| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Macumba
   |
Posted - 2003.09.07 12:51:00 -
[31]
Nah, thats the one that drains cap and gives it to you.
Molly means the one that causes a CTD if two people use one at the same time.
"PVP = griefing" Papa Smurf |
Angelsfist
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 13:03:00 -
[32]
 Jim, I did not clarify, so my apologies.
My electronics and engineering skills are at 5 and energy grid ops , energy management etc are at 4's.
I was taking my skills into account and the current config of my ship as well.
Even still it would be unrealistic to use 8 of them. Of course w/ a damage multiplier of 6x I dont really need to. So like I said before, it'll be a OK 
|
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 13:05:00 -
[33]
 Quote:
Jim, I did not clarify, so my apologies.
My electronics and engineering skills are at 5 and energy grid ops , energy management etc are at 4's.
I was taking my skills into account and the current config of my ship as well.
Even still it would be unrealistic to use 8 of them. Of course w/ a damage multiplier of 6x I dont really need to. So like I said before, it'll be a OK
I have the same skills, I can't even mount three 425mm railguns on my Raven.. and Caldari ships are supposed to specialize in railguns. Doesn't make much sense, does it? :)
------
ROBBLE ROBBLE |
Angelsfist
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 14:38:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Angelsfist on 07/09/2003 14:42:59
I agree with you entirely, but like all good players we'll adapt.
BTW, I have yet to see a Raven in space. Do they make for good ships?
2 tachyons and an assorted array of 6 medium beams make short work of pesky figates or cruisers silly enough to get in range. Also allows for using low slots for more important things
|
Tristan
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 15:10:00 -
[35]
Thanks caladen, it was meant more as a joke than how the bat sig was intended.
TomB has done a good job so far with a lot of the changes, as Revolution pointed out (in a way)... the changes on chaos are a TEST. they arent final. Some of the changes where much needed. Some of them suck... tachyons are my gripe. They are unusable, maybe if i send tom some isk...
|
Xelios
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 16:59:00 -
[36]
Edited by: Xelios on 07/09/2003 17:00:21
Next patch decides whether I stay or go. If these changes make it to TQ I'm leaving, simple as that. And no, you can't have my stuff.
|
Lady Jaxx
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 18:01:00 -
[37]
TomB = Molly
Who can begrudge him a slice of tension relieving trolling after having to read through the circular argument hell that is the ships and modules forum?
"University of Caille 0wnz 4ll j00 l4m3rz" |
NoHawker
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 19:29:00 -
[38]
Quote:
NoHawker, multiple shield hardners could be countered with cap drainers.
I don't see any imbalance here.
Well Molly you might as well quit now that CCP is going to nerf your precious hardeners.
What are you going to do?
I'm going to kill them all sir |
Arathmon
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 19:33:00 -
[39]
Quote:
Well I guess CCP is really good at nerfing because they do it alot.
I just have one question however.
Why do they do they spend energy and time nerfing items and ships when they could be fixing more important things?
Even if they could balance the game and fix major bugs at the same I'd still rather they just fix the major bugs or add more content first.
Bottom line is CCP needs to stop jacking around with nerfing items and ships and fix the more important **** first
Because, (surprise surprise!) people in CCP do different things (gasp!). People like TomB work on the balancing of ships and modules, while other devs work on the 'harder' things like fixing the lag issues, memory leaks, and warp to desktops.
---------------
I used to be in the FA. I like cookies. Eve Radio is teh pwn. |
Molly
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 22:37:00 -
[40]
For my PvP playstyle it is even better when I meet people w/o shield hardeners.
But I don't think that nerfing defensive modules is a good idea at all. None of you was able to explain me how shield hardners are imbalanced as of now (unless you want 70% hardeners to be Tech III or something).
It takes one too long to work for a Battleship, then having huge lag spikes in larger Battles and defensive modules being nerfed will only make it worse IMHO.
|
Karif
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 23:16:00 -
[41]
None of you was able to explain me how shield hardners are imbalanced as of now
Because you are not worth explaining it to.
It is that simple. Have a nice day.
===============================
Deception + Information + Skill |
Molly
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 23:19:00 -
[42]
Unlike you I don't have to use my noob-corp alt to open my mouth :-).
|
j0ik
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 23:23:00 -
[43]
Harrr! j0iky like Molly's cleavage. j0iky want to meet up with Molly and stick her up pirate style! Yarrr!
