EVE Search - Sticky:[Odyssey 1.1] Dominix bonus change

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Odyssey 1.1] Dominix bonus change

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 5 post(s)

CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 2121	Posted - 2013.08.08 11:43:00 - [1] - Quote We are going to put a small change in for 1.1: Dominix's drone tracking and optimal range bonus lowered from 10% per level to 7.5% per level. This brings the bonus in line with all other damage application bonuses we give, such as turret tracking bonuses or missile explosion velocity/radius bonuses. The Dominix hasn't been oppressively powerful but it is extremely strong and there is no need for the over-allocation with regards to this bonus. In case some of you think this is a reaction to the way the Domi performed in the alliance tournament, I can tell you that we will never make balance decisions based on that environment. The tournament certainly highlighted the strengths of sentry drones and damps, which are both powerful on TQ as well, but it removed many of their drawbacks and so it is not an effective way to assess balance or power in normal EVE.

Marc McIntyre Crendraven The Knights of Retribution 4	Posted - 2013.08.08 11:47:00 - [2] - Quote first post!!! seems like a good idea.
Anharat Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance 1	Posted - 2013.08.08 11:47:00 - [3] - Quote >has nothing to do with the tournament >publishes the change right after the tournament seems legit
Omnathious Deninard Novis Initiis 1436	Posted - 2013.08.08 11:49:00 - [4] - Quote Harvey James will be pleased. Ideas for Drone ImprovementTwitter Account-á @Omnathious
mynnna GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1442	Posted - 2013.08.08 11:49:00 - [5] - Quote Anharat wrote: >has nothing to do with the tournament >publishes the change right after the tournament seems legit If I could place a bounty on you for this awful post, I would. Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
Roime Ten Thousand Years Shinjiketo 3248	Posted - 2013.08.08 11:51:00 - [6] - Quote Good change, it'll still own :) Ten Thousand Years is recruiting pioneer spirits to Solitude.
Veshta Yoshida PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 756	Posted - 2013.08.08 11:57:00 - [7] - Quote mynnna wrote: Anharat wrote: >has nothing to do with the tournament >publishes the change right after the tournament seems legit If I could place a bounty on you for this awful post, I would. Gotta admit it is a little suspect, not as if people didn't question the wisdom of the 10% bonus prior to implementation. He is however probably telling the truth when he says the tourny was not the deciding factor, but there is no way it was not a contributing factor. Main thing is likely the FC assigned sentries from blobs in null that I hear is all the rage and has spawned Goddess knows how many threads to date.
Hannott Thanos Notorious Legion 657	Posted - 2013.08.08 11:57:00 - [8] - Quote Still pretty powerful, though I was thinking it was appropriate to differenciate between the Ishtar and the Domi on this bonus.
Blawrf McTaggart GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1609	Posted - 2013.08.08 12:01:00 - [9] - Quote what about drone assist mechanics?
Nagarythe Tinurandir Tormented of Destiny The Kadeshi 139	Posted - 2013.08.08 12:05:00 - [10] - Quote i knew dominix was too good to be true... means no more tracking of untackled frigs inside of ~15km doesn't it? ^^

Gorski Car ElitistOps Pandemic Legion 64	Posted - 2013.08.08 12:06:00 - [11] - Quote Drone assign mechanics are far more broken tbh.
Freighdee Katt Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 516	Posted - 2013.08.08 12:15:00 - [12] - Quote Not to worry. The complete overhaul of drones will square it all away. EvE is supposed to suck.-á Wait . . . what was the question?
Chi'Nane T'Kal Interminatus Aeterna Anima 133	Posted - 2013.08.08 12:17:00 - [13] - Quote Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: i knew dominix was too good to be true... means no more tracking of untackled frigs inside of ~15km doesn't it? ^^ Was 20km with the full bonus, so now it'll be more like 25-30.
MainTrain 7th Deepari Defence Armada Apocalypse Now. 0	Posted - 2013.08.08 12:23:00 - [14] - Quote Rise, you able to comment where, on the list of things to be rebalanced etc, drones currently sit
Hell Bitch Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2013.08.08 12:28:00 - [15] - Quote Good change and needed to happen. Domi with 10% optimal and tracking per level pushed the new ishtar into obsolescence before it's even left the hangar, increasing the ishtars bonus's (boni, i know) to compete results in omfg overpowered mega HAC.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative. 11183	Posted - 2013.08.08 12:31:00 - [16] - Quote Good change, unreservedly supported. 1 Kings 12:11
Cameron Zero Red Federation 202	Posted - 2013.08.08 12:32:00 - [17] - Quote mynnna wrote: Anharat wrote: >has nothing to do with the tournament >publishes the change right after the tournament seems legit If I could place a bounty on you for this awful post, I would. You CAN place a bounty on them. Sad you can't put a detail as to why, though. (Y'all are on the CSM, "fix it!") Also, I thought Goons were the kings of tinfoil hattery, or is that just everyone else? "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. GÇª"
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative. 11183	Posted - 2013.08.08 12:32:00 - [18] - Quote Hell * wrote: bonus's (boni, i know) NO! The plural of bonus is bonuses Anyone who tells you otherwise is an uneducated pretentious idiot. 1 Kings 12:11
Gypsio III Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 833	Posted - 2013.08.08 12:33:00 - [19] - Quote Very sensible, and good to see that recently-rebalanced ships can get reviewed a couple of months down the line.
Garviel Tarrant Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 1312	Posted - 2013.08.08 12:35:00 - [20] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: We are going to put a small change in for 1.1: Dominix's drone tracking and optimal range bonus lowered from 10% per level to 7.5% per level. This brings the bonus in line with all other damage application bonuses we give, such as turret tracking bonuses or missile explosion velocity/radius bonuses. The Dominix hasn't been oppressively powerful but it is extremely strong and there is no need for the over-allocation with regards to this bonus. In case some of you think this is a reaction to the way the Domi performed in the alliance tournament, I can tell you that we will never make balance decisions based on that environment. The tournament certainly highlighted the strengths of sentry drones and damps, which are both powerful on TQ as well, but it removed many of their drawbacks and so it is not an effective way to assess balance or power in normal EVE. How about also changing how omni's have rather ridiculous bonuses compared to gun tracking mods?, reduce the bonus and make them scripted. BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Hell Bitch Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2013.08.08 12:36:00 - [21] - Quote Malcanis wrote: Hell * wrote: bonus's (boni, i know) NO! The plural of bonus is bonuses Anyone who tells you otherwise is an uneducated pretentious idiot. I couldn't agree more, but this is the EVE forums, with more trolls than a Tolkien novel.
Akturous Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel 219	Posted - 2013.08.08 12:38:00 - [22] - Quote Of far more importance is to change the drone assist mechanics to a similar system as fighters, that's the problem with domi fleets, not 10%/lvl, though it's a wee bit excessive. Vote Item Heck One for CSM8
Smagd Encina Technologies Namtz' aar K'in 10	Posted - 2013.08.08 12:40:00 - [23] - Quote TBH fixing tracking will probably fix sentries, too. There's still the drone assist mechanic e. g. for large swarms of warriors II.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative. 11186	Posted - 2013.08.08 12:41:00 - [24] - Quote Cameron Zero wrote: mynnna wrote: Anharat wrote: >has nothing to do with the tournament >publishes the change right after the tournament seems legit If I could place a bounty on you for this awful post, I would. You CAN place a bounty on them. Sad you can't put a detail as to why, though. (Y'all are on the CSM, "fix it!") Also, I thought Goons were the kings of tinfoil hattery, or is that just everyone else? Mynnna is I think referring to the much requested, long awaited forum feature whereby you can bounty someone directly through the forum itself. 1 Kings 12:11
Veshta Yoshida PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 756	Posted - 2013.08.08 12:43:00 - [25] - Quote Malcanis wrote: Mynnna is I think referring to the much requested, long awaited forum feature whereby you can bounty someone directly through the forum itself. Heh My dream changes: - All eWar revised to use a base number (sensor strength, rename to electronics something) as a target, ie. same as current ECM functionality. Upon succeeding the effects are applied as normal. - ECCM changed to reducing twiddle time as well as doubling sensor strength towards that adversary for one cycle after having been successfully jammed (ie. a definitive end to perma jamming). - FW Implants keep their sensor strength boost (albeit a little lower than now) and will thus be the alpha/omega of eWar defense. - All eWar revised according to the highly successful ECM revamp so that mods themselves are weak'ish while racial hulls sport a massive bonus to their use. - TD's renamed to Targeting Disruption and allowed to affect missile explosion radius/speed dependent on script used (ie. not range, because that's silly .. how do you drain a missiles fuel from afar?) And the bit relevant to topic at hand: - Drones to use cap for weapons/propulsion thus making them neuting/void targets. Madly high recharge but low reservoirs (to avoid the obvious NOS exploit), enough to stop them for just 2-3 volleys worth if/when cap is alpha'ed - Drone flights are to be considered a ship borne weapon system (even when user might not want them to be), meaning that a flight of drones are treated as a single unit and susceptible to eWar on an equal footing with the drone carrier (ie. use the mothers stat). It is quite frankly insane that drone ships are effectively able to outsource their primary weapons with close to zero downsides in case of being eWar'ed. They keep the ability to scoop/launch to foil eWar like they do damage. - New skill (or attached to existing) that sets a limit to how many flight any one person can control, suggestion would be to use the skill Combat Drones (rank 2) and allow one or two flights per skill level. NB: Might also tie the limit to hull sizes so that a frig can handle just one outsourced flight and a BS can handle 5-10.
Sephira Galamore Inner Beard Society 161	Posted - 2013.08.08 12:43:00 - [26] - Quote Hell * wrote: Malcanis wrote: Hell * wrote: bonus's (boni, i know) NO! The plural of bonus is bonuses Anyone who tells you otherwise is an uneducated pretentious idiot. I couldn't agree more, but this is the EVE forums, with more trolls than a Tolkien novel. And I just realized we have _three_ valid plurals for bonus in German... Seems to be the general attitude lately, allowing more spellings to reduce mistakes -.-
Victor Rayl Hedion University Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2013.08.08 12:46:00 - [27] - Quote Can't say i'm against the change but I agree: the real problem are assist mechanics, or rather the inconsistency to the other weapon systems. The real solution would be to either disable the assistance command altogether or implement it for all weapons across the board. As the latter would benefit multiboxers too much for my taste AND would make fleet combat even more boring, I am in favor of the former, i.e. get rid of the assist command.
Akturous Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel 219	Posted - 2013.08.08 12:53:00 - [28] - Quote You don't have to get rid of it silly, you just limit it to assisting five drones to one person, like it should be and that's only if they don't have drones themselves, otherwise they're SOL. Vote Item Heck One for CSM8
Anharat Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance 1	Posted - 2013.08.08 12:53:00 - [29] - Quote Sephira Galamore wrote: Hell * wrote: Malcanis wrote: Hell * wrote: bonus's (boni, i know) NO! The plural of bonus is bonuses Anyone who tells you otherwise is an uneducated pretentious idiot. I couldn't agree more, but this is the EVE forums, with more trolls than a Tolkien novel. And I just realized we have _three_ valid plurals for bonus in German... Seems to be the general attitude lately, allowing more spellings to reduce mistakes -.- The only correct plural form for bonus, that doesn't make you look like an uncivilized barbarian, is boni.
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 568	Posted - 2013.08.08 12:56:00 - [30] - Quote So Dominix and Ishtar will have the exact same bonuses on their sentries and also have the same drone bay? That seems a little... weird. Shouldn't a battleship have a higher raw damage output? Not that I'm complaining... new Ishtar looks delicious. But as always, battleships get the short straw again. .



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.