| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
   |
Posted - 2011.11.30 13:35:00 -
[1] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:
* Active tanking vs passive tanking. And by extension, armor tanking vs shield tanking.
I hope you won't just buff active tanking to the level which will dumb down small-scale PvP ever further, but rather address passive tank and current EHP stupidity instead, will you?
Passive tank needs more penalties and/or less EHP values.
You'll surely need to revise your Dominion changes to arties as well. I do hope this side-task won't prevent you from reaching your goal 
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 14:20:00 -
[2] - Quote
Increasing repair rates is exactly what they should avoid at all costs.
Since 2006 there's already way too much tank around and this got even worse after introduction of rigs. Generic damage output increased by about 15% (faction ammo) while tank has received massive boosts - several straight HP boosts in 2006 (x2...x3, depending on ship class) plus introduction of current rigs, which promote tank over anything else.
Shooting at stuff and seeing it repping back or slowly losing few pixels of lifebar is not only dull and stupid, but also promotes blobs since it's virtually impossible to kill anything before reinforcements arrive or the situation changes in some other way.
As I said above, address EHP instead.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 15:40:00 -
[3] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:
Giving every active tank a boost in hitpoints generated while changing crystal implants to something else will give EVERYBODY an equal oportunity to have a viable active tank without riscing their implants has multiple benefits : 1,5b isk spent on implants will no longer give people the same advantage as now, people might use active tanks out of empire/lowsec without fearing loss of implants to bubbles and people will no longer be forced into faction equipment just to be competible with T2 buffer tanks.
That's slaves which need to be turned into armour-rep bonus implants. Don't fix something which isn't broken. Crystals don't affect capital mods and thus are fine.
What you propose is just silly. Why exactly EVE should drop its fundamental rule risk vs. reward and promote those unwilling to risk their implants? Carebears are already very safe while flying within their endless blobs with gazillion logistic ships on stand-by. There's no need in dragging everyone down to that level.
Enough of this communism. People are NOT equal just like human races are NOT equal etc. And there's no need in this artificial equalizing you propose.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 20:01:00 -
[4] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:risc vs reward is a nice legacy, however so is the concept of diminishing returns and currently crystal sets will give the rich people a huge advantage. Also because it is a valuable asset plugged into your clone most people given this option will only use them in parts of Eve where they have a little risc of losing them...
Making slaves work as crystals will solve very few issues compared to fixing it the other way around. Maybe crystals shouldn't be changed to work like slaves, but for sure slaves should never be changed to work like crystals.
Pinky
There's already a concept of diminishing returns in place there since LG Crystals cost a fraction of HG ones and provide half the bonus.
It's a total heresy to believe Slaves boosting EHP by nearly 50% are OK while Crystals which provide 52% increase for repairing rate are OP.
By your logic we should get rid of ALL pirate sets altogether along with the removal of faction ships. Only these measures can make everyone equal.
Edit: Off topic part removed, CCP Phantom
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 10:22:00 -
[5] - Quote
25km? Seriously? And how much will it make when bonused and pimped out? 50? I don't see how this is realistic.
As for the risk of being webbed by gallente boats, it's already there. Just don't be stupid and don't stand still - pilot your damn ship instead.
I don't deny some stuff needs tweaking (shield rigs and extenders need to have speed penalties intead of foolish signature ones), but asking for such a long web is just way too much.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 12:22:00 -
[6] - Quote
That's why I say shield overtanking should be penalized as much as armour overtanking - i.e. making your ship slower. In this case typical Cane losts some of its appeal.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 13:55:00 -
[7] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:That's why I say shield overtanking should be penalized as much as armour overtanking - i.e. making your ship slower. In this case typical Cane losts some of its appeal. yeah make caldari even more slower --> they will start move backward ^^ hopefully faster than matar :D
Even slower? Have you flown amarr actually? 
There's nothing wrong with making buffer-tanked Caldari and Matari slower. Matari will still be ahead of any other race while Caldari will stand on pair with Amarr in this regard. Gallente - somewhere in between Matari and the other two.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 17:18:00 -
[8] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:25km? Seriously? And how much will it make when bonused and pimped out? 50? I don't see how this is realistic.. I'm saying this would wind up being the max range with say battleship 5. The bonus would only apply to certain ships like the Megathron and the Bruitx.
25 km with free tech2 modules? What I'm saying is: throw in some isk and gang-bonuses and you'll end up with insanity of 50 km webs.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 18:01:00 -
[9] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:Tara Read wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:25km? Seriously? And how much will it make when bonused and pimped out? 50? I don't see how this is realistic.. I'm saying this would wind up being the max range with say battleship 5. The bonus would only apply to certain ships like the Megathron and the Bruitx. 25 km with free tech2 modules? What I'm saying is: throw in some isk and gang-bonuses and you'll end up with insanity of 50 km webs. Insanity? You still have to reach your target in an armor plated battleship that does 900 M/S genius from 50 KM away.... Need I spell out the total stupidity in trying to use that approach?
You're talking about some mythical 1 vs 1 situations. In reality such a Megathrone becomes a mandatory webbing ship in each and every gang.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 05:45:00 -
[10] - Quote
Julius Foederatus wrote:As far as CCP goes, they need to either wake up to this reality and end their love affair with minmatar, or they will never accomplish their stated goal of balancing hybrids and hybrid ships.
And as far as killing kiting setups, no ****, that's the whole point. Kiting is way too easy in this game, especially if you're Minmatar.
Seems like you, too, are taking about 1 vs 1 theory. If it's N vs X, then kiting is the most challenging and interesting aspect of the whole EVE gameplay. It really IS the aspect differentiating pr0's from b00n rabble.
That's like saying that PvP in EVE is all about locking someone, pressing guns and hitting orbit button - n00bs often tell us that on forums, but they hardly ever achieve anything with that kind of attitude.
Once again, I'm not saying Gallente should or shouldn't become the fastest race (in terms of linear speed), but those implying that your ship should have some unique stopping or catching power just cause you're shortest range guy... are just trolling. That's like me saying I should have most damage because I have least tank  Or that my Abso should be ECM immune cause it - unlike NH - lacks fof missiles. Nonsense. It doesn't work that way.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 12:09:00 -
[11] - Quote
The thing is:
- range of heavy missiles is way too good (cut it down to 40 km)
- TEs provide way too big falloff bonus (15% seems reasonable)
- passive shield tank mods should slow you down just like passive armour ones
After getting the stuff above sorted out, we may start looking at speed values and/or consider giving blasterboats something unique, like web resistance bonus (surely not 100% one - total immunity is proven as stupid at supercaps).
But it's crucial to follow the order. Trying to 'fix' gallente straight ahead is counter-productive.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.03 19:15:00 -
[12] - Quote
Julius Foederatus wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:Seems like you, too, are taking about 1 vs 1 theory. If it's N vs X, then kiting is the most challenging and interesting aspect of the whole EVE gameplay. It really IS the aspect differentiating pr0's from b00n rabble. That's like saying that PvP in EVE is all about locking someone, pressing guns and hitting orbit button - n00bs often tell us that on forums, but they hardly ever achieve anything with that kind of attitude. Once again, I'm not saying Gallente should or shouldn't become the fastest race (in terms of linear speed), but those implying that your ship should have some unique stopping or catching power just cause you're shortest range guy... are just trolling. That's like me saying I should have most damage because I have least tank Or that my Abso should be ECM immune cause it - unlike NH - lacks fof missiles. Nonsense. It doesn't work that way. Perhaps I should clarify, I wasn't commenting on the difficulty of the actual tactic of kiting, although it is frankly not as skillful as you're making it out to be. The FC says align somewhere, you keep your speed up, and overheat if you need to, warping out if any nasties get close and hit the primary.
That's a total BS. A FC tells you how to pilot your ship??? LOL?
Kiting is something being done on your own! And no, just keeping a formation within a blob at a certain distance from the other blob is in no way called kiting. At least that's surely not something I for one would call kiting and put here as the most challenging game area.
Julius Foederatus wrote:It requires a lot less skill than the tactics needed to counter nano gangs.
First of all, nano is dead. Kiting is not the same as nano. Only morons can call a ship doing 1300 m/s a nano one.
I'm not sure what you imply by countering nano (kiting), but flying immobile brick requires next to no skill at all. Been there, done that - check my abaddon movies dating back to 2008.
Julius Foederatus wrote:What I was trying to get at is that there are no real disadvantages for a kiting fit on your ship. You have pretty good EHP, the best speed, and decent damage all in one package. The close range ship does not have this benefit of not having to choose between speed, tank, or dps. If someone wants to kite, they need to have to make some kind of significant sacrifice on their ship fit, probably to tank but maybe to dps.
Are you kidding? A kiting ship sacrifices a crapload of stuff:
- a stopping ability of close-range brawlers
- DPS
- tank
- often range as well
The exact values depend on setup, but saying "there are no real disadvantages for a kiting fit on your ship" is just another BS. Have you actually flown anything non brick-like?
Julius Foederatus wrote:And if it doesn't work that way, how is a ship with the shortest range ever going to apply damage on its own?
Yet again, I'm not against making Gallente the fastest race, but the main issue is to allow kiting ships retain some chances against them. If it takes you way too long to get in range, then you must die in a fire and in no way Gallente boats could use some magic web-range bonuses, which will just grant them ability to get in range easily no matter what. Kiting ships don't have any granted ability to kill the opponents they engange, there's a constant struggle - unless, of course, you're one of those 'lock-f1-f8-orbit' guys.
As I already stated above, the very discussion is based on the fact that several game aspects are FUBAR.
- shield rigs and shield extenders don't slow you down. LOL? They should!
- heavy missiles shoot up to 80 km which given their DPS is pretty OP
- TEs grant +30% falloff, which is clearly way too much.
There's just too much range in the game atm. Or it's way too easy to gain it.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.03 19:39:00 -
[13] - Quote
Whoever told you I fly in blobs? No need to use ueuphemisms like 'gang' or 'fleet doctrine'. Blob is a blob and that's it.
And - if you do enjoy flying there - who the hell told you blasters should be usable there 
No need in bringing in OP ships like Cane or Drake. They are that popular for a reason.
Skipping OP ships and getting back to constructive discussion, I can tell you that my Nighthawk - a perfect kiting sample - is already next to useless against megapulses. It has literally no tank.
I don't care about megapulses while flying, say, a Sleipnir. They don't track well enough at close range and I can tank them anyway.
You failed to get my message. Just fix shield-tank, heavy missiles, TE's etc. and all of a sudden Winmatar will barely retain a small window they can decently operate in. And Drakes won't be able to spam missiles from 80 km.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.03 20:22:00 -
[14] - Quote
Julius Foederatus wrote:
What does your Nighthawk do against blaster ships? We're not talking about megapulses here, we're talking about hybrids. Rails don't have the dps or utility to deal with kiting set ups, blasters don't have the range or the actual ability to apply dps against hulls that are almost always faster than your own.
It's all about paper, rock and scissors.
Rails outdamage beams since Crucible, btw. Use them if you think they'll suit you better than blast0rs. I for one have already designed a pretty good Astarte setup with rails. Absolution doesn't come close.
Getting back to topic, I've got to repeat once again - you seem to be missing the fact blasters are of no use only because of it being so easy to outrange them, thanks to TEs and great basic range of heavy missiles. And also the fact that Gallente ships tend to be outrun by shield-tanked ones only because of shield-tank not slowing you down. Address these issues and the range difference will get shortened by about 2/3 and speed difference by at least half.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.04 11:46:00 -
[15] - Quote
Adding speed penalties to shield tank rigs (and extenders) is better than removing those from armour ones. Why? Because it will promote active tank.
So it would look like the following.
passive tank: slow, huge EHP, cap independant, easy to fit, boring
active tank: fast, small EHP, cap dependant, hard to fit, fun
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 06:40:00 -
[16] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote: Med railguns themselves are in need of a lot more dmg modifier, tracking now it's not bad. Ammo short range is really short (get rid of penalties!) and long range poor dmg.
That's a total BS. Railguns already outdamage beams while consuming almost no cap and being extremely easy to fit. And on top of that having superior range.
Heavy Beam Laser II: 3.6 dmg mode / 6.00 = 0.6
250mm Railgun II: 3.63 dmg mode / 6.38 rof = 0.569
Now add a typical pair of bonuses (cap consumption vs damage one) and you'll see that there's no point in using beams whatsoever.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 14:13:00 -
[17] - Quote
How about you starting comparing apples to apples and providing valid info?
It's pretty evident that a Zealot outdamages any other hac at his own optimal. All his bonuses are devoted to lasers and the ship's got no drones, no utility etc. It must outdamage everything in its class.
I'm pretty sure you've omitted drones of Deimos. Also - yeah, long-range sniping is dead, but still - what's the damage output of a Zealot at the distances Eagle is intended for? Muninn is a bit weird in its design.
Yet again, provide valid pairs for comparison.
abso: 535 DPS @ 15 and merely 490 @ 19
astarte: 535 @ 19 (and this ship has got x2.3 falloff in comparison)
apoc: 312 @163 (fleet setup dating back to 2008)
mega: 343 @168 (fleet setup dating back to 2008)
Figures imply 2 damage mods.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 17:40:00 -
[18] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:How about you starting comparing apples to apples and providing valid info?
It's pretty evident that a Zealot outdamages any other hac at his own optimal. All his bonuses are devoted to lasers and the ship's got no drones, no utility etc. It must outdamage everything in its class.
I'm pretty sure you've omitted drones of Deimos. Also - yeah, long-range sniping is dead, but still - what's the damage output of a Zealot at the distances Eagle is intended for? Muninn is a bit weird in its design.
Yet again, provide valid pairs for comparison.
abso: 535 DPS @ 15 and merely 490 @ 19
astarte: 535 @ 19 (and this ship has got x2.3 falloff in comparison)
apoc: 312 @163 (fleet setup dating back to 2008)
mega: 343 @168 (fleet setup dating back to 2008)
Figures imply 2 damage mods. I used the ships you chose to quote originally. If you now admit they disproved what you were trying to demonstrate why make the assertion in the first place? As for your latest attempts; Absolution 6 heavy beam II, 2 HS II; 465 dps @ 15+10 with multi, 310dps @ 54+10 with aurora Astarte 7 250mm Rail II, 2 MFS II; 482 dps@ 18+23 with antimatter, 321 dps @ 65+23 with spike The astarte gets 3.6% dps more for fitting an extra rail. If the guns were equivalent then it should gain an extra 16.7%. In other words, on this gallente ship, designed for doing damage, it is underperforming the equivalent laser platform by almost 13%, and to achieve equity has to use an extra slot. This could be seen as the Abso's extra low slot being used to fit a 3rd HS. Which makes the abso not only a better dps ship, but also still a superior tank. Your turn.
Stupid forums have evaporated my post. Anyway,
where does this 3.6% come from? Just dividing X by Y is invalid since these figures come with different ranges. As I said, start comparing something comparable.
490 DPS for abso at 19 km
555 DPS for astarte at the same range
13.2 % increment.
Dragging in extra low of Abso is invalid since it's there for a reason. Astarte has got an extra mid and extra 25m3 dronespace.
By all means, boost rails even further. After they fix current volley damage of arties it will make sense to use rails and nothing else.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 19:29:00 -
[19] - Quote
It's 'outperfomed' merely cause of ROF bonus, which inreases cap consumption by 33%. It's idiotic to ignore different bonuses Abso and Astate receive.
We can discuss any range up to 80 km or w/e. The thing is, you can not ignore range superioirty, otherwise let's pull out blasters and they say they're fine cause they deal a crapload of damage.
A straight comparison between rails and beams show that rails are already ahead. As I said, use a typical pair of bonuses - that is cap usage and damage ones. Wanna compare Brutix vs Prophecy?
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 20:05:00 -
[20] - Quote
What are you talking about? I've seen barely an attempt of comparing apples to oranges. You threw away drones the Deimos has at its disposal - unlike Zealot - and then claim Zealot to outdamage it by a huge margin? Nice trick.
Astarte vs Absolution - Astarte is already ahead damage vise even without its superior drones.
It makes no sense to ask for Gallente boats fitted with Rails to outdamage Amarr ones with Beams at short range and still leave them with greater dronebays, superior range and better cap stability.
What exactly are you asking for?
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 13:49:00 -
[21] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:We are here and we are reading your feedback.
We will be iterating on our balancing efforts based on the feedback in this and other threads and will release some more balancing in early 2012.
I'm willing to suggest you stop iterating on hybrids for a while to address other issues - cynoes, passive tank (too good for 0 isk investement), rigs and so on. Oh, and fix tracking enhancers already.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 13:38:00 -
[22] - Quote
You can not 'have it done' without addressing core issues. And if one keeps boosting hybrids mindlessly they will easily become OP after he fixes:
- TE's
- EHP values provided by shield extenders and plates; also base EHP values
- shield extenders not imposing speed/mass penalty (which is just stupid and results in overtanked ship being as fast and agile as active tanked one - wtf)
- base range of heavy missiles (80 km before any rigs - wtf)
That's why I say we'd better start doing small steps in many directions rather than try achieving a mythical balance between bare weapons.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 03:57:00 -
[23] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:tEcHnOkRaT wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:You can not 'have it done' without addressing core issues. And if one keeps boosting hybrids mindlessly they will easily become OP after he fixes:
- TE's
- EHP values provided by shield extenders and plates; also base EHP values
- shield extenders not imposing speed/mass penalty (which is just stupid and results in overtanked ship being as fast and agile as active tanked one - wtf)
- base range of heavy missiles (80 km before any rigs - wtf)
That's why I say we'd better start doing small steps in many directions rather than try achieving a mythical balance between bare weapons. - EHP values provided by shield extenders and plates; also base EHP values // what exactly is wrong with that ? - shield extenders not imposing speed/mass penalty // why should it ? its just an electromagnetic field around ur ship - base range of heavy missiles (80 km before any rigs - wtf) // flightttime, therefore alot of vasted cycles, less dps then other weaponsystems, and so on.... (have u ever even used heavy missiles ?) -EHP. I'd leave as is. It seems a lot until you fly in a fleet, and then it's not enough to prevent you being 1-volleyed. It'll never be possible to alter it to be able to suit all styles of play from solo to large fleet, so if active tanks get a bit of a tweak (where it currently makes no sense with certain ship bonuses) we have tanking for both ends of the spectrum that actually works well enough.
Current craploads of EHP don't mean anything in blob warfare either, so that's a poor excuse of leaving proper PvP in fubar (overtanked) form.
I find it quite funny how they first state 'fights don't last long enough' and boost ehp only to find out that 'atries have lost their alpha-strike appeal' and boost them in turn, too. Given how popular they are atm and how clueless CCP members have often been in the past, I'm quite scared that they might consider boosting EHP once again, which would just kill all the joy of proper PvP while providing next to nothing for blobs.
That's why I say:
- fix EHP (and corresponding mods)
- fix arties (dominion was an absurd)
Adopting a fundamental rule that a heavily tanked ship (of massive EHP) is to be slow will make the game better by an order of magnitude. At the moment only overtanked armour boats are slow, while shield overtanking comes with no proper penalties (signature radius by no means is equal to the same reduction in speed).
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 10:43:00 -
[24] - Quote
Reducing EHP will come with fixing artillery, which got pushed intro fubar state in Dominion (so were tracking enhancers).
Instant ammo switching is a feature mostly being pulled out as a massive advantage at forums only. Selectable damage types are several times better than this, so is zero cap usage. I'm quite puzzled to see it being mentioned that often. How can one even compare those?
Rails don't need any further boosts as they already outperform beams. As for the 'features', there are hardly any available in the first place.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 11:54:00 -
[25] - Quote
There's nothing wrong with current values active tanks provide. Boosting these values will just ruin the joy of proper PvP.
There's nothing with admitting the necessity of shield extenders to slow ship down. Active tanks need a clear advantage to become viable and the only logical advantage is mobility. Since very few will justify giving repairers a speed bonus, we just have to introduce speed penalty for passive tank mods.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 22:31:00 -
[26] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:
And how can you claim active tanking is fine when Brutix, cyclone, sleipnir, claymore with shield bonuses rarely use active tanking? Myrmidons and Hyperions shield tank as often as they active tank where Im flying too and I'd rather fit an extender on a Hawk rather than even a faction shield booster...
That's why I'm saying buffer tanking is way too good for its cost (there's none actually) and its drawbacks (very insignificant). Fix buffer and active tanking will turn out much more viable.
Matari speed is a whole another story.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 21:38:00 -
[27] - Quote
There are several ways to balance active and passive tank types without boosting repping values themselves, which is the last thing one should consider doing.
In addition to (or instead of, if you so please) what I've already said (plain reduction in EHP) it's also very appealing to increase fitting requirements for plates/extenders and reduce them for active modules.
2600 MW for 1600mm plate - hell, yes! In this case passive tanking becomes much more interesting fitting-wise. It's no longer 'overtank with plates and put biggest guns on top of it', but rather 'I have to actually make a tough choice'.
500 MW for a large shield extender - w00t!
As for repping mods, they are already balanced pretty well by cap consumption. If anything, they should require less PG and less CPU.
And this of a direct relation to hybrids, btw.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 13:42:00 -
[28] - Quote
You can downgrade your guns anytime, which kinda is the very point of upping requirements. Fitting choices instead of no-brainers.
Also, not all players enjoy overtanked EVE. So speak for yourself. Current active tanks do offer valid gameplay. Buffer offers overtank which takes forever to chew through.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 14:06:00 -
[29] - Quote
Not only stealthy loners, it promotes small-scale PvP in general. Being unable to kill anything before a crapload of reinforcements arrives is the reason why it's so safe to blob up and so unreasonable to fly in small numbers.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 14:51:00 -
[30] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:Not only stealthy loners, it promotes small-scale PvP in general. Being unable to kill anything before a crapload of reinforcements arrives is the reason why it's so safe to blob up and so unreasonable to fly in small numbers. if u wont to have duels u have to arrange them !!!!
If you want to look persuasive, post with your main.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 15:10:00 -
[31] - Quote
Kahz Niverrah wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:You can downgrade your guns anytime, which kinda is the very point of upping requirements. Fitting choices instead of no-brainers. While I agree with the sentiment here, the problem is that right now amarr ships, particularly cruiser and battle cruiser size ships, already have to make this decision. Fitting heavy pulses and a decent tank is very difficult on some ships, impossible on the rest. We're forced to choose between a downsized tank, or fit smaller guns... but I think that's a good thing. Until the hybrid buff, hybrid ships had to make this choice too. Now, less so, but still to some extent. Minmatar ships can leisurely fit their biggest guns, full tank, mwd, and whatever other utility mods they want with little concern for fitting. Increasing the fitting requirements for plates and extenders would hurt the ships that already have to make this fitting decision. Instead, I think it would be more effective to rebalance the ships that can fit things too easily.
Cruisers are irrelevant at least since tier2 BC release, so it makes no sense to mention them in the first place. Battleships are unaffected at all - it's always possible to use several plates plus top-tier guns, while the very idea of having CPU and grid is giving players something to think about while compromising between various goals.
I don't see how increasing PG requirements can hit amarr the most, given they already have biggest grid among all races. MWD, cap booster, plates, neuts etc. eat up the same amount of grid, thus the bigger is their % in grid usage, the better it is for Amarr. Besides, the whole issue is not that relevant anyway since it's dependant on exact values.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 19:24:00 -
[32] - Quote
Kahz Niverrah wrote:It hits them the hardest because lasers have, far and away, the highest fitting requirements of any weapons system.
For some weird reason you cut my quote and then got what you deserved - missed the point entirely.
If fitting essential mods uses, say, 1% of grid, then the rest of it goes for guns and it's literally impossible to avoid fitting the largest ones.
If fitting those mods uses, say, 50, then it's kind of hard to do that.
For instance.
1) a plate requires 500 MWs
Ship A has 2k MWs, after fitting a plate there's 1500 MWs left for fitting guns etc.
Ship B has 1.5k MWs, 1000 is left after the plate
2) a plate requires 1000
Ship A has now 1k left
Ship B - merely 500
3) lol-case: a plate uses 1500 MWs
Ship A has 500 spare MWs and still can fit something like quad light beam lasers
Ship B can not fit anything, despite its racial guns being easier to fit themsevles
As for capbooster, it has to be fitted regardless, so it's irrelevant.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 19:32:00 -
[33] - Quote
Stuff like Canes and Drakes is to fixed regardless, to be quite honest 
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 23:44:00 -
[34] - Quote
At this point my biggest hope is in CCP Tallest being calm at all those rants produced by people with very limited PvP experience (if any at all). Either that or they are just ashamed to post with their mains. Either way, it's better to discard these pathetic claims.
Railguns are more than fine now.
Blasters will most likely become fine after the lattest iteration on Null.
It's just the right time to address other issues - like passive overtanking, rigs, shield extenders with no mobility penalties and so on.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2012.01.16 22:58:00 -
[35] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
Yes, medium rails need work. But in all seriousness Hybrids are pretty damn awesome now. If you're having trouble grasping that, you're pretty bad at using hybrids.
Uff, finally a spot of sanity among obscurantism.
What's your view on further work upon rails, by the way? I'm a firm believer they are absolulety ok already.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2012.01.21 10:55:00 -
[36] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:
Not entirely true. Take CCP Ytterbium for example - he manages to take the time to respond in those threads where he has oversight of the task in hand. This seems to be a problem with CCP Tallest - he is ridiculously bad at communicating. At the very least, if he can't bear to talk with us he should have someone else do it for him. His behaviour in this regard is appalling.
Not even close to how appalling are clueless tards who, while even unable to post with their mains (ashamed of themselves, apparently), dare to make arrogant demands which are bound to make hybrids no less than OP.
CCP's doing just fine in terms of sheer hybrid stats.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2012.01.25 18:48:00 -
[37] - Quote
Magosian wrote:Af'ilia wrote:Heres my 2isk...
When I can fit an omen with blasters and get more dps than pulse...
There is a balancing issue. Forgive me, but I just can't help myself. Battleclinic says you haven't logged a kill since April of 2010. That was nearly two years ago. It also says your lifetime record is 59 and 73; not exactly impressive. Of your 73 losses, you have ONE logged Gallente ship loss: a logi-fit Exequeror. So there is no available history showing you've used hybrids or Gallente ships in pvp, ever, at least not in a capacity where you were stripped of gang members who did your job for you. Yet you come in here, cross-fit hybrid weapons on an amarr ship, and suggest hybrids are fine or overpowered because you see higher dps numbers? Hybrids in the med and large sizes still need lots of help. You'd know this if you actually used them.
Your statistics doesn't look impressive either, - 155 kills with a load of them being farmers - yet you have claims to be an expert in such a complex area as weapon balance. You can fly Gallente as much as you want, but lack of experience with other races combined with poor stats at Gallente themselves removes a great deal of validity from your words.
As someone with much more intense PvP record I find your general conclusion in the last line to be utterly clueless.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2012.01.25 20:09:00 -
[38] - Quote
This thread is there for a sole reason of competent players warning CCP about performing excessive steps on hybrids alone instead of treating the whole balance as a complex matter, where things like hulls, rigs, mods and so on also do have their role in making something superior or inferior.
Stating that 'med and large hybrids still need a lot of help' is getting us away from that.
Seriously, dude. Do you really believe I'm worse than you at PvP or that I hate Gallente or something equally absurd? I just don't get your point in arguing in the first place.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
| |
|