| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 66 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
|
CCP Tallest
C C P
C C P Alliance
299
   |
Posted - 2011.12.19 10:55:00 -
[1441] - Quote
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. |
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 11:47:00 -
[1442] - Quote
Thx for the notice - will you be sharing your thoughts in time for us as a player base to give feed back and still have time to reflect on those?
Also will you be able to hint what you are NOT working on since lots of ideas and suggestions have been put up for debate about minmatar/gallente speed/mass/agility, hybrid ammunition, changes to tracking computer/enhancers affect on fall-off, ship bonuses, signature resolution and unique advantages? 
Pinky |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 13:39:00 -
[1443] - Quote
Julia Connor wrote:Just keep asking and you'll get what you want but please can you stop stating the obvious OVER and OVER and OVER again?
You know, after 3 years of talking and hundreds of pages of feedback seems they were not clear enough.
Also the supposed hybrids balance announced for this expansion AND announced IN the expansion video is not there.
So has you can see, it's still not clear so you have to repeat it again and again and again until someone (?) that can do something gets it. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 13:49:00 -
[1444] - 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 |
Archare
SKEET ELITE
Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 16:50:00 -
[1445] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Thx for the notice - will you be sharing your thoughts in time for us as a player base to give feed back and still have time to reflect on those? Also will you be able to hint what you are NOT working on since lots of ideas and suggestions have been put up for debate about minmatar/gallente speed/mass/agility, hybrid ammunition, changes to tracking computer/enhancers affect on fall-off, ship bonuses, signature resolution and unique advantages? Pinky
^this
Some general new framework or direction as to what is currently being looked at could make the discussion refreshing. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 18:24:00 -
[1446] - Quote
and plz when u think about balance dont think like
paper, rock, scisors, sword, bow, leather shirt, heavy armor......
but focus on making it more realistic thats why we play here
Real Life modern warfare isnt about spaceships but u can still see how it would be realized if it was :) |
MeBiatch
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
186
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 19:01:00 -
[1447] - 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.
yay i had a feeling you were on a hiatus untill january... i just did not want to tell anyone cuss i am bitter... 
|
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 19:18:00 -
[1448] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote: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.
nerf passive tank ? that would be another boost towards minmatar
and just wondering how u make it that it costs u 0 isk :D or do u simply fly it as a blank hull |
Hamox
The Scope
Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 00:31:00 -
[1449] - 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.
Thank you for your feedback, it is good to read from time to time that you are working on it.
Good things need their time and as long as you feed us here and there a little bit we will be patient and we will also try to help you as good as we can :)
Let us know what direction you want to balance and we will deliver you free bug testing even before the changes are made on Sisi. We have many well experienced players here that will give you good ideas and thoughts so that you can improve your pre-balancing even before the changes go live on Sisi and later on TQ.
We all know that the whole game is very complex and changes have many effects, some as intended but some aren't. We are more than happy to give you any support :) |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 10:13:00 -
[1450] - Quote
I'd rather we get this balanced and done before taking on new projects like the balance between buffer and active tank (because balance between shield and armor is still knife sharp except for rig penalties).
- Hybrids
- Minmatar/Gallente balance on speed/mass/agility (as part oh hybrid balance)
- Perhaps Tier 3 speed and agility (they're faster than HACs wtf? Give them BC mass/agility/speed)
- Then other things...
Pinky |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 13:38:00 -
[1451] - 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 |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 13:55:00 -
[1452] - Quote
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 ?) |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes
The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 15:49:00 -
[1453] - Quote
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.
-shield extenders shouldn't impose mass? why not?
--For 'realism': Aren't they generated by massive machines you install?(Check armour repairers, armour repair rigs, etc which don't add any hp at all) Why should adding mass even slow you down in space? It just reduces acceleration, not achievable velocities.
--For game play: Because it makes good sense in trying to balance the current trend for shield buffers that leave your speed unaffected and skew game play heavily away from armour being viable at the same type of game style. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 16:14:00 -
[1454] - 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. -shield extenders shouldn't impose mass? why not? --For 'realism': Aren't they generated by massive machines you install?(Check armour repairers, armour repair rigs, etc which don't add any hp at all) Why should adding mass even slow you down in space? It just reduces acceleration, not achievable velocities. --For game play: Because it makes good sense in trying to balance the current trend for shield buffers that leave your speed unaffected and skew game play heavily away from armour being viable at the same type of game style.
u dont need machinery to generate stronger em fields, just some extra batteries and shield extenders add only half the hp of armor plates, most shieldbased ships are anyway slow exept winmtar, and as an extra if u fit a passive shield tank ur out of cap and need to wait 10 mins until it recharges |
YuuKnow
151
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 01:07:00 -
[1455] - Quote
I'm generally in either Faction or Tech 1 Bships. My megathron's are performing adequately with the new hybrid changes. Doesn't seem like anything too unbalanced IMHO.
I would propose that if additional tweaking is needed, it be made on a ship by ship basis in terms of racial bonuses, turret/launcher capacity... not to the whole hybrids class in uniform.
on a side note, perhaps it would have been more interesting to tweak "hybrids" by not tweaking hybrids at all, but rather increasing the unique racial personalities of ships that used the hybrids. AKA, giving more drone space to the Gallante, or giving more launchers to Caldari with misile damage bonuses added into the simultaneous hybrid damage bonuses.
just my 2 cents (isk) |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 03:57:00 -
[1456] - 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 |
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor
Federal Consensus Outreach
791
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 07:04:00 -
[1457] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:proper PvP while providing next to nothing for blobs.
So blobs aren't "proper PvP" now? Jesus.
Andreus Anthony LeHane Ixiris
CEO, Mixed Metaphor
Animated Corporate Logos |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 08:31:00 -
[1458] - Quote
there is no pvp in eve, u have a fleet ganking a guy or smaller fleet fighting a bigger fleet.
if u wont a proper pvp u have to arrange it like a duel or a contest.
and what do u wont to achieve with a reduced ehp ? that arties kill everything with an alpha strike ?
cammon wake up everyone will train them and who shoots first wins
i would even suggest to increase ehp so the fights take even a bit more longer and more tactical options becoume available
|
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes
The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 10:13:00 -
[1459] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:
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).
I agree with you entirely on this point. We should either have the situation where the penalty to armour rigs is changed from speed or the penalty to shield rigs is changed to speed, or they rearrange the rigs to be ehp classed for shield and armour with speed penalties / resist classed for shield and armour with sig bloom penalties / armour repairer or shield booster effectors with some other (non-speed) penalty.
As for reducing ehp from current levels though - all this would do would be to broaden the effective alpha to even more weapon types than artillery. Currently artillery is the one weapon type that poses this problem for a fleet (unless numbers are so overwhelming) and as such I really don't mind it being unique. What we need are unique traits that offer advantages to the other weapon types similarly - lasers have this to a degree with instant ammo change, and also with scorch. Hybrids have no such feature and this is what rails desperately need as blasters will never ever be able to compete in large fleets from what I've seen to date. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 10:43:00 -
[1460] - 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 |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 10:57:00 -
[1461] - Quote
Armor plates and shield extenders seems fine to me - The problem is armor repairers and shield boosters doesn't repair/boost enough hitpoints even in small scale pvp as well as. A straight 25-50% boost applied to cycle time and hitpoints pr cycle at the same time changing the bonus on Slave and Crystal implant sets... This means the average active tanks will be much better, but without the implants people no longer have the super insane active shield tanks or monster buffered ships.
About the speed of shield boats the problem is mostly minmatar. Tbh the minmatar and angel cartel ships are too generous with the fitting. Look at the Hurricane easily being able to field biggest autocannons, 2 T2 medium energy neutralizers, mwd, 2 extenders and all the lowslots with gyrostabilizers and tracking enhancers - And still having spare powergrid and especially cpu without any fittting mods or implants. Some minmatar ships need a more balanced aproach to cpu/pg (Hurricane could easily lose 160 powergrid and 65 cpu while the fits stay almost the same as now).
Also it is a shame to have minmatar not only the fastest, but also the most agile, lightest and having plenty capacitor for MWD'ing. As I said before I think a lot of issues would be sorted by reducing the agility and mass on specific gallente blaster ships making them faster accelerating and benefitting well from MWDs, and while minmatar will still be the fastest ships they should have mass added and agility decreased. Also the armor rig penalties should definately have another drawback.
TL;DR =
- I agree last blaster changes should be made primarily on ammunition and ships
- Plates and extenders are fine
- Boost active repairing a lot but nerf slave/crystal implants to prevent monster tanks
- Review and decrease powergrid/cpu on Hurricane + other minmatar ships
- Make blaster ships more agile and reduce mass equal to 1 plate
- Make minmatar ships less agile and increase their mass - but they will still be the fastest
- Change armor rig penalty
Pinky |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 11:08:00 -
[1462] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Armor plates and shield extenders seems fine to me - The problem is armor repairers and shield boosters doesn't repair/boost enough hitpoints even in small scale pvp as well as. A straight 25-50% boost applied to cycle time and hitpoints pr cycle at the same time changing the bonus on Slave and Crystal implant sets... This means the average active tanks will be much better, but without the implants people no longer have the super insane active shield tanks or monster buffered ships. About the speed of shield boats the problem is mostly minmatar. Tbh the minmatar and angel cartel ships are too generous with the fitting. Look at the Hurricane easily being able to field biggest autocannons, 2 T2 medium energy neutralizers, mwd, 2 extenders and all the lowslots with gyrostabilizers and tracking enhancers - And still having spare powergrid and especially cpu without any fittting mods or implants. Some minmatar ships need a more balanced aproach to cpu/pg (Hurricane could easily lose 160 powergrid and 65 cpu while the fits stay almost the same as now). Also it is a shame to have minmatar not only the fastest, but also the most agile, lightest and having plenty capacitor for MWD'ing. As I said before I think a lot of issues would be sorted by reducing the agility and mass on specific gallente blaster ships making them faster accelerating and benefitting well from MWDs, and while minmatar will still be the fastest ships they should have mass added and agility decreased. Also the armor rig penalties should definately have another drawback. TL;DR = - I agree last blaster changes should be made primarily on ammunition and ships
- Plates and extenders are fine
- Boost active repairing a lot but nerf slave/crystal implants to prevent monster tanks
- Review and decrease powergrid/cpu on Hurricane + other minmatar ships
- Make blaster ships more agile and reduce mass equal to 1 plate
- Make minmatar ships less agile and increase their mass - but they will still be the fastest
- Change armor rig penalty
Pinky
this one
|
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 11:54:00 -
[1463] - 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 |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 12:03:00 -
[1464] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote: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.
especially for winmatar ,why those ships have comarable ehp to the other races while flying 20-30% faster , it makes no sense |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 12:20:00 -
[1465] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote: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.
if u take a look at the current fleet tactics its all about applying as mutch dps as possible to 1 target and shield/armor reppers dont give u more EHP to survive a few seconds longer but u need to fit a buffer as big as possible and hope u will survive untill a logistics ship can remote rep u
and if u wont some real pvp go to the ideas forum and ask for some sorts of an arena system where u can fight 1 on 1 with any specific shipclass u wish cuz it wont happen in actuall gameplay |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 12:47:00 -
[1466] - Quote
Real pvp ?
The only "ideal" enviroment for that is the eve alliance tournament. This is a pretty good indicator for ballance in a regulated and limited enviroment.
I bet in the next alliance tournament we will see not many gallente ships.
My prediction is: catalyst, ranis and vindicator might be used but not much more.
A lot of Machs, Sleipnirs and Thrasers will be present.
A lot of games struggled with the balance between health amount vs. damage reduction vs. health repair.
The tools we got in eve are well known to most palyers as EHP vs. Ewar vs. active tank/logis.
First we have to monitor if all 3 are sufficient tactics in most present enviroments.
I won't discuss the results anbd efficiency of such a monitoring but there might be some work to do.
The major issue in all games is there is a max amount of incomming damage /players at which it is impossible to create any balance. Because of that we only can measure battles in certain conditions.
In eve this will be:
- small fleet battles:
passive tank +
active tank -
ewar -
- docking games:
active tank with officer mods +
Ewar +
- Gate games:
passive tank +
active tank -
ewar -
- arena:
active tank +
ewar +
passive tank -
We need new ideas, like
-"combine active tank with damage reduction" or
-"with passive tank no damage reduction possible"
Personal Note on opinion of current state:
- Gallente frigs are awesome. They do not nor have ever had a range issue. They are nice!
- Gallente cruiser sized hulls with rails and blasters are not that nice. Drone boats are still used and cummon in.
- BC/BS SIze: pretty mixed feelings here. I do not feel much difference from before the changes. The situations where vindicators were great before are still the same. No Change in preferences. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 13:18:00 -
[1467] - Quote
I agree that super fast minmatar ships with lots of dps are really annoying (borderline gamebreaking) and I would like the running capabilities of dickfleets reduced myself. I just think you are blaiming the wrong factor.
Unfortunately I don't find the caldari ships too fast and making shield buffers increase mass you might slow down minmatar a little, but you'll also make caldari go backwards. (Amarr can alse be slow but thats mostly armor rigs armor rigs)
Don't blaim shield tanking for annoying dickfleets - blaim minmatar and angel cartel ships for having too little mass and too much agility. And blaim MWDs for being too fast for their limited drawbacks...
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... The only guys using active tanks to handle much more than a handfull of people for a few minutes are using faction setups with commandships, implants and drugs. And they have to pray on not getting neutralized and blobbed. Make active tanks for everybody and find another role for crystals and slaves.
Pinky
*Dickfleet = super fast fleets dicking around catching stragglers and easily kiting other fleets with suppreme speeds and range with little danger of taking losses because they also get in warp super fast should you get close to them or surprise them on a gate...
Tier 3 BC's are super nice in this role btw. Small signature and faster than hacs easily capable of landing, shooting and warping out almost instantly makes them near impossible to catch once they are in position. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 22:31:00 -
[1468] - 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 |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 23:20:00 -
[1469] - Quote
What i really would love to see is some strange design decisions like the "nightmare" a shield tanked laser ship.
This is new, this is fresh and unique.
It shows some out of the box thinking and brings us a new flavor.
whatever you do, be creative :) No matter if you take ship designs, ammo design, weapon design whatever :) Be creative, no stagnation ;) |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 09:55:00 -
[1470] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote: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.
myrmidon and hyperion is being used for pve and in pve active shield tank is twice as good as active armor tank. and u cant buffer tank in pve cuz u will pop :).
and as for passive shield tank in pve there is only a handfull that u can consider viable.
so u are now flaming about passive shield tanks in pvp, but just consider that there are alot more solo pve players then active pvp players. and if u change the way shield tanking works for alot of people lvl 4 and lvl 5 missions might become imposible to complete.
another option would be to boost active armor tanking
btw this forum is for hybrid guns not for shield/armor tanking :) |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 66 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |