Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Inspiration
109
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 14:59:00 -
[151] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Mara Rinn wrote:The only buff I've ever wanted for TP was to have them moved to high slots. This would be a great change.
I approve of this too! I hate arguing with static minds that relate everything relative to the status-quo. By definition these minds oppose logic, reason, posses a narrow view and object against solutions for issues that have half an existing workaround. Left up to them, nothing would ever progress!
|
Re'doubt
Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore
14
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 17:15:00 -
[152] - Quote
I'm sure much has been said in this thread already, however I never thought that TP's and sebo's needed any kind of nerf.
This change hurts PVE players who use those items and PVPers to an extent as well.
Really the only people who this change benefits are gate campers, who only need to overload for a few seconds in order to catch their prey.
I strongly encourage revisiting this change as well as others and rethinking their usefulness. |
EvilArchitect
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 17:40:00 -
[153] - Quote
I did a quick skim of both threads and saw nothing about this. Please forgive me if this has already been brought up.
I corpmate of mine nudged me to do a little math regarding the red giant overheat bonus. Now correct me if I am wrong about Red Giant mechanics ( I never liked the bloody commies), but I think it will be possible to achieve over 100% effect with TD. Those who knew the incident with AHARM can see where this is going.
Now, according to EFT, with maximum links and skills, a TD bonused ship (like sentinel, curse and pilgrim) has scripted maximum effect of 79.81%. A C6 red giant gives 100% bonus to overheat effect.
79,81 * 0,9 ( 1.1 nerf) * [1 + 0,2*2 (overheat + C6 bonus)] = 100,5606 %
These conditions are the singe edge case that make it possible, unless someone has been holding out on faction TD.
Unless CCP has fixed the turret mechanics, application of this TD would give target perfect optimal and tracking for a short while. At least, until the other Red Giant bonus burns them out. |
Neal Altol
Viziam Amarr Empire
15
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 19:25:00 -
[154] - Quote
EvilArchitect wrote:I did a quick skim of both threads and saw nothing about this. Please forgive me if this has already been brought up.
I corpmate of mine nudged me to do a little math regarding the red giant overheat bonus. Now correct me if I am wrong about Red Giant mechanics ( I never liked the bloody commies), but I think it will be possible to achieve over 100% effect with TD. Those who knew the incident with AHARM can see where this is going.
Now, according to EFT, with maximum links and skills, a TD bonused ship (like sentinel, curse and pilgrim) has scripted maximum effect of 79.81%. A C6 red giant gives 100% bonus to overheat effect.
79,81 * 0,9 ( 1.1 nerf) * [1 + 0,2*2 (overheat + C6 bonus)] = 100,5606 %
These conditions are the singe edge case that make it possible, unless someone has been holding out on faction TD.
Unless CCP has fixed the turret mechanics, application of this TD would give target perfect optimal and tracking for a short while. At least, until the other Red Giant bonus burns them out.
Did you include rigs on those ships? |
EvilArchitect
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 19:51:00 -
[155] - Quote
Neal Altol wrote:Did you include rigs on those ships? I did not even expect they might exist. Now that they are added, base jumps to 87,99%.
While I theorycrafted, I made table for (apparently nonexistent) faction TD, which would have base rate of 87,34%. This is close enough to above so this table is usable: http://pastebin.com/LuwxBs5w |
Spc One
The Chodak Void Alliance
215
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 22:35:00 -
[156] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: The TL:DR is that all Tracking Disruptors and Remote Sensor Dampeners will have their base effectiveness reduced by 10%, and at the same time be given the ability to get a 20% effectiveness through overheating.
This means that compared to current TQ values, these modules will be 10% worse when not heated, and 8% better when heated.
Does that apply to npc's too ?
|
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
4804
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 00:25:00 -
[157] - Quote
Wrayeth wrote:Mara Rinn wrote:The only buff I've ever wanted for TP was to have them moved to high slots. TBH, this would quite nicely fix the fact that almost no one running a huginn or rapier uses them due to lack of midslots.
And all the missile ships I fly are shield tankers, meaning EWAR nerfs the tank. And given a ship with bonuses to webs and target painters, we end up always using webs. Why? Mainly because webs stop people running away, while TP have little impact on the combat tactics. All a TP does is let you hit harder when you can hit at all, webs change the rules of the fight so you actually get to hit the other guy.
It wouldn't surprise me to find that somewhere in the dark depths of CCP headquarters there is a room where the argument of "balancing TPs, missiles, the Phoenix, and webifiers" has been going on so long and with so much emotional investment that the argument has manifested itself physically and is used by CCP to dispose of the bodies of the people unfortunate enough to mention gold ammo or micro transactions at staff meetings.
Okay, so I probably took that one a little too far.
Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
Silverbackyererse
29
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 02:20:00 -
[158] - Quote
Overheating is good. What about set of rigs and modules for heat absorption Fozzie?
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates RAZOR Alliance
316
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 02:58:00 -
[159] - Quote
Silverbackyererse wrote:Overheating is good. What about set of rigs and modules for heat absorption Fozzie?
If they added rigs for overheating, perhaps they could make 3 flavors - high, medium, and low. Would make for some interesting fitting decisions. http://eveion.blogspot.com/ |
Saberlily Whyteshadow
Novum Matutinus Interstellar ConVicts
39
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 03:38:00 -
[160] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:The original version of this post included a reduction in strength to target painters as well. We have decided to leave their base strength as is for 1.1 and reevaluate from there:
Yay! |
|
Meyr
SiN Corp Black Core Alliance
267
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 05:18:00 -
[161] - Quote
EvilArchitect wrote:Neal Altol wrote:Did you include rigs on those ships? I did not even expect they might exist. Now that they are added, base jumps to 87,99%. While I theorycrafted, I made table for (apparently nonexistent) faction TD, which would have base rate of 87,34%. This is close enough to above so this table is usable: http://pastebin.com/LuwxBs5w
Fozzie -
Please read the above post, and, while you're modeling it for yourself, ask the following question:
"Do I want to use the same easy, lazy, and global solution to an issue that specifically exists when overheating a module in a high-level wormhole that I proposed for Capital Turrets, or am I going to adjust the wormhole's affect, which is what should have been proposed in the first place?" |
Arcos Vandymion
The Advent of Faith Standing United.
25
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 14:56:00 -
[162] - Quote
Vinyl 41 wrote:rly were nerfing TPs now ? is that some sort of a hidden war against pve missle users ?
What are missiles? Is that some kind of old-school drone? /sarcasm |
Scuzzy Logic
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
127
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 15:03:00 -
[163] - Quote
Re'doubt wrote:I'm sure much has been said in this thread already, however I never thought that TP's and sebo's needed any kind of nerf.
This change hurts PVE players who use those items, and PVPers to an extent as well.
Really the only people who this change benefits are gate campers, who only need to overload for a few seconds in order to catch their prey.
I strongly encourage revisiting this change as well as others and rethinking their usefulness.
This a million times.
I still think damps should have less of a nerf and less of an OH bonus to compensate. EWAR really is more useful in long, drawn-out fights. |
Deacon Abox
Justified Chaos
285
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 22:59:00 -
[164] - Quote
The remote midslot items do not need an overload ability. Sit at a gate in a gate camp. Cloaked scout on other side calls jump, or campers see gateflash. Start overheating. There is no tactical decision to be made on overheating or not with these modules.
Next, why are you nerfing damps, TDs, and painters? ECM still kicks more ass. And how are you going to benefit the ships that are currently bonused for these ewar modules? Any stupid ship with a spare mid can fit these modules and do just about as good a job with them. Why are you not giving the non-caldari ewar ships the weak ecm module/strong ecm boat bonuses treatment? |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1997
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 03:48:00 -
[165] - Quote
Scuzzy Logic wrote:Re'doubt wrote:I'm sure much has been said in this thread already, however I never thought that TP's and sebo's needed any kind of nerf.
This change hurts PVE players who use those items, and PVPers to an extent as well.
Really the only people who this change benefits are gate campers, who only need to overload for a few seconds in order to catch their prey.
I strongly encourage revisiting this change as well as others and rethinking their usefulness. This a million times. I still think damps should have less of a nerf and less of an OH bonus to compensate. EWAR really is more useful in long, drawn-out fights.
