|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 15 post(s) |
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
10
|
Posted - 2013.12.25 21:52:00 -
[1] - Quote
Seranova Farreach wrote: Nestor = exploration and possable prolonged deployment on exploration roams
It needs a massive redesign before that statement is even remotely true. |
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
11
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 11:20:00 -
[2] - Quote
Roy Alleyne wrote:I am disposable wrote:Seranova Farreach wrote: Nestor = exploration and possable prolonged deployment on exploration roams
It needs a massive redesign before that statement is even remotely true. True, to a point. Can you propose a use for this ship, as it is now, at which another ship wouldn't be more desirable? If so then please post it, the rest of us have been having difficulty brainstorming one. If not then post why you think you can't and offer your own thoughts on how to fix this.
No I cannot. If they want to make it a exploration BS (which is a questionable concept honestly), they need to give it more than a few token "exploration bonuses". It needs some of, if not all of, the following:
1) Much faster align and warp speed than standard battleships.
2) Bonus to warp strength.
3) Interdiction immunity.
4) Cloaking bonus (blops-level at a minimum).
|
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
14
|
Posted - 2013.12.27 11:36:00 -
[3] - Quote
Seranova Farreach wrote:I am disposable wrote:Roy Alleyne wrote:I am disposable wrote:Seranova Farreach wrote: Nestor = exploration and possable prolonged deployment on exploration roams
It needs a massive redesign before that statement is even remotely true. True, to a point. Can you propose a use for this ship, as it is now, at which another ship wouldn't be more desirable? If so then please post it, the rest of us have been having difficulty brainstorming one. If not then post why you think you can't and offer your own thoughts on how to fix this. No I cannot. If they want to make it a exploration BS (which is a questionable concept honestly), they need to give it more than a few token "exploration bonuses". It needs some of, if not all of, the following: 1) Much faster align and warp speed than standard battleships. 2) Bonus to warp strength. 3) Interdiction immunity. 4) Cloaking bonus (blops-level at a minimum). #1 already done its 1/2 the mass of any other BS's
Not really. Its alignment time is only a couple seconds better than most battleships, and I'm pretty sure it has the same snail-like warp speed. |
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
15
|
Posted - 2013.12.29 10:35:00 -
[4] - Quote
Joker Dronemaster wrote:Mhari Dson wrote:Looking at the discussion so far (didn't read it all but enough to get a decent idea) this thing is missing a leg and has 3 arms.... Ok so you sound intelligent so far....................... Mhari Dson wrote:As for the bonuses as currently noted... crap give it up and give it covops or a no cyno required jumpdrive And now you've lost me. Translation............ I'm too cheap to pay for an alt. How will you select the system you want to go to? A drop down menu? Text input box? A drop down menu would be cumbersome to say the very least. Check this link for an idea of how many systems youd have to cram into it. http://evemaps.dotlan.net/range/Sin,5/E1F-LK I hope you have a big monitor........... And a text input box just sounds annoying to use.
A JD that didn't require a cyno would be easy to implement via the star map. Right click on desired star system, click 'jump to' option, jump is initiated with a random point in said star system being the arrival point. This option would only appear if the star system was within range.
As far as making the thing balanced and not completely broken, I think if it was limited to very short jumps, and was only usable with the Nestor and BLOPS it would be okay. Think half the distance of standard BLOPS jumps (so very, very limited). It could also be made more fuel-intensive. |
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
16
|
Posted - 2013.12.29 19:27:00 -
[5] - Quote
AstraPardus wrote:My words in the previous SoE thread did not fall on deaf ears: LOGI!! \o/
I cannot stress how stoked I am about this ship.
I don't get what you are excited about. For combat purposes a Dominix is superior and much cheaper. For exploration there is a very long list of ships that are a much better choice. |
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
20
|
Posted - 2013.12.31 12:23:00 -
[6] - Quote
Joker Dronemaster wrote: Why am I going to pay 1.5 to 2 billion isk for a lateral shift in ship efficiency?
Because you have more money than sense, and prefer the aesthetics of a handheld blender to that of a shoe? |
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
21
|
Posted - 2014.01.01 04:09:00 -
[7] - Quote
Savira Terrant wrote:Hey Uriel, shifting to drone reps I like very much as you might know. I just would not like it as a role bonus. I'd rather have two racial bonuses each, than having a freaking huge list of rolebonuses... I am also all about the jumpdrive, but if it get's one I don't think it would need an MJD activation delay bonus. What did you envision to do with it? Or did you mean reactivation bonus? The latter would make it perfect for DED sites, so long as we are unable to jump directly to the next gate. Adoris Nolen wrote:Get rid of the Energy turret bonus/etc, ADD Drone range/tracking bonus & ability to fit those drone control units. I'd say the opposite. Remove the drone damage bonus. Give it a 100% turret bonus, only four turrets slots and change the range bonus to a tracking bonus per level amarr bs. Than has two highs left to make sure the rep drones are not out of drone control range when using the MJD. So my proposal for the bonuses: Amarr: 4% armor resist bonus per level 7.5% tracking bonus per level Gallente: 20% to speed and armor tranfer amount of drones per level 15% reduction of MJD reactivation delay per level (I know it is a little awkward as Gallente bonus, but makes sense when looking at the lore, with Duvolle Laboratories being the last hands-on corporation for this tech) Role: 100% bonus to energy weapon damage useless exploration bonuses (should be substituted with a jumpdrive)
Pirate faction ships only get one bonus for each racial ship skill.
|
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
22
|
Posted - 2014.01.01 04:11:00 -
[8] - Quote
Joker Dronemaster wrote:I am disposable wrote:Joker Dronemaster wrote: Why am I going to pay 1.5 to 2 billion isk for a lateral shift in ship efficiency?
Because you have more money than sense, and prefer the aesthetics of a handheld blender to that of a shoe? Unfortunately neither of those things are true.............
Well then I guess you will be saving lots of isk. |
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
23
|
Posted - 2014.01.02 07:40:00 -
[9] - Quote
Joker Dronemaster wrote:This thread is starting to need CPR. i wish a blue would go ahead and post............. something. Actually I take that back, i wish a blue would post something useful.
The story of every feedback thread they start nowadays. |
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
24
|
Posted - 2014.01.03 03:16:00 -
[10] - Quote
Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci wrote:CCP is back from holiday now, so maybe we'll get some response soon!
I hope you aren't holding your breath. |
|
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
37
|
Posted - 2014.01.05 05:55:00 -
[11] - Quote
Bibosikus wrote:Apparently the Nestor has been withdrawn?
Is that a statement or a question? I certainly see nothing on any site confirming any such thing. |
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
40
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 01:10:00 -
[12] - Quote
Silvetica Dian wrote:MeBiatch wrote: there is a substantial amount of reading i would think he has to do first. edit with update: CCP Fozzie wrote:Rise is still on vacation. He'll be back next week. not really nothing new has been said since his last post. just people recycling the same ideas again and again. the design is fine and the only thing that will limit it's use in pvp is the price/performance mesh is unlikely to be popular.
Oh yeah it's perfectly fine if you are into hangar decorations... |
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
43
|
Posted - 2014.01.07 12:03:00 -
[13] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:So the ship is on sisi and it still looks ugly and has crap stats... what was the point of this thread?
What is the point of any feedback thread started by CCP? I'm starting to think they only start them to create the illusion that we are being listened to. The rapid launcher thread has gotten no response in months, and they are now ignoring this thread the same way. We really are wasting our time here. |
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
46
|
Posted - 2014.01.07 16:37:00 -
[14] - Quote
Spugg Galdon wrote:I am disposable wrote:Rek Seven wrote:So the ship is on sisi and it still looks ugly and has crap stats... what was the point of this thread? What is the point of any feedback thread started by CCP? I'm starting to think they only start them to create the illusion that we are being listened to. The rapid launcher thread has gotten no response in months, and they are now ignoring this thread the same way. We really are wasting our time here. I diagree. CCP has shown that they do listen to these forums. The problem has been timing for this subject. They released the stats for this just before Christmas and Icelanders have a VERY long Christmas vacation. Hopefully now that people have returned to work they will catch up on the feed back and start considering changes to be made to this hull. If we hear nothing from now until 1.1 and they release the Nestor as is. Then I will lose faith.
I guess you missed the rapid launcher thread... |
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
46
|
Posted - 2014.01.07 18:27:00 -
[15] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:I am disposable wrote:Spugg Galdon wrote:I am disposable wrote:Rek Seven wrote:So the ship is on sisi and it still looks ugly and has crap stats... what was the point of this thread? What is the point of any feedback thread started by CCP? I'm starting to think they only start them to create the illusion that we are being listened to. The rapid launcher thread has gotten no response in months, and they are now ignoring this thread the same way. We really are wasting our time here. I diagree. CCP has shown that they do listen to these forums. The problem has been timing for this subject. They released the stats for this just before Christmas and Icelanders have a VERY long Christmas vacation. Hopefully now that people have returned to work they will catch up on the feed back and start considering changes to be made to this hull. If we hear nothing from now until 1.1 and they release the Nestor as is. Then I will lose faith. I guess you missed the rapid launcher thread... Just because people with a vested interest whine, this does not make a decision wrong.
By vested interest you mean the people who actually used RLMLs and aren't happy with it being changed into something completely different without any warning? Yeah there's nothing wrong with that... |
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
49
|
Posted - 2014.01.08 18:05:00 -
[16] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Hi guys, sorry for the winter break in communication. Hope you all had a good holiday!
I've been catching up a bit here and I'll try to comment on some of what I'm seeing.
There's a lot of concern about the price, which is completely understandable as it will be rather expensive at current SOE LP value, but that cost is controlled by the market and doesn't affect the thinking behind the LP price that we set. This is a ship that is meant to function at pirate faction meta level and is attainable at less risk than other pirate faction Battleships because of being available in high sec, which warrants the step up in LP cost. If it turns out that price is so prohibitive that people can't justify using the Nestor as much as we would want we can investigate ways to make it more attractive or make it easier to get, but hopefully that won't be necessary.
As far as the ship design itself, everyone is trying to tug it in a direction that matches their ideal application, which makes sense considering that for most people some ship traits won't be useful due to their diverse nature. I want to reiterate that removing some of these smaller traits wouldn't necessarily mean we could suddenly add something else. The exploration bonuses are a good example. Many people won't use the hacking or probing bonus, but in some cases they will add nice options. For instance, a small PVP group might love to take advantage of the probing bonus for getting quicker results on enemy snipers or safed up opponents. These bonuses come cheap in terms of balance and characterize the Sisters of EVE ships as a whole so we like including them, but don't let that make you think they are there in place of something more focused and powerful.
Specifically, there are suggestions relating to:
Smartbomb bonuses - I think this would be fun to get in somewhere but the Nestor is definitely not the right place More damage - it already has huge damage potential because of being drone bonused with 5 turrets, and pure tank and gank is not meant to be it's strong point. More tank - it is extremely important that it can tank well enough to run most PVE content, if this isn't the case we would make adjustments but we don't expect that to be a problem. Outside of that, just like with damage, it isn't meant to be overly strong in this area. Covert cloaking - we discussed this extensively and ultimately agreed that it is both too powerful, and also should belong on a tech 2 battleship before a pirate faction if it were to happen. Black ops bridging - again, power level is a big concern here. We already upped the amount of damage you can bring through covert bridges with the Stratios and don't want to extend that even further. It's possible that if Black Ops had been rebalanced before the Nestor went in we may have been more likely to echo some Black Ops function, but without knowing how that rebalance will pan out exactly we didn't want to go that direction at this time. MJDs - Marauders just picked up a focus on MJDs and it would be strange to do the same with the Nestor. Ship maintenance arrays - we talked about this a lot as well but the new personal depots cover this function nicely without ever leading to afk gameplay (which would be a risk if it was on the Nestor) After going over a lot of these options in detail (both initially and after reading feedback), we feel happy with the decision to go with a focus in logistics, low mass, and general versatility.
I'll be reading further discussion and will keep you updated on any future changes, hope this answered some of your questions.
edit: The SMA on Singularity is an error (someone tried to sneak it on while I was away for vacation I guess) and it will be removed before release.
In other words nothing is going to change even though poster after poster has pointed out that currently this thing is nothing but a massively overpriced yet gimped Dominix with mostly useless bonuses tacked on. Why am I not surprised? |
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
50
|
Posted - 2014.01.08 20:23:00 -
[17] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:CCP Rise wrote:After going over a lot of these options in detail (both initially and after reading feedback), we feel happy with the decision to go with a focus in logistics, low mass, and general versatility. This is yet another example of where a new "feature" was "suggested", but in reality the final version will essentially be the first version sans some minor cosmetic changes. There's only one organization in EVE that will benefit from being able to obtain and field the Nestor for a fraction of the cost of everyone else. I'm really trying to avoid drinking the kool-aid, but I'm at a loss to figure out how this $2-billion armor logistics blender is supposed to have any appeal? PS. Now that you're back from holidays, do you think we could please get an RLML update? We've only been waiting since November...
It should be obvious to all at this point that Rise and Fozzie are only going through the motions when it comes to player feedback. Oh well, they are the CCP employees so they make the calls, even if we are trying to help them not add more useless crap to this game. |
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
50
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 06:18:00 -
[18] - Quote
XvXTeacherVxV wrote:Hostility towards devs and other forum posters only discourages developers from engaging threads like this at all. You might not be happy about the state of the Nestor (I'm not) but let's just be grateful that devs take the time to explain themselves here even when they don't have to, knowing full well that whatever they suggest will get picked apart by forum pvpers anyway.
I would like to hear Rise's thoughts on some of the other changes that were mentioned though, like a cloaked speed bonus or a non-covert jump drive. I was leaning toward a jump drive, but the cloaked velocity bonus would help this ship get around both k-space and wormholes without making it overpowered. Warp core strength could too, but I think that's the tackier of the suggested solutions.
I'm not moved by posts that rarely ever come, and when they do, are completely dismissive. I'd be more appreciative if they came out and stated that they aren't really looking for our input and that all design decisions are 99.9% determined internally, because as far as I can tell this feedback thing is a giant farce. |
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
54
|
Posted - 2014.01.10 00:13:00 -
[19] - Quote
Savira Terrant wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:PotatoOverdose wrote:CCP Rise wrote: I think a jump drive would mean redesigning the entire ship.
TBH this might be a good idea with or without the jump drive. Let's take a step back for a minute, because there is an obvious disconnect between many of the posters in this thread and the vision you present. Exactly. Scrap the current design. Forget whatever plan you had originally. It isn't going to work. The ship is all over the place and doesn't do anything well enough to justify its price. This.
That. |
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
61
|
Posted - 2014.01.13 08:47:00 -
[20] - Quote
sabastyian wrote:Guys, a problem alot of you are forgetting, the Nestor's cap life is horrid, worse then an abaddon. This ship needs a cap transfer bonus to be useful, or needs a better base cap, or a bonus to reduce amount of cap required for each repper
Especially if you fit lasers like they want you to. Lasers and remote reppers on this thing is a hilarious thought to be honest. |
|
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
62
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 22:51:00 -
[21] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:The SOE battle ship was never needed the frigate and cruiser were fine on there own, but people complained that they wanted a SOE battleship so now we have a ship that feels out of place and has no definite role.
I think CCP's lack of imagination and vision is more to blame than players who simply wanted a full set like other factions. |
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
71
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 23:45:00 -
[22] - Quote
Guristas are going to get screwed so hard... |
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
77
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 05:22:00 -
[23] - Quote
Roy Alleyne wrote:Arthur Aihaken wrote:Andy Landen wrote:They do have a pretty good point about this ship not doing anything very well. I still like the idea that's been put forward by many of us: make it a Battlecruiser, give it a Covert Ops cloak, faster warp and align speed and reduced signature radius. The logistics aspect can get nerfed as far as most are concerned. Why does it need to be a battleship anyway? Battleships have become obsolete with the new warp speed mechanics. It already is one of the most agile BSs in New Eden and has a warp speed of 2.5 AU/s, the same speed as BCs. It will never and should never get a covops cloak for the multitude of reasons stated throughout the thread and unless you can offer a better reason that it should than 'I want, I want, I want,' stop trolling the thread with it.
What are the multitude of reasons again? I've seen CCP say it would be too powerful, and that if they give cov ops to a BS it will be on a T2 hull first. Neither of those are really reasons. The first begs the question as there is no actual evidence to suggest a BS with a cov ops cloak is going to be overpowered inherently (lowered firepower and durability would seem to be the natural answer balance-wise). The second is just a cop out as they have decided to introduce the Nestor before doing a balance pass on Black Ops ships. That in itself is simply not a good reason to not do it. |
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
77
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 09:05:00 -
[24] - Quote
Roy Alleyne wrote:Divi Filus wrote:Roy Alleyne wrote:I'm not even going to bother repeating myself on the cloak issue And we all really appreciate it. Very well, I wont say anything more on covops cloaking since neither logic or reason based arguments are working. However, if anything new or interesting is suggested then I will be happy to discuss them with everyone as that is what these forums are for. Now if you will exuse me, I need to go patch that head sized dent in the wall.
First, logic and reason are the same thing.
Second, no one including yourself has actually presented a real logic-based argument for why cov ops cloaking should be verboten on battleship hulls. |
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
79
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 09:19:00 -
[25] - Quote
Divi Filus wrote:
Remove [some/all] turretsGÇöthis one is pretty straightforward, and neatly fits what you say is "essential for balance," i.e. "that cloaky ships should not be able to go toe to toe with combat oriented ships." (This requirement, by the way, is already problematic given the existing covert-capable ship line.) It's also the only suggestion I've seen you even obliquely address, with the somewhat bizarre claim that the turrets need to stay because, essentially, that's how the Sisters do things. (The fact that this argument applies equally well towards keeping the turrets as it does towards extending the existing Sisters cloaking bonuses to the last ship in their line may or may not have been lost on you.) Increase sensor recalibration delayGÇöi.e. make it wait some not-insignificant period of time between decloak and targeting. I've put this one forward myself more times now than I care to count, but suffice it to say that a long enough recalibration delay should greatly reduce the ability to dictate initial engagement range and blunt the element of surprise. For anyone who may understandably be concerned about a scenario in which a smaller cloaky ship lands tackle first and then lets the Nestor wait out its targeting delay, I reply that a similar scenario is easily possible today featuring a cloaked tackler and an off-grid battleship (perhaps with a prototype cloak, for bonus points). If there is no problem with the latter scenario, there should be no problem with the former, as long as the Nestor's targeting delay is sufficiently long. Prohibit the ship from accessing covert jump portalsGÇöthis is just good sense. It should go without saying that a covert Nestor should also not be able to fit a covert jump portal generator itself. The Nestor would thus be reliant on stargates where, as you and I seem to agree, it would be at least somewhat vulnerable. [/list]
Personally I think the third option + a general nerf to its tank + a removal of its RR bonus is what is needed to balance a cov ops cloak on it. With the inherently slow lock-on times of battleships this thing would be terrible at locking down targets coming out of cloak either way. Plus when a person takes an un-insurable 2+ bisk ship into PVP that ship should rock in my opinion. |
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
88
|
Posted - 2014.01.24 21:17:00 -
[26] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:By request I'm posting to say the ship isn't going to have any changes before 1.1
We want to see what activity looks like the way it is currently and make adjustments after. I'd also really like to look at finding ways to drop sisters ships outside of LP so that we can have some effect on the price in a way other than lowering the LP cost, but I'm not sure when we can get that figured out and implemented.
Why do you bother to start feedback threads? |
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
93
|
Posted - 2014.01.28 19:38:00 -
[27] - Quote
Finally looked at the model in game. Roflmao... |
I am disposable
Republic University Minmatar Republic
94
|
Posted - 2014.02.01 10:45:00 -
[28] - Quote
I'm starting to notice that Rise likes to unsticky the threads that are not overly positive... |
|
|
|