Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
Vulfen
Snuff Box Urine Alliance
25
|
Posted - 2013.08.28 10:39:00 -
[61] - Quote
Thanks for you work CCP devs
I believe 90% of you work on this is great, the other 5% only time will tell and 5% is poor, so overall you guys have done a good job, you just might have to end up revisiting some of these changes in the near future.
I.e that 6th mid for the NH, and the terrible bonuses on the Slephnir. |
|
CCP Eterne
C C P C C P Alliance
2735
|
Posted - 2013.08.28 10:57:00 -
[62] - Quote
I have deleted some ranting and trolling from this thread. EVE Online/DUST 514 Community Representative GÇ+ EVE Illuminati GÇ+ Fiction Adept
@CCP_Eterne GÇ+ @EVE_LiveEvents |
|
Gabriel Karade
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
117
|
Posted - 2013.08.28 11:11:00 -
[63] - Quote
Heh, for the first time in 9 years I might actually decide to fly a HAC
Gallente MkII: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1227770 War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293 |
Webzy Phoenix
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.28 11:54:00 -
[64] - Quote
Mostly excellent... Kudos to all
I believe that overall the changes are good and will be a positive for the game. Of course I do disagree with a few of the changes, and I feel a great opportunity was missed in some areas; but I suppose that is to be expected with a job of this magnitude, as most people will have mixed feelings about one thing or another.
My personal focus has been on waiting for the T3 cruiser revamp. I love the idea of the Strategic Cruiser, but I honestly believe they were seriously borked from the beginning... one "God-mode", two "meh", and one TURD. Unfortunately, I trained up for the TURD and have been hoping for a fix for a long, long time.
When will my Legion not suck? |
Antihrist Pripravnik
Paravan Korporacija
82
|
Posted - 2013.08.28 12:33:00 -
[65] - Quote
I have one advice for both CCP and players:
For the love of everything that is soft and cuddly, DO NOT shoot the Hoarder... it's full of ammo!!!
Now, when that's out of the way - cool devblog with some long expected (and overdue) changes. CCP Ytterbium: Yarrblblbgrlblbgrlblblblbblbgrlblblbgrblblyarrrrdrooooooolonthekeyboardlikealunatic |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1372
|
Posted - 2013.08.28 15:37:00 -
[66] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Vyktor Abyss wrote:Not happy about many of the changes and feedback given in those threads.
All ignored, like many other valid posters - glad to see CCP still working as intended. Just because one doesn't agree with every single person's suggestion doesn't mean feedback is being ignored. We take everything posted into consideration. At the end of the day, our jobs are do what's best for the game using our best judgement, and often that means differing from what some specific players want.
Should just listen to me damn it
I'm always right, even when i'm not <.< BYDI recruitment closed-ish |
Oxylan
QRDELESH - Mutual Admiration Society
53
|
Posted - 2013.08.28 17:19:00 -
[67] - Quote
Great stuf CCP, we all love space ships more love for ships better EVE for everyone, cant wait for using command ships again.
Also all other changes like redesign industrals and other ships, pure awesome.
Thank you If it bleed we can kill it. |
Akimo Heth
State War Academy Caldari State
37
|
Posted - 2013.08.28 20:33:00 -
[68] - Quote
Vyktor Abyss wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Vyktor Abyss wrote:Not happy about many of the changes and feedback given in those threads.
All ignored, like many other valid posters - glad to see CCP still working as intended. Just because one doesn't agree with every single person's suggestion doesn't mean feedback is being ignored. We take everything posted into consideration. At the end of the day, our jobs are do what's best for the game using our best judgement, and often that means differing from what some specific players want. Not having a dig at you personally, just from my perspective after writing pages and pages of feedback it looks like you post a set of changes with your minds completely made up. It is very rare you actually alter your position, which is either you being supremely confident of your changes or just being stubborn - for you sake I hope its the former. I won't personally bother posting regarding changes in future anyway. It doesn't feel like a good use of time.
Couldn't agree more. It seems CCP only changes their mind in the face of an uproar (see Gallenta BS, HACs, Industrial changes) versus reasoned arguments made as genuine feedback by a few dedicated player in those threads. Its unfortunate that even a great suggestion made by a single or few players gets little in the way of a meaningful response unless a threadnought is created (see NOS change thread which received little to no attention but contains several good suggestions and feedback). |
Snape Dieboldmotor
Perkone Caldari State
19
|
Posted - 2013.08.28 21:32:00 -
[69] - Quote
We appreciate your hard work on these changes. Thanks. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Polarized.
960
|
Posted - 2013.08.28 22:27:00 -
[70] - Quote
It's great that ships and modules are getting rebalanced to help bring more variety to the game but personally, eve isn't getting any more exciting/enjoyable.
I really wish the avatar basted gameplay project would get restarted...
Putting work in since 2010. |
|
Stay Thirsty
The Chosen Children
7
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 02:58:00 -
[71] - Quote
Are the skill name / category changes included? I did not see them listed, although I understand the blog was primarily about rebalance. |
Crellion
Parental Control
44
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 11:18:00 -
[72] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Vyktor Abyss wrote:Not happy about many of the changes and feedback given in those threads.
All ignored, like many other valid posters - glad to see CCP still working as intended. Just because one doesn't agree with every single person's suggestion doesn't mean feedback is being ignored. We take everything posted into consideration. At the end of the day, our jobs are do what's best for the game using our best judgement, and often that means differing from what some specific players want.
There was a post with a fair number of likes on the 2nd HAC thread about why the 3 drones are mistakengly given to the Cerberus when they should obviously be given to the Eagle instead (given their roles and profile and specifically the inability of the Eagle's main weapon to hit small targets up close and the ability of the Cerbs main weapon to do the same at all ranges).
No dev comment in there. Could we have one here? |
Sparkus Volundar
Applied Creations The Fendahlian Collective
62
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 11:26:00 -
[73] - Quote
Thanks for the hard work.
Nighthawk still needs a 6th mid though. Since that's been mentioned a few time, I will try to put some numbers to it in case that helps/provides a fresh angle.
I like missiles as much as the next man but the fleet RR tanking comparison between the NH and the Vulture is painful.
The Vulture also has a resist bonus, 96% of the NH's base shield HP and a 6th mid for more tank.
Full T2 resists are very nice and it helps that the NH has recieved them but when you effectively drop a tank slot to get a T2 resist bonus (missile Drake/commandship Vulture, 6 mids vs. missile NH, 5 mids), they don't give as much advantage.
Comparison 1 - without gang links or many modules: - NH with 5 mids, 2 rigs and a DC. - Vulture with 6 mids, 2 rigs, a DC and an EM hardener in the 6th mid. - Drake pretending to be a NH (T2 therm hardener and T1 kinetic rig in the extra slots the NH lost).
Drake 30-75-71-65 resists 193 DPS omni-tanked per meta 4 large RR
Nighthawk 30-86-79-65 resists 219 DPS omni-tanked per meta 4 large RR (14% more than Drake)
Vulture 69-86-79-65 resists 302 DPS omni-tanked per meta 4 large RR (57% more than Drake)
14% is a bad increase for the NH since if the Drake was unfitted, it would be +45%. Add one E-War mod and a strong tank and things improve for the NH due to stacking penalties but it's still not great compared to a Vulture as seen below.
Comparison 2 - rebalanced gang links and stronger tanks: - Flat resists and minimal stacking penalties aimed for. - All ships have a DC and each leave space for 1 E-War/utility module.
Drake (Invul II, EM Hardner II, Therm Hardner II, T1 EM rig and T1 Kin rig) 81-84-82-81 resists 575 DPS omni-tanked per meta 4 large RR
Nighthawk (Invul II, EM Hardner II, T2 EM rig) 82-92-89-81 resists 745 DPS omni-tanked per meta 4 large RR (30% more than Drake)
Vulture (Invul II, EM Hardner II, EM Hardner II, T1 Exp rig) 87-92-89-85 resists 870 DPS omni-tanked per meta 4 large RR (51% more than Drake)
Obviously the NH will do more damage than a Drake plus have a few other advantages but in a fight with RR, it's only getting about 60% of the advantage of its T2 resists due to having one less mid slot.
Thanks for taking the time to consider this post.
Regards, Sparks . |
Nabiah
Biohazard. WINMATAR.
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 12:18:00 -
[74] - Quote
so 4 mid slots where you we are meant to use a shield repper that will only give us a limited survivability. We realy want to loose that Vagabond dont we ? |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
381
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 12:36:00 -
[75] - Quote
I am glad things are finally starting to progress in the right direction - who knows I might actually start playing again when the Strategic Cruisers have been properly balanced... Tier 3 Battlecruisers, T3 ships and blobbing made it very frustrating to keep playing.
I actually started writing a long document of things as I saw it before stopping to play. It does involve my view on T3 ships and capitals together with a few frustrations on other ships.
Here is the link (for devs and people who is looking for inspiration):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1c3c1s7WWEU9Dx_EysFgcrrZnoorpPxCNelS9zY9yM3g/edit?usp=sharing
Anyway keep up the good work with Eve - I believe a huge buff on active tanking and long range weaponry has been necesary for a long time... Now you just have to adjust the game environment to suit players in small groups wanting to use active repairs (more entries to lowsec, stronger sentry guns and bigger systems w/ more belts and bigger rewards for people)
Pinky Denmark |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1172
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 14:19:00 -
[76] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Jerick Ludhowe wrote:Deimos (6.2/s cap) Absolution (4.5/s cap along will all other command ships lol?) Please explain, Extremely strong capacitor regen is part of the package of intended strengths for the HAC class. When we give one class a certain strength we don't generally change every other class to give them the same strength. The pattern of ships sharing a class and role (for example Attack frigates, or disruption cruisers) having the same peak cap regen but significantly differing cap pool sizes with exceptions as needed has also been in use for well over a year and we're quite happy with it overall. The fact that people are somehow "discovering" it now amuses me greatly :)
Please follow the same logic and scrap command sub from T3's, those are cruiser hulls, CS are Battlecruisers.
Command ships require a huge amount of time to get them, get them all it's just masochism, this command sub is not at it's place at all and T3's could be given another important role for all playing styles in the spec cruiser class. I don't care loosing 3D training for an ubber cloack dictor a la Sabre, this would be a fantastic tool for solo small entities to disrupt easier larger groups and step on their territory toes, an effective harassment tool able to fit cover ops cloak that's it.
Thx for not reading *removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
SkupojHren
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 14:35:00 -
[77] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Little known fact: Miley Cyrus' hit song "We Can't Stop" was entirely based upon the story of CCP's balance team.
Our deepest apologies.
we can`t stop destroying eve? |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
4550
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 16:21:00 -
[78] - Quote
Again, huge swaths of formerly sub par ships will again see main stream use.
Well done.
I'm sure there will be a 2nd pass made to tweak a few things here and there, as there should be, but the base direction looks pretty sound considering current and future game mechanics.
I am very much looking forward to gang bonuses being handled differently. I know that the current system works as it does to keep server load to a minimum, but a sensible system that takes the bulleye off of specific command ships (or spreads the load around a lot) will be most welcome. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Balanah
Quebec's Underdog League Quebec United Legions
23
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 20:55:00 -
[79] - Quote
Again after this patch, Amarr ships will be more cap dependant than ever. Poor Zealot, not enough tracking and cap thanks to the MWD. _______________ Wormhole animal. |
Vorll Minaaran
Centre Of Attention Middle of Nowhere
16
|
Posted - 2013.08.31 00:03:00 -
[80] - Quote
Dont know where to put, but this topic seems the most suitable for this typo in the patch notes:
VULTURE:
Role Bonus: Can fit up to three Warfare Link modules.
Caldari Battlecruiser Bonuses:
4% bonus to all Shield Resistances 1. 0% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret optimal range.
|
|
TravelBuoy
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
95
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 16:01:00 -
[81] - Quote
Capqu wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:When are you nerfing links? i suggest you go look at the link thread a little closer friend
I suggest u just open your eyes and u will see the link nerfs.
|
Mioelnir
Cataclysm Enterprises Easily Offended
105
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 23:40:00 -
[82] - Quote
I really like that we now have a dedicated linkship for dualtanked fleets..... now all we need is a new link variety that only gives a bonus if you have short and long range weapons of at least two different types and sizes fitted. |
Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
479
|
Posted - 2013.09.02 21:00:00 -
[83] - Quote
seems like the low slot ECCM mods have been sneakily rebalanced without any mention ... just noticed it in patch notes any word on this CCP? Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Guy en Gravonere
Gravonere Industries
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.02 22:54:00 -
[84] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Vyktor Abyss wrote:Not happy about many of the changes and feedback given in those threads.
All ignored, like many other valid posters - glad to see CCP still working as intended. Just because one doesn't agree with every single person's suggestion doesn't mean feedback is being ignored. We take everything posted into consideration. At the end of the day, our jobs are do what's best for the game using our best judgement, and often that means differing from what some specific players want.
When I read some of the posts the rebalancing team has to deal with I'm reminded of an old commercial about herding cats that I believe was originally aired during a superbowl.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_MaJDK3VNE |
arria Auscent
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
107
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 10:11:00 -
[85] - Quote
and now the bestower beats the itty5 for hauling always liked it more |
Gabber359
Infinite Point Nulli Secunda
21
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 16:14:00 -
[86] - Quote
Minor tweaks to the commodity haulers (that would be nice, please):
-Unable to drag and drop from POCO straight to Commodity Cargo bay (Epithal, either remove the tiddly cargo bay or make the default drag/drop action straight into the other Bay. Quite annoying when picking up cargo and you don't want to have to actually open the bay. Makes the Cargo Icon next to the center HUD kinda pointless in this regard)
-Unable to Jettison from Commodity Bay This makes working from a POS tedious. Before you could warp to a pos --> jettison. Now it's warp to a pos --> Move a tiddly amount of PI from Bay to Cargo --> Jettison --> Open Can --> Manually move from Bay to Can
The only thing I fear, is running out of beer ! |
Kusum Fawn
State War Academy Caldari State
352
|
Posted - 2013.09.07 00:02:00 -
[87] - Quote
Biggest problem with all the ship erbalancing is lack of focus on role and use, No one builds ships to do " umm... whatever" they are built to fill some need.
Define the role and then define the ship. Also define the race that is building said ship, and make sure that it makes sense within the races direction, Amarrian ships should have better capacitor, Gallente ships should have more drone bay, ETC.
Even within the grand scope of all the individual manufacturers there should be some thought as to the identity of that brand. It is ok for every race to have the same number of ships, and every class to have the same number of ships, they just should all be different enough to have specific roles. within their racial catagory Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
|
SpacePhenix
KnownUnknown
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.12 12:49:00 -
[88] - Quote
Ill try to do this politely.... Bare with me if i seam unpolite... Course im furius....
Are CCP really trying to destroy EVE... The last couple of updates has compleetly destryed the game for me ... In the last couple of months i se old players leave EVE for good.. And i am serusly thinkin about doing so myself...
Stupid update nr 1... Balangsing production Bluprints by adding extra materials... I mean WHAT!!! So now i cant produce my T1 blueprints ships with any cind of profit.... I mean the productiuon profit before the update was low inugh... like 10% profit... now its - 20 to -50% profit... Is that the point of your update...for what reson? making ore compression less possible... Congrat ... your sucedeed on destroing the profit of T1 high sec producers...