Yarrrr Matey! I be the nefarious j0ik of the deep spaces piggies! Yarrrr! Harrr! Arrr! I'm a narsty pirate! Har har yarrrr! |
Karif
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 23:25:00 -
[44]
Not my fault you are stupid...
===============================
Deception + Information + Skill |
Pabaf
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 23:44:00 -
[45]
its not just about mining, lotsa things to do, and rememeber new things will come 
|
Jash Illian
|
Posted - 2003.09.07 23:59:00 -
[46]
Sorry, I see the shield hardener double nerf being the direct result of people whining about lasers being gimped. Especially the Tachyon users.
Wow...they can't mount 8 Tachs on a bship and do horrible things to people because people are smart enough to carry em/them hardeners. Can't just nerf em/therm so they all have to be nerfed.
I can deal with single hardeners going to 50%. The stacking is just overboard and addresses the wrong thing. Yes, 6 heat sinks is ungodly damage. At the ship's optimal range. Game mechanics prevent us from initiating combat outside their optimal range easily. I could care less if an Armageddon gets wooly on my ass with Tachs in it's optimal. Let me exit warp where I want and I'll choose a place outside of it. Or inside of it. Let me choose to make someone that specializes regret their specialty.
People will do the rest and move to more balanced setups.
I mean its like you want corporations to oblige each other like its sex or something. Pffft I would rather **** my enemy.- Rohann
Be careful out there. That other guy waiting in the queue for the gate MIGHT be a baby-munching frock-burner, YOU JUST DON'T KNOW!- Lallante |
agrizla
|
Posted - 2003.09.08 00:22:00 -
[47]
Sorry Jash but I have to disagree. All of the major problems in the game so far have been stacking related. The base formula for stacking needs toning down.
Whatever else happens - well that's down to TomB, but the stacking formula has to change.
Mara/Passari and the resultant kneejerk sec system we now have to live with would never have happened but for the stacking system - OK so it was modules and skills there but even so. There are numerous other examples of it too - I'm sure you can think of a few yourself.
Bottom line is that stacking all the same modules should not give you an exponential increase. At best it should be linear.
One thing I don't agree with is TomB excluding some modules - this is just storing up problems. Set a formula for all modules and stick with it - that way we all know where we stand.
|
Aeryn Sarum
|
Posted - 2003.09.08 01:13:00 -
[48]
Yup, stacking rule should be consistent for all modules.
|
Jash Illian
|
Posted - 2003.09.08 02:43:00 -
[49]
Edited by: Jash Illian on 08/09/2003 02:44:53
Quote:
Sorry Jash but I have to disagree. All of the major problems in the game so far have been stacking related. The base formula for stacking needs toning down.
Whatever else happens - well that's down to TomB, but the stacking formula has to change.
Mara/Passari and the resultant kneejerk sec system we now have to live with would never have happened but for the stacking system - OK so it was modules and skills there but even so. There are numerous other examples of it too - I'm sure you can think of a few yourself.
Bottom line is that stacking all the same modules should not give you an exponential increase. At best it should be linear.
One thing I don't agree with is TomB excluding some modules - this is just storing up problems. Set a formula for all modules and stick with it - that way we all know where we stand.
The fixed deployment style of combat in Eve + mechanics issues, like entry warp lag, made Mara/Passari possible more than anything. Along with the current length of battles.
I always opt to fix the problem, not the symptoms. That's all this is doing, fixing symptoms. People that stack all damage mods in their low slots have a smaller range than those that stack all range enhancers in their low slots. Problem is the people with range/tracking enhancers rarely get to utilize them. Till they fix the exit warp mechanics, the core issue will still be there and people will still go for as much Damage Per Second (the Holy Gospel of the Turret changes argument) every day.
And as a bandaid, this is a poor one. Personally I think it'd be better to modify the damage/range/ect module to act more like the Overdrive Injectors: balance benefit with a cost. Put a negative modifier to tracking on damage modules. Put a negative modifier to to RoF on targetting modules. Balance is positive AND negative. Color code the shield hardener effects and have boosting one resistance lower another resistance.
There's a difference between surgery and hatchet jobs. TomB is wielding an axe atm when the game has been in dire need of a scapel since beta. Well...except for anything with the name "Scout" on it 
I mean its like you want corporations to oblige each other like its sex or something. Pffft I would rather **** my enemy.- Rohann
Be careful out there. That other guy waiting in the queue for the gate MIGHT be a baby-munching frock-burner, YOU JUST DON'T KNOW!- Lallante |
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2003.09.08 04:28:00 -
[50]
Quote:
Edited by: Angelsfist on 07/09/2003 14:42:59
I agree with you entirely, but like all good players we'll adapt.
BTW, I have yet to see a Raven in space. Do they make for good ships?
So far I find the Raven acceptable, though it is *currently* one of the weaker battleships in the game. The patch will make this ship entirely better with missles being deadly instead of slow, and cumbersome to deploy.
I was able to defeat a Scorpion, Dominix, and Armageddon 1v1 so far in my Raven with really no problem. I could do the same in my Scorpion though so /shrug. The extra launchers currently aren't worth losing 2 medium.. patch should make the extra firepower of the Raven worth it though..
------
ROBBLE ROBBLE |
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2003.09.08 04:29:00 -
[51]
Quote:
For my PvP playstyle it is even better when I meet people w/o shield hardeners.
But I don't think that nerfing defensive modules is a good idea at all. None of you was able to explain me how shield hardners are imbalanced as of now (unless you want 70% hardeners to be Tech III or something).
It takes one too long to work for a Battleship, then having huge lag spikes in larger Battles and defensive modules being nerfed will only make it worse IMHO.
But they're nerfing damage modules too Molly, that should balance it out.. shield boosters and armor repairers have had their effectiveness doubled too.. it should balance out.
------
ROBBLE ROBBLE |
Revolution
|
Posted - 2003.09.08 04:38:00 -
[52]
As it is on chaos now that the new stacking are on, here is the stats of the gun i was using;
425mm railgun 1 - 2.5 dmg mod
large hybrid turret skill lvl 2
1 magnetic stabiliser 1
dmg mod total = 3.2
4 magnetic stabiliser 1's
dmg mod total = 3.6
(on a caldari bship)
|
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2003.09.08 04:45:00 -
[53]
Quote:
As it is on chaos now that the new stacking are on, here is the stats of the gun i was using;
425mm railgun 1 - 2.5 dmg mod
large hybrid turret skill lvl 2
1 magnetic stabiliser 1
dmg mod total = 3.2
4 magnetic stabiliser 1's
dmg mod total = 3.6
(on a caldari bship)
Wow almost doesn't pay to even have two on then?
------
ROBBLE ROBBLE |
Revolution
|
Posted - 2003.09.08 04:55:00 -
[54]
Well yer, it leaves plenty of slots for some of the other neat low slot modules that never get used.
|
Ashton Black
|
Posted - 2003.09.08 06:47:00 -
[55]
Edited by: Ashton Black on 08/09/2003 06:47:34
Has anyone thought of the effect nerfing stacking will have on the EW side of PvP?. It will no longer be econmical to have a EW boat as part of a fleet if warp scramblers, target lock disruptors and webbies become nerf'd too. The BB will no longer be the Cruiser for the disearning PvPer.
As I don't test on Chaos I would like to hear how this works out.
|
Jash Illian
|
Posted - 2003.09.08 06:59:00 -
[56]
Quote:
Edited by: Ashton Black on 08/09/2003 06:47:34
Has anyone thought of the effect nerfing stacking will have on the EW side of PvP?. It will no longer be econmical to have a EW boat as part of a fleet if warp scramblers, target lock disruptors and webbies become nerf'd too. The BB will no longer be the Cruiser for the disearning PvPer.
As I don't test on Chaos I would like to hear how this works out.
The blackbird was being misused imo. Instead of carefully selecting the ECM modules to use against a target and having to deal with the consequences if they chose wrong, people just slapped on sensor inhibitors to cut range down to almost nothing. Same effect as jamming, requiring less intellect and having no risk.
So I'm not particularly upset to see that go. If people want to shut down my Rupture with a Blackbird, they need to come armed with LADAR jammers. And pay the price if I'm in my Thorax. As for the rest of ECM/ECCM modules, such as backup LADAR arrays and ECM White Noise generators, I don't believe they apply. Their effects did not stack exponentially. They stacked cumulatively.
I mean its like you want corporations to oblige each other like its sex or something. Pffft I would rather **** my enemy.- Rohann
Be careful out there. That other guy waiting in the queue for the gate MIGHT be a baby-munching frock-burner, YOU JUST DON'T KNOW!- Lallante |
Kaleb
|
Posted - 2003.09.08 07:01:00 -
[57]
Ban her already!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |