gank (granted it'll be a 1000 DPS gank fit, 3 magstabs, 2 TEs and and nano) you will still get out ran by Hurricanes that have DOUBLE the engagement range or better.....which means that nano-cane with a couple neuts and a long point is still far and away a hands down better ship.
Personally I fly both, and I'll still fly both. But I'm still not terribly worried about Gallente being OP, serviceable perhaps...but certainly not OP. |
Pr1ncess Alia
Perkone Caldari State
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 10:18:00 -
[255] - Quote
Tippia wrote: How about discussing how/why he's wrong about the effects when we move into larger groups and disprove or at least present a solid case against his claim that the Tornado is unquestionably superior for the reasons he mention?
The benefit of this would be to make you seem able to hold a rational discussion.
How about we start at the point where he suggests the tornado is a better blaster ship than the Talos is after citing the fact the Talos holds a much higher DPS?
Oh but wait, damage types. Because we are going to assume that Tornado will automatically be fit against the lowest tanked damage type of the Talos... there aren't 2 other races flying around New Eden that pilot might be prepared for.
Again, not a fan of this type of impractical and extremely stat selective arguments.
Rational discussion? Pot and Kettle much? If I was going to play your card, I could just say "well prove me wrong, where did you prove me wrong?"
Shadowsword wrote: It's just that you're reasoning, based on "you can't speak about 1v1", is wrong, at least when similar sizes, roles and costs are concerned.
If ship A is better than ship B in 1v1, then a fleet of 50 ships A will also be better than a fleet of 50 ships B.
I don't know if you've played this game, but there is RARELY a fleet of identical ships fit identically vs 50 of another. It's an impractical and unrealistic hypothetical.
Check in on ships and modules sometime. A 1v1 scenario never works (nor for that matter a 50v50 or 100v100), the fact you're going to say that it does is evidence of your ineptitude.
The game is more complex than that. We're writing off web bonus' based on another ship having falloff, somehow concluding that ship A having less dps than ship B makes ship A better?!?
The argument is asinine at worst, uneducated and completely inapplicable to any in-game scenario at best.
TehPsycho wrote:It's interesting how everybody's worried about buffing blasters to the point they start stepping into AC role, yet we can see AC's step into blasters role better than blasters can. I think keeping the ships speed is fine, its their thing, but nerf the weapon damage of AC's IMO, its just too high at face-range where gallente should have a clear advantage - the fact that they can stay out of face-range easily enough makes this unecessary.
Except where the genius on the last page pointing this out also came right out and said even with max damage t2 ammo the tornado falls short of the talos DPS by roughly 15%
What is the watershed where the advantage of blasters are acceptable? I fly both but I still see people making very broad generalizations and definite conclusions based on small data samplings and without having even seen these ships in action.
EFT warrioring at it's best.
============
All this said I have to ask, what is the recommended fix? Nerf AC's until they are useless? Boost Blaster dps more? What is the acceptable %age they should be above the other weapon classes at 0km? 25%? 50%?
Everyone knows there is no easy answer, not without making another weapon system useless. We've been discussing it for years now. Yet, when hybrids get a much needed boost... we are so quick to say it wasn't enough.
Not to repeat myself too much, but you haven't even seen these ships fly. You have no clue how they are going to perform, you assume based off one fit and one scenario the entire functionality of these ships.
|
Sarmatiko
121
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 10:19:00 -
[256] - Quote
Nyla Skin wrote: I read from EN24 that this info was reverse-engineered from CCP's internal test server somehow by someone naughty.
Why do you believe all that bull on EN24? Test servers isn't something that is hidden. They always been here, just nobody interested in that stuff. How many times in year you think about servers like Multiplicity, Enthropy, Chaos or even Duality? I doubt you even ever heard about them (but in the past they were public access servers) Bulkdata decryption is totally legal and common process. Most of the 3'rd party developers use tools and libraries like Entity Reverence to gather data from sisi and other servers for years. So in other words there is no "database leak", don't listen idiots in private blogs and on EN24 |
pussnheels
Vintage heavy industries
141
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 10:20:00 -
[257] - Quote
While i understand most of you are excited about those new changes would't it be prudent just to wait till the definite stats and other changes are in a dev blog , Othererwise alot of you will be very dissapointed when CCPdecides to change some numbers at the last moment I do not agree with what you are saying , but i will defend to the death your right to say it...... Voltaire |
Borlag Crendraven
EVE University Ivy League
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 10:21:00 -
[258] - Quote
Nyla Skin wrote:Indeed, yet another piece of awesomeness. In regards to Gallente, I do not possess intricate knowledge to eve game mechanics as some people do, but from what I see it doesn't look like Gallente are buffed enough yet to be compared to minmatar. Need more love. Changes to blasters seem fine but propably not enough for people want to fly gallente. I like the concept of making gallente ships fast in a straight line but have less agility though. I think they propably still wont be fast enough. ps. No ship should exist with only one midslot.
The combination of less cap use as well as easier fitting requirements will effect this in more ways than just the guns. Obviously depending on the build, you might be able to fit better tank, bigger weapons or perhaps replace a fitting related module/rig with speed, tank or weapon related mod that might balance it further. Obviously before final changes this is all speculation, but I see a very bright future for several gallente builds that are currently weaker than their counterparts from the other races. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
996
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 10:25:00 -
[259] - Quote
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:Rational discussion? Pot and Kettle much? If I was going to play your card, I could just say "well prove me wrong, where did you prove me wrong?" GǪat which point he'd quite rightly point out that you hadn't provided any claims to disprove yet, so it wouldn't be any pot and kettle GÇö just the kettle all on its own. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
|
CCP Soundwave
C C P C C P Alliance
76
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 10:39:00 -
[260] - Quote
This winter is going to be so ******* awesome. |
|
|
TehPsycho
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 10:43:00 -
[261] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:This winter is going to be so ******* awesome.
It will be if you take aboard the (albeit early) feedback on hybrids and the shiny new BC's. :D |
Wacktopia
Sicarius. Legion of The Damned.
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 10:44:00 -
[262] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:This winter is going to be so ******* awesome.
Does this mean you are not going to nerf Gallente agility after all? :innocent smile: |
Shtu Lix
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 10:45:00 -
[263] - Quote
Blasters need a damage boost. Also check the hybrid ammo: currently is not worth it to use anything than AM and long range T2. Blaster ships could receive a MWD speed bonus too.
Another way for CCP to change Gallente would be to made "hull tanking" a viable option for more variation. Rather than having a speed penalty (armor), the ships would have an agility penalty (hull). Slap some resistance bonus on the hulls of gallente ships, mess a little bit with all the hull related modules and you have something different. It would mess with the fleet combat, but as it seems right now, hybrid ships are not good for that anyway. ------------------------------ |
|
CCP Spitfire
C C P C C P Alliance
362
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 10:49:00 -
[264] - Quote
pussnheels wrote:While i understand most of you are excited about those new changes would't it be prudent just to wait till the definite stats and other changes are in a dev blog , Othererwise alot of you will be very dissapointed when CCPdecides to change some numbers at the last moment
This would be a very sensible approach, yes. We will be releasing more information on all those changes in the coming days or weeks before they arrive on the Singularity test server.
CCP Spitfire | Russian Community Coordinator @ccp_spitfire |
|
Embrace My Hate
Black Horizon. Test Friends Please Ignore
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 10:51:00 -
[265] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:This winter is going to be so ******* awesome.
Here's to hoping |
El'Niaga
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
44
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 10:52:00 -
[266] - Quote
To fix gallante ships just lower the base mass of the ship, then adding the armor plates has less of an effect. |
Shadowsword
The Rough Riders Ares Protectiva
43
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 10:58:00 -
[267] - Quote
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:I don't know if you've played this game, but there is RARELY a fleet of identical ships fit identically vs 50 of another. It's an impractical and unrealistic hypothetical.
Check in on ships and modules sometime. A 1v1 scenario never works (nor for that matter a 50v50 or 100v100), the fact you're going to say that it does is evidence of your ineptitude.
The game is more complex than that. We're writing off web bonus' based on another ship having falloff, somehow concluding that ship A having less dps than ship B makes ship A better?!?
The argument is asinine at worst, uneducated and completely inapplicable to any in-game scenario at best.
Inability to argue without turning nasty is a sign of your own ineptitude at debate.
Of course fleets are rarely make of a single ship type. And your point is? The Tornado and Talos have both the same roles, are both of the same classes, and will have almost equal building costs. So of course you should compare them. Refusing to do so on the grounds that other ships in the gang can interfere is like claiming that Dramiels weren't better than Comets because Rapiers exist.
You speak of writing off the Talos web bonus and speaking only about dps, yet you conveniently ignore things like range, EHP and speed (and a gallente BC with a 1600 plate isn't likely to go anywhere close to an unplated minmatar BC, if the minnie pilot isn't an idiot).
It come down to this: Can you even give a reason to choose a Talos over a Tornado for a fleet fight? There is none, for the same reason that current BC fleets are heavy on hurricanes and rarely contain a signifiant amount of harbingers. |
Nyla Skin
Special Taskforce
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 10:59:00 -
[268] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:This winter is going to be so ******* awesome.
For once its something other than words. Even hinting that these plans are real might make me resub my other account.
El'Niaga wrote:To fix gallante ships just lower the base mass of the ship, then adding the armor plates has less of an effect.
This is what I have thought about too, although I would rather have gallente ships have some kind of bonus where fitting armor plates causes less mass increase than in other races ships. Otherwise people will just start fitting gallente ships with shield and be doubly fast. |
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69
30
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 11:00:00 -
[269] - Quote
Looks good, T2 ganglinks look nice, will this coincide with a need for ganglinks to be on grid?
Either loki alts just got awesome or its time to unsub them |
Embrace My Hate
Black Horizon. Test Friends Please Ignore
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 11:00:00 -
[270] - Quote
Shtu Lix wrote:Blasters need a damage boost. Also check the hybrid ammo: currently is not worth it to use anything than AM and long range T2. Blaster ships could receive a MWD speed bonus too.
It would be nice to buff hybrid ammo back into relevance. Otherwise I firmly believe that blasters do not need more DPS. What they need is better tracking at close range. Blasters should have the far best tracking at close range.
Additionally I believe adding to range or falloff on blasters is just making everything more vanilla. CCP would need to add enough straight line speed to blaster boats to justify an attempt at getting into range. If Blaster boats aren't fast enough then it doesn't matter how much love blasters get.
|
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 11:00:00 -
[271] - Quote
Princess Alia,
I confined the comparison to a 1v1 because in gang environments, the far superior damage projection abilities of fall-off bonused ACs make the Tornado a superior choice. I know full well that there's more to PVP than 1v1, but I didn't see it necessary to compare the Talos and Tornado there, as it's so obvious that the Tornado is better. I didn't think that this needed spelling out.
Damage types. In the very small scale combat where the blaster Talos will be most useful, you almost always have sufficient warning to be able to reload. I've spent quite long enough pissing about in AML Caracals and Drakes to know the importance of picking the right ammo for the job. Even if you have no warning (e.g. jump-in via a gate), then the Tornado has the mobility to buy the required ten seconds to load Hail, then turn and let yourself get webbed. If you choose to do so, of course, you could just choose to kite the Talos outside web range, minimising tracking problems as it lumbers after you.
The rest of your posts appear to be unresearched, content-free waffle. Now, perhaps you could explain to me why you think that the AC-Tornado should be broadly on-par with the Talos in the Talos's niche? |
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 11:06:00 -
[272] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:Princess Alia,
I confined the comparison to a 1v1 because in gang environments, the far superior damage projection abilities of fall-off bonused ACs make the Tornado a superior choice. I know full well that there's more to PVP than 1v1, but I didn't see it necessary to compare the Talos and Tornado there, as it's so obvious that the Tornado is better. I didn't think that this needed spelling out.
Damage types. In the very small scale combat where the blaster Talos will be most useful, you almost always have sufficient warning to be able to reload. I've spent quite long enough pissing about in AML Caracals and Drakes to know the importance of picking the right ammo for the job. Even if you have no warning (e.g. jump-in via a gate), then the Tornado has the mobility to buy the required ten seconds to load Hail, then turn and let yourself get webbed. If you choose to do so, of course, you could just choose to kite the Talos outside web range, minimising tracking problems as it lumbers after you.
The rest of your posts appear to be unresearched, content-free waffle. Now, perhaps you could explain to me why you think that the AC-Tornado should be broadly on-par with the Talos in the Talos's niche?
She doesn't have T2 Large blasters and feels left out? |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 11:12:00 -
[273] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote: It come down to this: Can you even give a reason to choose a Talos over a Tornado for a fleet fight? There is none, for the same reason that current BC fleets are heavy on hurricanes and rarely contain a signifiant amount of harbingers.
The far superior mobility and damage projection abilities make choosing the AC-Tornado over the blaster-Talos in fleet a no-brainer. But since we shouldn't really expect blasters to be effective in fleet, given their short range, it's not really the right question. What we're looking for is reasons to fly the blaster-Talos over the AC-Tornado solo or in duo/trio.
The problem here is that obvious choice is still the Tornado, despite the superior EFT damage and even the 90% web. In these very small environments, mobility and damage projection is king - the ability to get tackle and to avoid tackle, the ability to apply DPS outside web range. The Tornado has these abilities; the Talos does not. Sure, the good paper DPS and 90% web look good in EFT, but a suitable comparison is one of Serpentis and Angel ships - which are more popular in space? |
Nyla Skin
Special Taskforce
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 11:23:00 -
[274] - Quote
When fleets consist of large numbers of ships, the amount of damage projected is rarely an issue. Therefore what matters is the range and speed with which you can project said damage. This is why ships that have technically bigger damage output but at shorter range or with bad mobility are rarely flown in large fleets.
Many things look balanced when looking at small enough number of ships against each other.. |
praznimrak
Level Up
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 11:32:00 -
[275] - Quote
Hello CCP. After incarna crap i did quit eve you to show ccp menagment waht i think off your work in last year. But than few days ago i got invitation from CCP to resub for 5 euros one moonth and there was talking abouth ship spining coming back,so im back.
Awsom job,seems you did finaly wake up and listen to wha we(players) want to be fixied in this game. Congrats.
Was abouth time to change stuff and im suporting you recent efforts,but still there is one thing it shoud be fixed. When one starts to play eve he find out that anything you want to do in eve is time consuming and in the begining it is fine but whith time the nead of fast content is coming stronger as not everyone wants to playe 5 hours minimum. There shoud be more agile gameplaye so ppl that have 2 hours time shoud have content to playe in that time period. Thx.
keep on whith good work and server numbers wi go up again.
PRAZ My youtube chanell: http://www.youtube.com/user/EveOnlineGameplay |
Yvan Ratamnim
Phoenix Evolved Part Duo
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 11:50:00 -
[276] - Quote
THIS IS THE HOTTEST THING SINCE TOASTED SLICED BREAD |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 11:55:00 -
[277] - Quote
Rail damage boost looks good, need tot est it though before you can see if the level is set right for balance. Blaster tracking boost is 20% - not sure that's enough tbh given they get used at 1km or so, regardless of size. Might be a case of having larger tracking bonus for bigger blasters with smalls being set at that 20% point.
But I live in hope having seen the scope of changes being considered. |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
102
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 11:59:00 -
[278] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:Rail damage boost looks good, need tot est it though before you can see if the level is set right for balance. Blaster tracking boost is 20% - not sure that's enough tbh given they get used at 1km or so, regardless of size. Might be a case of having larger tracking bonus for bigger blasters with smalls being set at that 20% point.
But I live in hope having seen the scope of changes being considered.
small blasters don't need extra tracking/damage at all. they work fine already. tbh if those changes are final, you might even end up with a taranis that can fit neutrons and mwd without even using a MAPC.
that actually worries me a bit [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
DarkAegix
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
166
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 12:01:00 -
[279] - Quote
Excellent. All is falling into place. |
Yvan Ratamnim
Phoenix Evolved Part Duo
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 12:02:00 -
[280] - Quote
Hmmm "Planetary Customs Offices" to "Orbital Infrastructure"
Doesn't that sound like there going to drop additional items, perhaps customs office light weight defensive weapons? |
|
Daedalus II
The Older Gamers
64
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 12:05:00 -
[281] - Quote
"Large Shield Transporter II - 5 players" sounds interesting I think. I wonder what it's supposed to do... Somehow raise the maximum shield of up to 5 ships in the fleet? Will it repair up to 5 ships at the same time? |
Shadowsword
The Rough Riders Ares Protectiva
43
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 12:13:00 -
[282] - Quote
Daedalus II wrote:"Large Shield Transporter II - 5 players" sounds interesting I think. I wonder what it's supposed to do... Somehow raise the maximum shield of up to 5 ships in the fleet? Will it repair up to 5 ships at the same time?
It's obviously a test-only module used by devs to test balance in groups situations, like "how long does that carrier hold out against 10 BS? Let's fit that Damage mod - 10 players on my abaddon and check out".
Grimpak wrote:that actually worries me a bit
If the Taranis make a come-back, it only gives some incentive to bring along a few assault frigs or destroyers. |
Hicksimus
Road to Ruin
59
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 12:34:00 -
[283] - Quote
Damn that made me pick up a plex.....anyway as you can see from the support here you guys at CCP should stand behind those numbers(as in making them happen before winter 2015) and when you do that e-mail them to all of the people who aren't playing any more because these changes will give people a new EvE to play with for a while :D. Things I have realized from the EvE forums: Many people beleive cost means money and only money |
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos BricK sQuAD.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 12:37:00 -
[284] - Quote
On first glance, I got very excited by these changes (being a Gallente fanboi). But on deeper reflection, I think there's still a way to go from these adjustments before Gallente (and in particular hybrids) become viable for fleet engagements again.