Stupid update nr 2... Adding extra moon goo materials to T2 production.... Well congrats you made T2 production to be a 0.0 corp with the right moons enterprise only.... Bying the extra advanced moon go makes T2 production not profitable for a small producer... And by small i mean a producer with out his own moon harvesting pos.... To get one join a bigger 0.0 corp witch also means you wont get the moon go with out bying it from corp unless go got really good conections and can get the right roles without gettting ******... In other words impossible for a small producer or a relative new player...
Stupid update nr 3... Nerfing the comand ship T3 ships and warefare link ships...And making them unactive inside the pos...Are you cidding me....!!!! First of all if your makin boooster ships unusable well give me my one year + of skill training back the command ships are crusers and do NOT have inugh hitpoints the be active in a combat situation and highslots are preseved for links not guns ore lauchers= its not an active combat ship... Second.... if you cant use the booster inside the pos for the beneft of having it in safty... Then it should be A LOT easyer to get a pos in high sec....My point is... if your making it easy for a pvp player, you should also at the same time make it just as easy to be a non pvp player... As it is with production today the skills needed for doing production is mutch steeper than being a pvp player.... That means if you want to be a producer you have to inclaculate the risk of loose in combat situations.... Course the skills for doing production is focuced on that - not doing combat skills...
CCP stop making the game prittyer and more benefitable for the big 0.0 corps And start fixing the game insted...Not desroying it...... I understand that the 0.0 corps risk a lot and i do understand that they have to make money to be able to have ships nedded for the big war fights.... But should the non pvp players pay for theyr fights... I mean if its not playable for a non pvp player (profitabe) he will stop playing a long time before he gets to join a 0.0 corp and get into the big fights... There are so mutch more nedded to be done than adding "lines in space"... The pos production for example... - Adding 1 inventing job at the time .... Stupid!!! if there +¡s the same jobs beeing installed make it possible to install all of them in one go..as many as that chars skills/ and free slots will allow... - Canseled jobs at pos ..The timer on that canseled slot will not reset .. The solution you have given me is to unancor the module and ancoring it again... Meaning that all the jobs at the same moduele gets canseled ... This is NOT a sulution of that problem... Wardecs in High - Wardec a unactive corp to get to shoot the unactive pos down to get a pos spot.. To painfull and takes to long time....Sugestion if a pos is unactive in lets say 14 days a timer starts and a corp mail is sent that means that they need to active use theyr pos with in a time frame for exs 1 week or else another corp can either hack the pos, salvage the pos or something else to claim the spot... Why there are to many unactive poses in high sec.. Having a pos spot for sale is fine but the corp that has it should be more active by doing so ... It also needs to be safer transaction between byer and seller with the selling moon spot option...in my upinion it shouldnt be posible to have an ancored unactive pos for more than 24 ours... - Wardecing a high sec corp is WAAAAAY to easy and WAAAAAY to cheep.... A pvp corp that wants to wardec a high sec non pvp corp that does not have the skills for pvping but for production .... Must have a very very good reson to do so... meeening if a corp wants to wardec somone in high that wardecing corp must have lost at least 10 ships from the specifik corp they want to wardec... And 50 mill is way to cheep... 500 mill is more appropriate... Why .... becourse getting a high sec pos is way to hard compared ... and haveing a high sec producing corp is skilled different...+ your desroying that production corp income for a week....
It seams to me like your making changes course there is some 0.0 coprs that cryes the loudest... CCP you should be more active in the game try to play it a bit (with out using codes) for example... skill a tree moth old charr and try to ean inugh isk to have a fully fitted Faction Battle Ship...run it trugh some suspisius ganking systems ...and when you loose it make inugh isk again to buy a new one...(without codes).. Try to play it like new players have to play it...(3 month old) Fly to Jita and take a good look in lokal.... Is that what you designed the game for... cheeters...??
BTW any comment on this from any other than CCP will be ifnored ..so dont bother answering... |
Rented
Hunter Heavy Industries
112
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 03:48:00 -
[89] - Quote
Holy wall of crying Batman! |
SpacePhenix
KnownUnknown
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.27 12:00:00 -
[90] - Quote
CCP are you going to contact me.... u are destroying the game STOP it.!!! |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |