| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 23 post(s) |

Boss McNab
Tactical Chaos Corp Infinity Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.29 19:07:00 -
[1] - Quote
Just a few things I noticed:
THE SACRILIGE: becuase you added the missle velocity bonus it seems like it will primarily do almost do the same job as a zealot but with selectable damge but at a lower DPS..
I still dont understand why you lowered its EHP...
wouldn`t it be better with some type of damage application bonus? explosion velocity or radius, 4%bonus to missle damage. i dunno.
The DEIMOS: Still seems a little behind the rest, with no way to actually apply its damge.
THE CERBERUS: though i dont like the bonus to kenetic damage i used its a tough one to work around, what about a 4% bonus to all missle damage types.
THE ISHTAR: WHY YOU NO ADD EXTRA LOW SLOT :( we are now forced to shield tank the ishatar and the GILA already does that soo well. THE BONUSes are a little odd as well.
LIKE these ships should all have their own little niche, |

Boss McNab
Tactical Chaos Corp Infinity Alliance
2
|
Posted - 2013.07.29 20:26:00 -
[2] - Quote
CCP RISE & CCP FOZZIE,
I hope we will being seeing a third round revision thread before you guys launch it. that is, unless you plan on having to balance them again in the next year or two. You should really take the time, listen to all the great forum feed back, and make a purpose for all these ships. Yes the CSM is great but you have hundreds of players giving you great feed back. Please use it, and listen to what the majority is telling you, even if you individually or a few CSM`s want to to something different. Please take into account you have a whole community of players that have put alot of work it to helping you build amazing T2 cruiser class as well.
I am very disappointed, and I feel that the forums ideas aren`t been looked into enough. Despite so many people not liking the ``one size fits all`` 50% reduction to MWD sig radius bonus, you have kept it. |

Boss McNab
Tactical Chaos Corp Infinity Alliance
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.29 21:34:00 -
[3] - Quote
Diesel47 wrote:Take the Cerb's drone bay and make it go away, in return have the 10% kin damage turn into All missile types damage.
Or make it 25m3 please.
15m3 dronebays shouldn't exist.
agreed |

Boss McNab
Tactical Chaos Corp Infinity Alliance
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.29 21:55:00 -
[4] - Quote
Lucien Cain wrote:Sarkelias Anophius wrote:CCP Rise: The Sacri slot layout is still a major problem in my eyes.
I am still of the opinion that removing a launcher, increasing the ROF or Damage bonus to compensate, and shifting a high to a low is the best solution. This will allow reasonable DPS, projected thanks to your changes, while retaining the utility high that makes the Sac such an awesome brawler.
I really think this would work perfectly. Remove a launcher, change damage bonus to 10%, ROF bonus to 7.5%, and we end up with the same base damage; switch a high to the low, resulting in a 5/4/6 slot layout, and BOOM, every single problem with this ship is solved.
This really, really needs to happen. F...ing THIS! Just do that and the discussion concerning the SAC will be over at last. Changing the Role Bonus into+ 25% Missile damage may work wonders aswell.
CCP RISE , CCP FOZZIE hope you had your note pads out for that amazing idea! he just did your job for you. |

Boss McNab
Tactical Chaos Corp
12
|
Posted - 2013.07.30 14:16:00 -
[5] - Quote
CCP RISE have you consider those changes to the sacrilige that had about 4 pages of people agreeing on?
did you see that.... |

Boss McNab
Tactical Chaos Corp
12
|
Posted - 2013.07.30 15:39:00 -
[6] - Quote
Lucien Cain wrote:Sarkelias Anophius wrote:CCP Rise: The Sacri slot layout is still a major problem in my eyes.
I am still of the opinion that removing a launcher, increasing the ROF or Damage bonus to compensate, and shifting a high to a low is the best solution. This will allow reasonable DPS, projected thanks to your changes, while retaining the utility high that makes the Sac such an awesome brawler.
I really think this would work perfectly. Remove a launcher, change damage bonus to 10%, ROF bonus to 7.5%, and we end up with the same base damage; switch a high to the low, resulting in a 5/4/6 slot layout, and BOOM, every single problem with this ship is solved.
This really, really needs to happen. F...ing THIS! Just do that and the discussion concerning the SAC will be over at last. Changing the Role Bonus into+ 25% Missile damage may work wonders aswell.
Just reposting this to make surre CCP RISE saw this |

Boss McNab
Tactical Chaos Corp
13
|
Posted - 2013.07.30 16:19:00 -
[7] - Quote
I'm Down wrote:CCP Rise wrote:Hi all
Wanted to post and let you know I haven't disappeared or something, just had to go home and sleep and stuff.
I've been reading all of this and will continue to do so. I would not expect any changes at the scale of this last iteration, maybe some small tweaks after a few more days of feedback at the most.
We are a little concerned that some overpowered configurations might be popular following these changes, but I know many of you are still worried they aren't powerful enough. I'll keep reading for now and if we decide to make any changes you will be the first to know.
Thanks! Called it... god forbid you listen to reason.
I will translate the following:
Quote:I've been reading all of this and will continue to do so. I would not expect any changes at the scale of this last iteration, maybe some small tweaks after a few more days of feedback at the most.
I have read the forum and you guys are really wasting your time since I was planning on making the changes that I wanted to make anyways and not listen to you 100 pages of post. Please feel free to continue posting so I can ignore them yet again in a few days.
|

Boss McNab
Tactical Chaos Corp
16
|
Posted - 2013.07.30 18:59:00 -
[8] - Quote
Michael J Caboose wrote:Sarkelias Anophius wrote:Sarkelias Anophius wrote:CCP Rise: The Sacri slot layout is still a major problem in my eyes.
I am still of the opinion that removing a launcher, increasing the ROF or Damage bonus to compensate, and shifting a high to a low is the best solution. This will allow reasonable DPS, projected thanks to your changes, while retaining the utility high that makes the Sac such an awesome brawler.
I really think this would work perfectly. Remove a launcher, change damage bonus to 10%, ROF bonus to 7.5%, and we end up with the same base damage; switch a high to the low, resulting in a 5/4/6 slot layout, and BOOM, every single problem with this ship is solved.
This really, really needs to happen. Self-quoting bump because folks seem to like this idea and dear CCP Rise should read it and comment on it, because it's a perfectly balanced solution to a questionable ship. QFT. The poor sac is outclassed by the cerb in almost every way. And the muninn. Maybe make it an AC version of the Zealot? IDK, right now, it's just terrible.
so guys do we just keep reposting this idea until they do it? who wants to take first shift on making sure its getting reposted?
|

Boss McNab
Tactical Chaos Corp
16
|
Posted - 2013.07.30 19:38:00 -
[9] - Quote
Kane Fenris wrote:Baali Tekitsu wrote:Stupid Idea: EvE is lacking a dedicated Cyno boat. Have them a second role bonus "500% to HP while cynosural field generator is active". This would make them pretty unique and give them a special role. last time i checked covert recon ships were pretty much dedicated cyno ships
and HIC`s are pretty much perfect, they lock the target down, have huge amount of tank, and light a cyno |

Boss McNab
Tactical Chaos Corp
16
|
Posted - 2013.07.30 19:39:00 -
[10] - Quote
ElQuirko wrote:Why... why is the Ishtar packing over 200 less PG than the Vexor navy issue...?
Because CCP RISE and CCP FOZZIE thats why |

Boss McNab
Tactical Chaos Corp Evil Things Inc.
18
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 19:03:00 -
[11] - Quote
Soo is CCP RISE MIA, it`s been over 500post from plays, alot good feed back and ideas and it seems he has had nothing to say? |

Boss McNab
Tactical Chaos Corp Evil Things Inc.
21
|
Posted - 2013.08.06 21:51:00 -
[12] - Quote
I'm Down wrote:First, to comment on your pro/con post about page 79... it's about 5 to 1 ratio of negative post to positive on this thread, and actually worse now than in early pages. Secondly, you can't post about player support post when none of them can even tell you why other than.... "oh hacs are slightly better than before" Third, you have still not received any positive support for the sacrilege, and honestly, it has absolutely no role that the zealot could not fill better/easier if dedicated to that cause besides a different weapon system. Forth, you have not addressed cost concerns one bit when players have openly pointed out that the price point of hacs in no way accounts for their non-unique role, reduced efficiency at task compared to other ships, and other glaring flaws. You have yet to give hac's a role.... and there is no sense of balance within even the ship class itself. There are some obvious winners and losers in the bunch.... for a class that's alerady underperforming as a whole, what does that say about the losers within the class. ========================= Then there is the MWD role bonus for hacs has been bashed to **** and back, but you refuse to budge on it. Next to nobody has supported it, but you blindly continue to see it as a good thing... even when the predominant use of hacs doesn't even suggest using a MWD ever, if often. ========================= Last and most important: Fun factor: Without a role, these ships have completely lost out on the most obvious point of a rebalance... FUN. There is just nothing unique to these ships to make them worth flying. Player's have been screaming at you for creativity, but you refuse to offer up any. What kind of smug obnoxious ass do you have to be to completely ignore what your paycheck players have been asking you for. Nobody has asked for you to make them OP, just different in some way. But no, you refuse to even try. Thanks for nothing.
Agree`d. CCP Rise I know your working hard, but please. give it one more go, give us a round 3 to the balance and youll be loved... |
| |
|