Blasters need more damage up close, but their long-range low damage ammo types need to give far more flexibility. So at current blaster optimal range, they really need to melt face (ACs operate better at blaster optimal currently, and I'm not convinced that improving blaster tracking alone makes a big enough difference to make blasters worthwhile).
But to be remotely useful in fleet fights, blasters need to be able to do respectable damage at longer ranges. Switching ammo types should make a lot more difference to the range of blasters than at present. (achieving that without giving rails an insane range boost will require adjusting base ranges for both weapons and range multipliers on all charges)
Rails with AM need to be able to compete with (if not outperform) the equivalent tier of Pulse lasers loaded with scorch. The main reason nobody flies Gallente ships in fleet battles is because, even with rails, Amarr ships with pulse lasers still perform better at every realistic combat range. The fact that a short-range weapon with long-range ammo can significantly outperform a long-range weapon with short-range ammo at every range is ridiculous.
Anyway, I know those new stats aren't set in stone. But please, while you're still working on it, make hybrid platforms viable for modern fleet combat. |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
102
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 12:48:00 -
[285] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:Grimpak wrote:that actually worries me a bit If the Taranis make a come-back, it only gives some incentive to bring along a few assault frigs or destroyers.
what comeback? the ship is already quite good, unless you're comparing it to pirate frigates, which is wrong in the first place. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Kari Trace
Nox Imperium
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 13:10:00 -
[286] - Quote
If this is true these items are being worked on the next patch can be titled `this is win` and I think everyone would agree.
CCP, this is the direction EVE -0should- have been going the last 2 years...Dust, WoD: great ideas. but EVE should not suffer for them. ( I'm actually looking forward to Dust, might even buy a PS3 for it... )
Anyways, -yeayz I on the threadknought! |
Zhula Guixgrixks
Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations 0ccupational Hazzard
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 13:23:00 -
[287] - Quote
CCP , why the hybrid frigate agility nerf ???!??
Daredevil agility: 3.39 => 3.5595 Federation Navy Comet agility: 3.3 => 3.465 maxVelocity: 370.0 => 375.0 Incursus agility: 3.31 => 3.4755 maxVelocity: 334.0 => 344.0 Tristan agility: 3.85 => 4.0425 maxVelocity: 296.0 => 306.0 Taranis agility: 3.1 => 3.255 etc.
What we really don't need in Eve , are slugish hybrid frigates. Fix it. thx
-Zhula |
gfldex
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 13:57:00 -
[288] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:This winter is going to be so ******* awesome.
Snowballs? *wink* *wink* |
Zagam
Incompertus INC Fatal Ascension
209
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 14:09:00 -
[289] - Quote
Zhula Guixgrixks wrote:CCP , why the hybrid frigate agility nerf ???!??
Daredevil agility: 3.39 => 3.5595 Federation Navy Comet agility: 3.3 => 3.465 maxVelocity: 370.0 => 375.0 Incursus agility: 3.31 => 3.4755 maxVelocity: 334.0 => 344.0 Tristan agility: 3.85 => 4.0425 maxVelocity: 296.0 => 306.0 Taranis agility: 3.1 => 3.255 etc.
What we really don't need in Eve , are slugish hybrid frigates. Fix it. thx
-Zhula
Uh... its not a nerf... its a buff. higher numbers = more agility. (compare the agility on a frigate vs. a cruiser vs. a BS, you'll see what I mean)
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
1002
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 14:16:00 -
[290] - Quote
Zagam wrote:Uh... its not a nerf... its a buff. higher numbers = more agility. (compare the agility on a frigate vs. a cruiser vs. a BS, you'll see what I mean) No, it's a nerf. Higher number = less agility.
If you look in the item database, you'll see those numbers repeated under the heading GÇ£Inertia modifierGÇ¥, which is multiplied together with the ship's mass to give the final agility of the ship. You want that product to be as small as possible, and consequently, you want the factors to be as small as possible as well. This is why istabs have a negative modifier: because they lower the inertia modifier of the ship (again, the same stat as GÇ£agilityGÇ£ in that data dump) which in turn makes the ship more agile.
The reason cruisers and BS have lower inertia modifiers is because they also have masses that are some orders of magnitude higher, and therefore need inertia modifiers that are smaller to counteract this (otherwise, the align time of a battleship could be counted in minutes rather than seconds). The modifier on its own tells us nothing GÇö it's the combination of modifier and mass that is important.
So you can't say GÇ£cruisers are less agile, due to lower inertia modifierGÇ¥, firstly because a lower inertia modifier is actually better, and secondly because you also have to know what it's modifying. Only if two ships have the exact same mass can you do a direct comparison of the inertia mods.
GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
|
Buzzmong
Aliastra Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 14:39:00 -
[291] - Quote
Tippia is right (and also right for correcting me previously, it had been years since I looked up the formula and had forgotton how it worked, thanks!).
It doesn't help matters that the stats are mislabeled though as it leads to small bouts of confusion like this. |
Yvan Ratamnim
Phoenix Evolved Part Duo
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 15:02:00 -
[292] - Quote
So all good..
CCP still missing only a few things
- the 4th bonus to AF - nebula release date - details on pos's and temporary pos's (whatever that mobile pos thing was called)
Did anyone notice the destroyers are getting HP buff and sig radius nerf, and removal of the rof issue, did they just become epic fighter and frigate killers not just "soso" ones they actually look like they may be usefull for pvp possibly! |
Roosterton
Eternal Frontier
119
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 15:15:00 -
[293] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:Shadowsword wrote: It come down to this: Can you even give a reason to choose a Talos over a Tornado for a fleet fight? There is none, for the same reason that current BC fleets are heavy on hurricanes and rarely contain a signifiant amount of harbingers.
The far superior mobility and damage projection abilities make choosing the AC-Tornado over the blaster-Talos in fleet a no-brainer. But since we shouldn't really expect blasters to be effective in fleet, given their short range, it's not really the right question. What we're looking for is reasons to fly the blaster-Talos over the AC-Tornado solo or in duo/trio. The problem here is that obvious choice is still the Tornado, despite the superior EFT damage and even the 90% web. In these very small environments, mobility and damage projection is king - the ability to get tackle and to avoid tackle, the ability to apply DPS outside web range. The Tornado has these abilities; the Talos does not. Sure, the good paper DPS and 90% web look good in EFT, but a suitable comparison is one of Serpentis and Angel ships - which are more popular in space?
You make some good points. The main selling point for the Talos, I feel, would be for solo. Because honestly, with no dronebay, no web bonus, and large guns, which other one of the tier 3 BC's would you trust not to get pinned down by a lone rifter and blobbed to death? The Amarr one might stand a chance due to being armor tanked, freeing up mids for webs... Except that it only has three mids, which is only enough for point/MWD/cap booster.
That said, solo is a somewhat nich+¬ environment in today's EVE, so I guess it would be nice if they were at least somewhat viable for small gangs/fleets. Now to find a way to do it without obsoleting AC's... |
Denidil
The Graduates Morsus Mihi
112
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 15:23:00 -
[294] - Quote
Soundwave: troll! :D
i hope you're reading all the feedback here :D Anyone who is blue to DRF are cowards and have failed Eve.
MM Bombers, Best Bombers |
Proteus Maximus
The Red Exhilez Chaos Theory Alliance
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 15:25:00 -
[295] - Quote
Destroyer 5 never felt so fking good! Years of disappointment hopefully about to pay off :D Eve... It's just a better class of Idiot. |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 15:30:00 -
[296] - Quote
read this its a very detailed thread on features and ideas that talks about a hybrid boost...
there are some pretty good ideas in there CPP... Read it before making changes to hybrids pretty please |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 15:39:00 -
[297] - Quote
Grimpak wrote:tbh blasters still need a damage boost and a range cut, but if these stats go final, it's a good middle term.
rails would go for increasing RoF instead damage tho. ?? No way. RoF equals capped out more quickly.
|
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 15:46:00 -
[298] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Grimpak wrote:tbh blasters still need a damage boost and a range cut, but if these stats go final, it's a good middle term.
rails would go for increasing RoF instead damage tho. ?? No way. RoF equals capped out more quickly.
meh its not that bad if they reduce the cap activation cost to compensate for the increase rate of fire...
|
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 15:49:00 -
[299] - Quote
Onictus wrote: Personally I fly both, and I'll still fly both. But I'm still not terribly worried about Gallente being OP, serviceable perhaps...but certainly not OP.
Blasters can always be "because of neuted", in their native range. That alone will keep them from being too OP. |
Daedalus II
The Older Gamers
64
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 16:02:00 -
[300] - Quote
Buzzmong wrote:Tippia is right (and also right for correcting me previously, it had been years since I looked up the formula and had forgotton how it worked, thanks!).
It doesn't help matters that the stats are mislabeled though as it leads to small bouts of confusion like this. Then the question is, why do they even lower the agility of these ships. It's not like the Thorax for example ever has had any problems of being TOO agile. As a close range blaster ship, it if any ship would require high agility.
And coupled with the higher speed on all the affected ships, wouldn't that mean they will take even longer to change direction? So the already clumsy gallente ships will get "twice as much" clumsier (but a bit faster).
Could CCP perhaps like many here have messed up the values? Maybe they meant to change them the other way? |
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 16:04:00 -
[301] - Quote
Roosterton wrote:You make some good points. The main selling point for the Talos, I feel, would be for solo. Because honestly, with no dronebay, no web bonus, and large guns, which other one of the tier 3 BC's would you trust not to get pinned down by a lone rifter and blobbed to death? The Amarr one might stand a chance due to being armor tanked, freeing up mids for webs... Except that it only has three mids, which is only enough for point/MWD/cap booster. That said, solo is a somewhat nich+¬ environment in today's EVE, so I guess it would be nice if they were at least somewhat viable for small gangs/fleets. Now to find a way to do it without obsoleting AC's...
I was writing a long comment on the psychology and desirability of going into web range as a solo pilot, taking examples from Vagabond vs. the Deimos, armour-Cane to shield-Cane and from HAM-Drake to nano-HM Drake, but it dissolved into rambling incoherence so I just deleted it.
Suffice to say that, yes, the flight of drones and 90% web are very good tools for dealing with tacklers, but they still require you to go into web range, which is generally something to be avoided as a solo pilot, as you will frequently get baited, tackled and ganked. Applied to the Tornado and Talos, I suspect that people will prefer the falloff and mobility of the Tornado to the do-or-die approach of the Talos. I'm not saying that the Talos won't be flown - it's a powerful ship with a unique (for T1) bonus - but that the Tornado will probably be preferred even in a solo environment, simply because people often don't want to go into web range. In fleet, of course, there's no contest. |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 16:22:00 -
[302] - Quote
Buzzmong wrote:Tippia is right (and also right for correcting me previously, it had been years since I looked up the formula and had forgotton how it worked, thanks!).
It doesn't help matters that the stats are mislabeled though as it leads to small bouts of confusion like this.
The ships with a speed bonus will accelerate faster even with the inertia nerf, but does anybody here know what parameters affect how quickly a ship turns? If it's the acceleration formula, then the ships will be more agile (the ones with speed bonus). ??? |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
1002
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 16:32:00 -
[303] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:The ships with a speed bonus will accelerate faster even with the inertia nerf WeeeellGǪ it's possible that they will accelerate to a given speed at a faster rate, but I haven't done the maths on that yet. However, they will take longer to reach max speed GÇö it's kind of what increased inertia does.
Quote:but does anybody here know what parameters affect how quickly a ship turns? Turning is just a different way of acceleration, so it's still mass and inertia modifier GÇö higher is worse. So they'll turn slower. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Captain Alcatraz
Muppet Ninja's Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 16:33:00 -
[304] - Quote
I can already see fleets of Tornados being OP in small gang pvp, it's an affordable Mach with - roughly the same DPS - more speed - less tank but still decent, not a problem with a few scimis
Imo those new tier 3 BCs should be glass canons designed to kill BCs and up, giving them tracking / falloff / web strength bonuses makes them good at killing too much stuff
But they'll be fun |
Crazy KSK
Tsunami Cartel Dark Solar Empire
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 16:38:00 -
[305] - Quote
I think its a very bad idea to put a 90% web on a T1 bc its gonna be very OP for such a cheap ship right now you have to at least spend 80mil on a faction frigate to get this bonus even more if you want some tank with it pls don't do that ccp |
Yvan Ratamnim
Phoenix Evolved Part Duo
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 17:01:00 -
[306] - Quote
Crazy KSK wrote:I think its a very bad idea to put a 90% web on a T1 bc its gonna be very OP for such a cheap ship right now you have to at least spend 80mil on a faction frigate to get this bonus even more if you want some tank with it pls don't do that ccp
I like the 90% web on the talos, but not on something like the tornado,...
The fact is gallante ships need to be able to get in close to apply there dps, so i'd actually pray we see more gallante ships getting web bonuses of verying strengths |
Yvan Ratamnim
Phoenix Evolved Part Duo
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 17:02:00 -
[307] - Quote
Crazy KSK wrote:I think its a very bad idea to put a 90% web on a T1 bc its gonna be very OP for such a cheap ship right now you have to at least spend 80mil on a faction frigate to get this bonus even more if you want some tank with it pls don't do that ccp
who said the tornado's going to be cheap for all you know the tornado and talos will be 60-90m to buy the hull
Seeing as tier3 are more expensive than 1 and 2... and in bs its almost 1.5 to 2x as much ... we're looking at 50-80m range... so not exactly a cheap tier 1 ship for one that has minimal tank... |
Borlag Crendraven
EVE University Ivy League
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 17:11:00 -
[308] - Quote
Yvan Ratamnim wrote:Crazy KSK wrote:I think its a very bad idea to put a 90% web on a T1 bc its gonna be very OP for such a cheap ship right now you have to at least spend 80mil on a faction frigate to get this bonus even more if you want some tank with it pls don't do that ccp who said the tornado's going to be cheap for all you know the tornado and talos will be 60-90m to buy the hull Seeing as tier3 are more expensive than 1 and 2... and in bs its almost 1.5 to 2x as much ... we're looking at 50-80m range... so not exactly a cheap tier 1 ship for one that has minimal tank...
It'll still be cheap considering that losing the faction equivalent has you gaining pretty much nothing in insurance, whereas you get nearly everything back when losing a regular t1 ship, regardless of the tier. The initial cost doesn't make much difference if it's replaced simply by buying new modules which is what you can pretty much do here. |
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
31
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 17:45:00 -
[309] - Quote
Zhula Guixgrixks wrote:CCP , why the hybrid frigate agility nerf ???!??
Daredevil agility: 3.39 => 3.5595 Federation Navy Comet agility: 3.3 => 3.465 maxVelocity: 370.0 => 375.0 Incursus agility: 3.31 => 3.4755 maxVelocity: 334.0 => 344.0 Tristan agility: 3.85 => 4.0425 maxVelocity: 296.0 => 306.0 Taranis agility: 3.1 => 3.255 etc.
What we really don't need in Eve , are slugish hybrid frigates. Fix it. thx
-Zhula
I was hoping Inertia Modifier != agility.... but when I checked it last night... it does!
So yes, all these ships are getting reduced agility, but increases speed. |
Gogela
Freeport Exploration
85
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 18:05:00 -
[310] - Quote
Shionoya Risa wrote:Edit: Hi thar Naga, Oracle and Talos.
This ^
All GëíGêçGëí Ships | Many Odd GëíGêçGëí Items (+Drones) | <-- Links to showInfo in-game |
|
Zagam
Incompertus INC Fatal Ascension
209
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 18:06:00 -
[311] - Quote
Tippia wrote:X Gallentius wrote:The ships with a speed bonus will accelerate faster even with the inertia nerf WeeeellGǪ it's possible that they will accelerate to a given speed at a faster rate, but I haven't done the maths on that yet. However, they will take longer to reach max speed GÇö it's kind of what increased inertia does. Quote:but does anybody here know what parameters affect how quickly a ship turns? Turning is just a different way of acceleration, so it's still mass and inertia modifier GÇö higher is worse. So they'll turn slower.
I stand corrected. Its been a while since I last looked up the formula, too.
|
Forum Alt Shaishi
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 18:20:00 -
[312] - Quote
Looks nice, especially the removal of the 25% rof penalty on the destroyers.
Tho i realy hope they change the name of the Caldari Tier 3 BC, since it's not a bird, or a something that has wings. |
Poetic Stanziel
Arrakis Technology
153
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 18:20:00 -
[313] - Quote
http://i.imgur.com/Qo8yE.jpg EVE Online: Incarna = New Coke. EVE Online: Winter Expansion = Coke Classic. |
Gogela
Freeport Exploration
85
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 18:22:00 -
[314] - Quote
ell oh ell...
Good one Poetic Stanziel... All GëíGêçGëí Ships | Many Odd GëíGêçGëí Items (+Drones) | <-- Links to showInfo in-game |
Poetic Stanziel
Arrakis Technology
153
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 18:25:00 -
[315] - Quote
Gogela wrote:ell oh ell... Good one Poetic Stanziel... I snagged it from Bucky O'Hair.
https://twitter.com/#!/BuckyOhair/status/129255752396308480
EVE Online: Incarna = New Coke. EVE Online: Winter Expansion = Coke Classic. |
Phoehnix
Kevlar Solutions Fratres Milites de Amarri
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 18:29:00 -
[316] - Quote
You dont argue with tippia ffs
edit: also i love this, preliminary or not |
Gogela
Freeport Exploration
85
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 18:39:00 -
[317] - Quote
If I'm reading this right, Process-Interruptive Warp Disruptor requires Thermodynamics level one and gets a 20% bonus to warp disruption (-1 warp strenght range) on it's 22km base range. I wonder if the bonus is per level... 40km disrupt? Meta 6 T1 All GëíGêçGëí Ships | Many Odd GëíGêçGëí Items (+Drones) | <-- Links to showInfo in-game |
Sarmatiko
124
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 18:46:00 -
[318] - Quote
Gogela wrote:If I'm reading this right, Process-Interruptive Warp Disruptor requires Thermodynamics level one and gets a 20% bonus to warp disruption (-1 warp strenght range) on it's 22km base range. I wonder if the bonus is per level... 40km disrupt? Meta 6 T1 it's cosmos item. Nothing special and you can buy it even now in contracts. They just fixed old bug which put this item in "unpublished" state. Ar least my bugreport about this module got status "Fixed in Caligula 2011"
|
Gogela
Freeport Exploration
85
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 18:51:00 -
[319] - Quote
Thanks... good to know.
Does anyone know what the typeID is for the Tornado, Naga, Oracle and Talos? (ShowInfo ID?) All GëíGêçGëí Ships | Many Odd GëíGêçGëí Items (+Drones) | <-- Links to showInfo in-game |
Denidil
The Graduates Morsus Mihi
112
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 19:17:00 -
[320] - Quote
Tippia: what would the result of a interial modifier increase be when combined with a mass decrease? Anyone who is blue to DRF are cowards and have failed Eve.
MM Bombers, Best Bombers |
|
mkint
201
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 19:25:00 -
[321] - Quote
I'm just hoping the agility stats in this list are the same as the resistance stats... that is exactly opposite from the in-game stats. Lots of ships seem to be getting agility nerfs, even ones that don't seem like they should be (seriously? Ferox getting nerfed?) |
stoicfaux
326
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 19:28:00 -
[322] - Quote
Denidil wrote:Tippia: what would the result of a interial modifier increase be when combined with a mass decrease?
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Acceleration
If you increase inertia (I) by 5% and reduce mass (M) by 5%, you get a tiny improvement. (1.05 * .95 ) = .9975
Tinfoil. It should be at the top of everyone's food pyramid.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
1022
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 19:29:00 -
[323] - Quote
Denidil wrote:Tippia: what would the result of a interial modifier increase be when combined with a mass decrease? If they're completely balanced against each otherGǪ nothingGǪ initially.-¦
However, it would change how a fixed-number modifier to any of those stats given by a module (or skillGǪ although I don't think there is anyone that does) influences the ship as a whole and could therefore potentially shift what kinds of modules are beneficial to fit.
For instance, ye olde 1600mm tungsten plate adds a fixed amount of mass to your ship, thus making it less agile. If you do what you suggest GÇö increase inertia while decreasing mass GÇö that mass addition will suddenly be relatively larger than it was before. Instead of adding, say, 10% to your ships mass, the same single plate might now add 15%. This makes the plate option less attractive, while increasing the usefulness of trimark rigs (since they give a percentage increase, which is equally large no matter how much you fiddle with mass and inertia). Conversely, adding mass while reducing the inertia mod means that the mass addition from a plate becomes smaller, percent-wise, and thus has less effect on overall agility.
The same thing would be true for agility modules, but as far as I can recall, they all give percent-bonuses, so there's no GÇ£otherGÇ¥ option to choose between.
-¦ GǪand if they're not balanced against each other, then it's a matter of what the end product is: higher than before GåÆ less agile; lower than before GåÆ more agile. Beyond that, the question of how fixed-amount modifiers affect the whole thing is the same. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Denidil
The Graduates Morsus Mihi
112
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 19:38:00 -
[324] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Denidil wrote:Tippia: what would the result of a interial modifier increase be when combined with a mass decrease? http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/AccelerationIf you increase inertia (I) by 5% and reduce mass (M) by 5%, you get a tiny improvement. (1.05 * .95 ) = .9975
that's what i figured. raising the inertia modifier of blasterboats makes no sense to me, unless they then go and decrease the mass. Anyone who is blue to DRF are cowards and have failed Eve.
MM Bombers, Best Bombers |
Aineko Macx
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 19:44:00 -
[325] - Quote
Very interesting changes. I'm quite sure not all of it is balanced, but things are moving in the right direction. |
Yvan Ratamnim
Phoenix Evolved Part Duo
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 19:45:00 -
[326] - Quote
Borlag Crendraven wrote: It'll still be cheap considering that losing the faction equivalent has you gaining pretty much nothing in insurance, whereas you get nearly everything back when losing a regular t1 ship, regardless of the tier. The initial cost doesn't make much difference if it's replaced simply by buying new modules which is what you can pretty much do here.
You do realize faction ships arent supposed to be better than t2 right? (recons) ... faction are supposed to be between t1 and t2... hence the fact they require like 0 skills |
Ur235
Mind Games. 0ccupational Hazzard
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 20:09:00 -
[327] - Quote
Damn if this is true then im so happy I maxed out all my Gallente gunnery and spaceship skills all those years ago |
Borlag Crendraven
EVE University Ivy League
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 20:14:00 -
[328] - Quote
Yvan Ratamnim wrote:Borlag Crendraven wrote: It'll still be cheap considering that losing the faction equivalent has you gaining pretty much nothing in insurance, whereas you get nearly everything back when losing a regular t1 ship, regardless of the tier. The initial cost doesn't make much difference if it's replaced simply by buying new modules which is what you can pretty much do here.
You do realize faction ships arent supposed to be better than t2 right? (recons) ... faction are supposed to be between t1 and t2... hence the fact they require like 0 skills
Of course, but the discussion was about the price, which is what I commented on. On t1 ships the initial price of a would be gank boat is insignificant when you get pretty much everything back automagically. |
Frothgar
V0LTA VOLTA Corp
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 20:21:00 -
[329] - Quote
I'm really encouraged when looking at the initial concept of the Tier 3 BCs. The bane of ships for a long time has always been the Bigger = Better approach within the tier systems. You really can't argue with the notion that Tier 1 BCs are among the least used ships in the game.
I really hope CCP sticks to the flavor we're seeing in the current Tier 3 BCs in that they have some advantages over the Tier 2 ships (Range, Speed), but also some serious disadvantages (Tracking, Effective HP)
They look genuinely GOOD so far.
Higher Tier shouldn't just be a cookie cutter More fitting, More EHP, more damage over the previous tier. There should really be radically different roles as you go along.
So yeah, really happy, really encouraged by what I'm seeing so far. Just please stay with this inspired bit of brilliance. Last thing anyone wants is to have these ships simply bigger better versious of Tier 2 BCs, thatl just kill all the others dynamics. You saw what introducing Tier 2 BCs did to Both Tier 1 and Command ships.
|
mkint
202
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 20:28:00 -
[330] - Quote
Frothgar wrote:I'm really encouraged when looking at the initial concept of the Tier 3 BCs. The bane of ships for a long time has always been the Bigger = Better approach within the tier systems. You really can't argue with the notion that Tier 1 BCs are among the least used ships in the game.
I really hope CCP sticks to the flavor we're seeing in the current Tier 3 BCs in that they have some advantages over the Tier 2 ships (Range, Speed), but also some serious disadvantages (Tracking, Effective HP)
They look genuinely GOOD so far.
Higher Tier shouldn't just be a cookie cutter More fitting, More EHP, more damage over the previous tier. There should really be radically different roles as you go along.
So yeah, really happy, really encouraged by what I'm seeing so far. Just please stay with this inspired bit of brilliance. Last thing anyone wants is to have these ships simply bigger better versious of Tier 2 BCs, thatl just kill all the others dynamics. You saw what introducing Tier 2 BCs did to Both Tier 1 and Command ships.
Um... so instead they are releasing bigger better versions of the tier 1 BC's? Buh bye Brutix. Was nice knowing you. |
|
DarkAegix
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
168
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 20:30:00 -
[331] - Quote
Atron agility: 2.92 => 3.066 Celestis agility: 0.565 => 0.59325 Intertia =/= agility Notice how the Celestis (A cruiser) has a lower base "agility" when compared to the Atron. Is more agility better? Is agility of Gallente ships being buffed?
|
Frothgar
V0LTA VOLTA Corp
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 20:35:00 -
[332] - Quote
mkint wrote:Frothgar wrote:I'm really encouraged when looking at the initial concept of the Tier 3 BCs. The bane of ships for a long time has always been the Bigger = Better approach within the tier systems. You really can't argue with the notion that Tier 1 BCs are among the least used ships in the game.
I really hope CCP sticks to the flavor we're seeing in the current Tier 3 BCs in that they have some advantages over the Tier 2 ships (Range, Speed), but also some serious disadvantages (Tracking, Effective HP)
They look genuinely GOOD so far.
Higher Tier shouldn't just be a cookie cutter More fitting, More EHP, more damage over the previous tier. There should really be radically different roles as you go along.
So yeah, really happy, really encouraged by what I'm seeing so far. Just please stay with this inspired bit of brilliance. Last thing anyone wants is to have these ships simply bigger better versious of Tier 2 BCs, thatl just kill all the others dynamics. You saw what introducing Tier 2 BCs did to Both Tier 1 and Command ships.
Um... so instead they are releasing bigger better versions of the tier 1 BC's? Buh bye Brutix. Was nice knowing you.
Go play with Pyfa a bit. The gallente one does similar damage albeit at better range and with 25% of the tracking of a gank fit brutix. It also has almost the same EHP as a plate gank Brutix. I agree the Tier 1 BCs bring nothing to the table compared to the Tier2 ones, they really need a role.
The Tier3 stats have some serious advantages and disadvantages over the Tier2 counterpars. (1/2 to 2/3 of the tank, 20% of the tracking, better range, and speed)
Its a major step in the right direction, but they shouldn't stop there.
|
stoicfaux
326
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 20:37:00 -
[333] - Quote
Denidil wrote:Tippia: what would the result of a interial modifier increase be when combined with a mass decrease?
Acceleration formula: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Acceleration
Brutix agility: 0.704 => 0.7392 maxVelocity: 145.0 => 155.0 At Skills 0, according to pyfa, assuming I haven't pooched the extrapolations: Brutix: 21.5 seconds to reach 90% velocity (130.5m/s). New Brutix: 18.1 seconds to reach 130.5m/s (which is 84% of max velocity)
At Skills V: Brutix: 14.5 seconds to reach 90% velocity (162.9m/s) New Brutix: 12.2 seconds to reach 162.9 m/s (which is 84% of max velocity)
Skills V + 100 MWD II Brutix: 69.2 seconds to reach 90% velocity (2581.2m/s) New Brutix: 58.2 seconds to reach 2581.2 m/s (84% of max velocity)
edit: Skills V + 10 MWD II Brutix: 20.0 seconds to reach 90% (or 1000.8m/s) New Brutix: 16.8 to reach 1000.8m/s (or 84%)
Tinfoil. It should be at the top of everyone's food pyramid.
|
mkint
202
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 20:38:00 -
[334] - Quote
DarkAegix wrote: Atron agility: 2.92 => 3.066 Celestis agility: 0.565 => 0.59325 Intertia =/= agility Notice how the Celestis (A cruiser) has a lower base "agility" when compared to the Atron. Is more agility better? Is agility of Gallente ships being buffed?
That's what's not clear. In most places "inertia" and "agility" are used interchangeably. In those cases, lower is better, the math of which can be seen elsewhere in this thread (actual maneuverability uses agility and mass.) And checking on TQ for the atron: "INERTIA MODIFIER 2.92 x". So yes, in this data dump, it looks like most gallente ships are getting nerfed. Plus many others. I really really really freakin' hope this is wrong. Every last bit of feedback from players was that they need agility to be BUFFED, not NERFED. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 20:44:00 -
[335] - Quote
mkint wrote:Um... so instead they are releasing bigger better versions of the tier 1 BC's? Not really, different weapons sizes and the drawbacks from that as well as potentially cost might leave tier 1 BC's unaffected. Besides tier 1's are mostly obsoleted by the tier 2's as is. I'd be more concerned about their effect on the tier 2 BC's. There is one notable exception.
mkint wrote:Buh bye Brutix. Was nice knowing you. Agreed. With a 10% web bonus/lvl, I'd imagine there would be little the Brutix is used for that the Talos can't do better.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
1024
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 20:51:00 -
[336] - Quote
******* idiotic forum software
DarkAegix wrote: Atron agility: 2.92 => 3.066 Celestis agility: 0.565 => 0.59325 Intertia =/= agility Notice how the Celestis (A cruiser) has a lower base "agility" when compared to the Atron. Is more agility better? Is agility of Gallente ships being buffed? AgainGǪ
What the data dump calls agility is actually called Inertia Modifier in the item database. Cf. Atron: Inertia Modifier 2.92 and Celestis: Inertia Modifier 0.565.
You want the inertia modifier to be as low as possible, since it's multiplied together with the ship's mass to give the final agility (or inertia score, or whatever you want to call it). Lower is better. So why does the GÇ£hello, I move like a cowGÇ¥ Celestis have a lower (presumably better) imod than the nippy little Atron? Because the Celestis has a mass that is an order of magnitude larger.
Atron: Inertia Mod 2.92 +ù Mass 1,164,000 kg GåÆ 3,398,880 GÇ£inertia scoreGÇ¥. Celestis: Inertia Mod 0.565 +ù Mass 12,070,000 kg GåÆ 6,819,550 GÇ£inertia scoreGÇ¥.
Again, lower is better, so the Atron is about twice as agile as the Celestis. The new stats mean that both ships have their inertia mods (and, as a result, their inertia scores) increased by 5 percent. This makes them ~4.8 percent less agile than they are right now.
As stoicfaux shows above, though, the time to a specific speed is indeed lower, but that is due to the increased speed counteracting this agility nerf GÇö it would have been even quicker without the agility change. Agility nerf + speed buff = faster straight-line speed, worse align and orbit speed. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Zagam
Incompertus INC Fatal Ascension
209
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 21:00:00 -
[337] - Quote
I'm not an expert on Gallente ships (by any means), but for comparisons between tier 1/2/3 ships, lets take a look at Minmatar BS.
Typhoon - Tier 1. Incredible tank, mixed weapon platform, moderate DPS, slow. (PvE focused) Tempest - Tier 2. Moderate tank, mixed weapon platform, focus on guns, good DPS, moderately agile. (PvP or PvE) Maelstrom - Tier 3. Good tank, gun-focused platform, great DPS, slow. (PvP or PvE)
Each has their own role, but each tier gives an incremental improvement in DPS and skill requirements.
With Minmatar BC, it looks to break down like this:
Cyclone - Tier 1. Moderate-to-good (active) tank, mixed weapon platform, moderate DPS, slow-ish. (PvE) Hurricane - Tier 2. Moderate-to-poor (undefined) tank, gun focused platform, good DPS, moderate speed. (PvE or PvP) Tornado - Tier 3. Poor to terribad tank, gun-focused platform, great DPS, fast speed. (PvP)
They look to be following in appropriate footsteps. |
Zagam
Incompertus INC Fatal Ascension
209
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 21:02:00 -
[338] - Quote
Tippia wrote:******* idiotic forum software DarkAegix wrote: Atron agility: 2.92 => 3.066 Celestis agility: 0.565 => 0.59325 Intertia =/= agility Notice how the Celestis (A cruiser) has a lower base "agility" when compared to the Atron. Is more agility better? Is agility of Gallente ships being buffed? AgainGǪ What the data dump calls agility is actually called Inertia Modifier in the item database. Cf. Atron: Inertia Modifier 2.92 and Celestis: Inertia Modifier 0.565. You want the inertia modifier to be as low as possible, since it's multiplied together with the ship's mass to give the final agility (or inertia score, or whatever you want to call it). Lower is better. So why does the GÇ£hello, I move like a cowGÇ¥ Celestis have a lower (presumably better) imod than the nippy little Atron? Because the Celestis has a mass that is an order of magnitude larger. Atron: Inertia Mod 2.92 +ù Mass 1,164,000 kg GåÆ 3,398,880 GÇ£inertia scoreGÇ¥. Celestis: Inertia Mod 0.565 +ù Mass 12,070,000 kg GåÆ 6,819,550 GÇ£inertia scoreGÇ¥. Again, lower is better, so the Atron is about twice as agile as the Celestis. The new stats mean that both ships have their inertia mods (and, as a result, their inertia scores) increased by 5 percent. This makes them ~4.8 percent less agile than they are right now. As stoicfaux shows above, though, the time to a specific speed is indeed lower, but that is due to the increased speed counteracting this agility nerf GÇö it would have been even quicker without the agility change. Agility nerf + speed buff = faster straight-line speed, worse align and orbit speed. Maybe that is exactly CCP's intent. Much of the complaints about blaster boats is their slow speed to close into blaster range. These changes help to resolve that, along with the tracking, but also ensures that they don't become OP by nerfing their align and orbit time.
|
stoicfaux
326
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 21:03:00 -
[339] - Quote
Tippia wrote:As stoicfaux shows above, though, the time to a specific speed is indeed lower, but that is due to the increased speed counteracting this agility nerf GÇö it would have been even quicker without the agility change. Agility nerf + speed buff = faster straight-line speed, worse align and orbit speed. Speed is a big factor. So in case you all missed my 2nd edit in my previous numbers post, and for those of you worried about obsoleting the Brutix, let me be clear:
At Skills 0, according to pyfa, assuming I haven't pooched the extrapolations: Brutix: 21.5 seconds to reach 90% velocity (130.5m/s). New Brutix: 18.1 seconds to reach 130.5m/s (which is 84% of max velocity) Talos: ** 6.5 ** seconds to reach 130.5m/s (62% of max velocity)
The slightly more massive Talos's base agility (.56) and speed (210m/s) versus the Brutix's base agility (.704) and speed (145m/s) might need to be tweaked somewhat.
Tinfoil. It should be at the top of everyone's food pyramid.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
1024
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 21:05:00 -
[340] - Quote
Zagam wrote:Maybe that is exactly CCP's intent. Much of the complaints about blaster boats is their slow speed to close into blaster range. These changes help to resolve that, along with the tracking, but also ensures that they don't become OP by nerfing their align and orbit time. Yup. It should also let them coast for a bit longer if when they get webbed and scrammed, since that higher inertia makes them harder to stop quickly.
GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 21:09:00 -
[341] - Quote
Zagam wrote:I'm not an expert on Gallente ships (by any means), but for comparisons between tier 1/2/3 ships, lets take a look at Minmatar BS.
Typhoon - Tier 1. Incredible tank, mixed weapon platform, moderate DPS, slow. (PvE focused) Tempest - Tier 2. Moderate tank, mixed weapon platform, focus on guns, good DPS, moderately agile. (PvP or PvE) Maelstrom - Tier 3. Good tank, gun-focused platform, great DPS, slow. (PvP or PvE)
Each has their own role, but each tier gives an incremental improvement in DPS and skill requirements.
With Minmatar BC, it looks to break down like this:
Cyclone - Tier 1. Moderate-to-good (active) tank, mixed weapon platform, moderate DPS, slow-ish. (PvE) Hurricane - Tier 2. Moderate-to-poor (undefined) tank, gun focused platform, good DPS, moderate speed. (PvE or PvP) Tornado - Tier 3. Poor to terribad tank, gun-focused platform, great DPS, fast speed. (PvP)
They look to be following in appropriate footsteps.
If we're talking T1 nonfaction, how can you consider the typhoon slow? Isn't it one of the fastest nonfaction T1 BS's if not THE fastest? Same for the Tempest, which I think is actually slower and less agile than the Typhoon so far as base stats are concerned. I'll leave comments on it's PvP capacity to others with more experience.
Edit: If I recall a torp fit Typhoon has good potential DPS and can field a decent tank at the same time, wouldn't really relegate it to PvE focused. |
Zagam
Incompertus INC Fatal Ascension
209
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 21:12:00 -
[342] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Zagam wrote:I'm not an expert on Gallente ships (by any means), but for comparisons between tier 1/2/3 ships, lets take a look at Minmatar BS.
Typhoon - Tier 1. Incredible tank, mixed weapon platform, moderate DPS, slow. (PvE focused) Tempest - Tier 2. Moderate tank, mixed weapon platform, focus on guns, good DPS, moderately agile. (PvP or PvE) Maelstrom - Tier 3. Good tank, gun-focused platform, great DPS, slow. (PvP or PvE)
Each has their own role, but each tier gives an incremental improvement in DPS and skill requirements.
With Minmatar BC, it looks to break down like this:
Cyclone - Tier 1. Moderate-to-good (active) tank, mixed weapon platform, moderate DPS, slow-ish. (PvE) Hurricane - Tier 2. Moderate-to-poor (undefined) tank, gun focused platform, good DPS, moderate speed. (PvE or PvP) Tornado - Tier 3. Poor to terribad tank, gun-focused platform, great DPS, fast speed. (PvP)
They look to be following in appropriate footsteps. If we're talking T1 nonfaction, how can you consider the typhoon slow? Isn't it one of the fastest nonfaction T1 BS's if not THE fastest? Same for the Tempest, which I think is actually slower and less agile than the Typhoon so far as base stats are concerned. I'll leave comments on it's PvP capacity to others with more experience. The typhoon is also almost always armor-tanked, which adds to its mass and inertia, while the Tempest is usually shield-tanked.
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 21:27:00 -
[343] - Quote
Zagam wrote: The typhoon is also almost always armor-tanked, which adds to its mass and inertia, while the Tempest is usually shield-tanked.
Decent skills can make it quite quick even when armor tanked, though yes, it's not as fast a a shield tempest, also it's gankfit capacity should not be ignored. My point being that calling it a slow PvE focused ship seems far from correct. |
Thelron
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 21:44:00 -
[344] - Quote
Seen a bit of, "Blasters need more range to be viable in fleets." Serious question: why can't the blaster-boats warp in on top of the bulk of the enemy fleet, either by starting the fight well "behind" their own fleet so they can do a warp-to when the fight starts, or by starting the fight somewhere else entirely so they can do a warp-to on a group of "something fast and able to live just long enough" ships when the fight starts? I'm assuming its mostly lag (i.e. should be mitigated on the technical end rather than becoming a balancing factor) but is that an accurate assumption?
Granted that doesn't address the damage-vs-tracking-vs-ACs stuff, but it at least would give the blaster ships the ability to drop into the fight near their effective range and thus actually have a place in fleets (since their warp-to would presumably be right next to some high-value targets that weren't expecing to have their faces melted).
I'm guessing whatever reasons people have for not liking to do that are also what are keeping torpedo ships sidelined as well, and if it's mainly down to flaws in the technology or mechanics wouldn't it be best to first see if these can be fixed (and may be with stuff like TiDi)? |
Crazy KSK
Tsunami Cartel Dark Solar Empire
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 22:49:00 -
[345] - Quote
Thelron wrote:Seen a bit of, "Blasters need more range to be viable in fleets." Serious question: why can't the blaster-boats warp in on top of the bulk of the enemy fleet, either by starting the fight well "behind" their own fleet so they can do a warp-to when the fight starts, or by starting the fight somewhere else entirely so they can do a warp-to on a group of "something fast and able to live just long enough" ships when the fight starts? I'm assuming its mostly lag (i.e. should be mitigated on the technical end rather than becoming a balancing factor) but is that an accurate assumption?
Granted that doesn't address the damage-vs-tracking-vs-ACs stuff, but it at least would give the blaster ships the ability to drop into the fight near their effective range and thus actually have a place in fleets (since their warp-to would presumably be right next to some high-value targets that weren't expecing to have their faces melted).
I'm guessing whatever reasons people have for not liking to do that are also what are keeping torpedo ships sidelined as well, and if it's mainly down to flaws in the technology or mechanics wouldn't it be best to first see if these can be fixed (and may be with stuff like TiDi)?
the problem in big fleet fight is just that you can't fit 100 ships on one spot resulting in blaster boats having to always traverse some space before being able to apply damage and of curse the enemy fleet wants to increase that by moving away at the same time a longer range fleet can be hitting for some damage the entire time the blaster ships are catching up eventually this results in the ship being long dead before having dealt any damage |
Manssell
OmiHyperMultiNationalDrunksConglomerate
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 23:24:00 -
[346] - Quote
Hmmmm. I could have sworn I read a few Dev blogs about assault ship bonuses, yet I didn't see any in the list? |
Demon View
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 01:58:00 -
[347] - Quote
Thelron wrote:Seen a bit of, "Blasters need more range to be viable in fleets." Serious question: why can't the blaster-boats warp in on top of the bulk of the enemy fleet,
No matter what you do, the longer-range fleet has Rock advantage. |
Tinilla
EVE University Ivy League
35
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 03:37:00 -
[348] - Quote
Buffage to the Gal logi boat rocks my socks! |
Shaalira D'arc
Quantum Cats Syndicate
254
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 05:43:00 -
[349] - Quote
I'm posting just so I can say I was here. |
Onictus
Legendary Knights Vorpal's Edge
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 06:00:00 -
[350] - Quote
Thelron wrote:Seen a bit of, "Blasters need more range to be viable in fleets." Serious question: why can't the blaster-boats warp in on top of the bulk of the enemy fleet, either by starting the fight well "behind" their own fleet so they can do a warp-to when the fight starts, or by starting the fight somewhere else entirely so they can do a warp-to on a group of "something fast and able to live just long enough" ships when the fight starts? I'm assuming its mostly lag (i.e. should be mitigated on the technical end rather than becoming a balancing factor) but is that an accurate assumption?
Granted that doesn't address the damage-vs-tracking-vs-ACs stuff, but it at least would give the blaster ships the ability to drop into the fight near their effective range and thus actually have a place in fleets (since their warp-to would presumably be right next to some high-value targets that weren't expecing to have their faces melted).
I'm guessing whatever reasons people have for not liking to do that are also what are keeping torpedo ships sidelined as well, and if it's mainly down to flaws in the technology or mechanics wouldn't it be best to first see if these can be fixed (and may be with stuff like TiDi)?
Blasters are never going to be large fleet fare......the range just isn't there.
Even in small gang which is their "thing" you basically warp to 0 on the tackler, now if that tackler is say a interdiction boosted ceptor, he is likely 30km out to start with, and the target is still burning full speed, you may land 50-60km out. Warp to 0 is 0 from when you initiate warp, not where they are when you land.
So even if you DO get a good warp in with your blaster Brutix of doom (I fly them regularly) the guy you land on is already going full speed, you are stopped, so they may or may not be inside your 10km engagement range by the time you target them, get moving and start to apply pew.
This is a little better with large blasters that have about a 20km range with shortrange ammo, but you still have to break and chase down the next target EVERY single time. Its just the nature of the beast.
So making the ships a little faster may help in small gangs (which I'm fine with) but you still aren't going to see a lot of fleet operation.
I may (finally) fit a railgun on a PvP boat though, its been a LONG while since that happened above a frigate.
|
|
Planktal
Kenshao Industries Galactic Acqisition Specialists
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 07:09:00 -
[351] - Quote
Wasn't it 10 blaster fit Thorax that kicked BoB's butt in the alliance tournament several years ago? Here sanity, nice sanity.....*THWOOK*Got the bastard |
DarkAegix
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
169
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 10:35:00 -
[352] - Quote
To train for T2 small hybrids and up, or T2 large autocannons? Hmmm.... |
Shadowsword
The Rough Riders Ares Protectiva
43
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 10:44:00 -
[353] - Quote
Planktal wrote:Wasn't it 10 blaster fit Thorax that kicked BoB's butt in the alliance tournament several years ago?
That tournament had a set of rules that don't apply in standard pvp. |
Ann133566
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 11:24:00 -
[354] - Quote
Daredevil is going to be an intersting ship..... |
TR4D3R4LT
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 14:33:00 -
[355] - Quote
Onictus wrote:Blasters are never going to be large fleet fare......the range just isn't there.
Even in small gang which is their "thing" you basically warp to 0 on the tackler, now if that tackler is say a interdiction boosted ceptor, he is likely 30km out to start with, and the target is still burning full speed, you may land 50-60km out. Warp to 0 is 0 from when you initiate warp, not where they are when you land.
So even if you DO get a good warp in with your blaster Brutix of doom (I fly them regularly) the guy you land on is already going full speed, you are stopped, so they may or may not be inside your 10km engagement range by the time you target them, get moving and start to apply pew.
This is a little better with large blasters that have about a 20km range with shortrange ammo, but you still have to break and chase down the next target EVERY single time. Its just the nature of the beast.
So making the ships a little faster may help in small gangs (which I'm fine with) but you still aren't going to see a lot of fleet operation.
I may (finally) fit a railgun on a PvP boat though, its been a LONG while since that happened above a frigate.
This man nails the head. No matter how nice "I was there" eve video looks, it takes complete stupidity out of opposing side to not kite blaster fits. Blasters shine on gate, bait, whatever else games where your target is not going anywhere, trouble is all other weapon systems shine there too, blasters just finish the job tad quicker. If CCP actually looked at things that are in game, name race ewar drones (not ecm, they're fine altho pain in the behind) but painting, neuting and webbing ones. Perhaps realize they dont work well ever since ewar was nerfed to have stacking penalty. So 5x light web drones of webs *less* then one mid slot mod. Same for painting drones, ever since cap was boosted overall neuting drones are useless too. Now if we had situation where gallente boats, who have big drone bays actually could use said drones to something else then damage. I dont know, perhaps webbing, which in turn slows things down possibly up and beyond 50 km away? But noo, dont fix ewar drones, try to forget they exist as possible way to "even score" and instead fiddle around with ship speeds.
Instead of ship speed boost and balance agi nerf, perhaps add gallente ships have unique property, the web drone ewar from the ships deployed web drones doesnt have stacking penalty? Blimey! Now the buggers can perhaps catch something out of web range and mwd to blaster range while target has to make call, either destroy the drones in hopes of escaping OR keep applying dps on incoming blaster boat in hope to nuke him before. Do the same for minmatar for target painting goodness(as if they needed it.) Boost amarr neut drones a bit so they actually make impact in numbers fewer then 50?
Sure sure, perhaps peeps will just warp away with suddenly provided web-sling but hey, imho that's better then losing your blaster ship to out of blaster range kiting guy.
It's not rocket science to balance the game and it's scenarios if you actually use things already IN-game and just fix them from the state last nerf xyz (in case of ewar drones, ewar [mainly damp] nerf) caused. That was 2007 btw... |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 15:48:00 -
[356] - Quote
Are autocannons or HAMs used in large fleet warfare?
Use rails in fleet warfare. Since I'm not the fleet warfare expert, is the proposed 10% buff in dps (plus the easing of fitting requirements)enough to allow Gallente hulls back into fleets? |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 16:13:00 -
[357] - Quote
[quote=TR4D3R4LT][quote=Onictus]stuffquote]
This is the problem, damp/disrupt/web should be more useful for gallente ships, forcing the opponent into close range.
|
Yvan Ratamnim
Phoenix Evolved Part Duo
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 16:14:00 -
[358] - Quote
TR4D3R4LT wrote:
Instead of ship speed boost and balance agi nerf, perhaps add gallente ships have unique property, the web drone ewar from the ships deployed web drones doesnt have stacking penalty? Blimey! Now the buggers can perhaps catch something out of web range and mwd to blaster range while target has to make call, either destroy the drones in hopes of escaping OR keep applying dps on incoming blaster boat in hope to nuke him before. Do the same for minmatar for target painting goodness(as if they needed it.) Boost amarr neut drones a bit so they actually make impact in numbers fewer then 50?
Sure sure, perhaps peeps will just warp away with suddenly provided web-sling but hey, imho that's better then losing your blaster ship to out of blaster range kiting guy.
DEVS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ THAT... Web without stacking penalty would be an awesome thing for gallante |
Yvan Ratamnim
Phoenix Evolved Part Duo
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 16:17:00 -
[359] - Quote
CCP Spitfire wrote:pussnheels wrote:While i understand most of you are excited about those new changes would't it be prudent just to wait till the definite stats and other changes are in a dev blog , Othererwise alot of you will be very dissapointed when CCPdecides to change some numbers at the last moment This would be a very sensible approach, yes. We will be releasing more information on all those changes in the coming days or weeks before they arrive on the Singularity test server.
hehe buy you guys arent as fast as sisi cache leaks lol...
Atleast with these leaks and this thread i hope the devs are watching to see what pre-release complaints are creaping up and adjust accordingly before they hit SISI...
CCP has changed, perhaps they will head caution from the playerbase in cases like this, from the people who fly these ships daily. |
Sunviking
Mushroom inc
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 18:37:00 -
[360] - Quote
Hmmmm
I am Caldari, and Railguns may be getting a 10% Alpha boost.
Should I bother training Hybrids when the expansion is released, or should I just stick with Missiles?
10.4million SP in Missiles, next to nothing in Gunnery exept for Advanced Weapon Upgrades...
The Agony of Choice. |
|
Crazy KSK
Tsunami Cartel Dark Solar Empire
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.27 23:57:00 -
[361] - Quote
Sunviking wrote:Hmmmm
I am Caldari, and Railguns may be getting a 10% Alpha boost.
Should I bother training Hybrids when the expansion is released, or should I just stick with Missiles?
10.4million SP in Missiles, next to nothing in Gunnery exept for Advanced Weapon Upgrades...
The Agony of Choice.
short : stick to missiles
long: if they would boost rails to a point where they could compete with missiles they would need to boost all other long range guns as well
since HMs still do 462dps at 73, 250rails on a ferox only do 198 with recent leak data
even with antimatter which gives the 250s 342dps their still 100dps lower and don't have the ability to switch damage types |
Onictus
Legendary Knights Vorpal's Edge
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 00:29:00 -
[362] - Quote
Crazy KSK wrote:Sunviking wrote:Hmmmm
I am Caldari, and Railguns may be getting a 10% Alpha boost.
Should I bother training Hybrids when the expansion is released, or should I just stick with Missiles?
10.4million SP in Missiles, next to nothing in Gunnery exept for Advanced Weapon Upgrades...
The Agony of Choice. short : stick to missiles long: if they would boost rails to a point where they could compete with missiles they would need to boost all other long range guns as well since HMs still do 462dps at 73, 250rails on a ferox only do 198 with recent leak data even with antimatter which gives the 250s 342dps their still 100dps lower and don't have the ability to switch damage types
Agreed, blasters are almost there, rails need another 10% (at least) and an additional ROF bonus to be worthy |
Zarnak Wulf
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 02:55:00 -
[363] - Quote
Caldari rail boats were always gimped on fittings. You can now fit the largest tier rails and a buffer with only one fitting mod. The eagle and harpy, with their damage bonuses, look more appealing. Rail's range advantage comes into play at the small and medium size level. The new catalyst will be sexy too. 660ish salvos every 2.78 seconds at 22km or 278ish salvoes at 70km. |
leviticus ander
FMOFMC
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 02:08:00 -
[364] - Quote
I see people with the released data in PyFA. how do I get it? |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: [one page] |