Unbonused TD's are really really powerful in 1v1 situations. Way stronger than any of the other ewar. BYDI recruitment closed-ish |
Alxea
Unstable Pirate Sharks Of The Damed Sea
127
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 16:23:00 -
[166] - Quote
CCP You all are always so funny with your nerfs. You feel like each time you boost something it must be nerfed too like a double edged sword. lol What is up with the nerf happyness? Seriously I been playing this game since 2007 and all I see is nerf this and nerf that. If we boost it it must be nerfed too. WTF??? |
Estella Osoka
Deep Void Merc Syndicate Sicarius Draconis
275
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 21:04:00 -
[167] - Quote
I just want to know why they are nerfing something and not fixing the T2 mods. That is where the current problem with EWAR is, meta 4 mods are better than their T2 equivalents. |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
634
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 21:47:00 -
[168] - Quote
i think SD's and TD's should get a stronger nerf and a reduced OH bonus Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Andy Landen
Sub--Zero Catastrophic Uprising
496
|
Posted - 2014.01.21 02:16:00 -
[169] - Quote
All of these Rubicon 1.1 changes are going in the wrong direction. They make Eve much less interesting to me. And these 1 time use units are a joke for niche fleet uses only. Eve does not need nerfs to Sensor Dampening. What event prompted CCP to make SD worse? If I thought to use SD b4, this will most definitely push me away from it. "We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein-á |
Liafcipe9000
Critically Preposterous
13786
|
Posted - 2014.01.21 07:21:00 -
[170] - Quote
Oh look, CCP is nerfing tracking disruptors and sensor dampeners. Frostys Virpio > CCP: Continously Crying Playerbase Felicity Love >... was thinking "moar popcorn"... but now, seeing the truly awesome contribution this thread is going to make to the Greater Glory Of EVE.... imagonnamakkadapizza....
|
|
DR BiCarbonate
Basgerin Pirate SCUM.
79
|
Posted - 2014.01.22 02:44:00 -
[171] - Quote
Should probably nerf ecm now.... just saying. |
Thorado
Rim Collection RC Sorry We're In Your Space Eh
1
|
Posted - 2014.01.22 11:30:00 -
[172] - Quote
So what exactly is the difference between the T2 variant of Tracking Disruptor and Meta 4 and T2 variant of Sensor Dampener and Meta 4? I'm new to this so IDK |
Domanique Altares
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
2351
|
Posted - 2014.01.22 12:03:00 -
[173] - Quote
Thorado wrote:So what exactly is the difference between the T2 variant of Tracking Disruptor and Meta 4 and T2 variant of Sensor Dampener and Meta 4? I'm new to this so IDK
Currently, in the case of TDs and damps, the performance (effectiveness) of T2 and meta 4 is the same. T2 mods are generally cheaper than meta 4 in many markets. In every other meaningful fashion, the T2 mods are inferior to the meta 4. They take more fitting, use more cap, and now that they can be overheated, will probably burn the whole rack out faster just like most other T2 mods. Rifterlings pirate corporation is now recruitng members for lowsec PvP operations. Newbie friendly, free T1 frigate and dessy hangar, solo tutoring and PvP classes for new members. Join our in game channel 'weflyrifters' and speak to a recruiter today. |
Notorious Fellon
Republic University Minmatar Republic
127
|
Posted - 2014.01.22 21:21:00 -
[174] - Quote
So now, as if initially learning this game was not enough, now we are expecting new players who are learning the ropes in PVE to be forced to overheat a TP just for it to be useful?
wtf?
Nice ninja ISK sink btw.
WH daytrippers will have fun trying to repair modules with no stations.
Makes perfect sense to me. *boggle*
|
Maxemus Payne
THE BOARD OF EDUCATION
8
|
Posted - 2014.01.22 23:48:00 -
[175] - Quote
CCP, I would ***** and complain about your unneeded changes, but I know it would be useless. You've already stopped listening to the users with the RLML nerfs... now you're changing more things that are not broken. Why not do something worth while like: A. Add a stacking penalty to ECM drones B. Fix missiles C. Fix Sov
Please, stop meddling in things that are NOT broken and start prioritizing things that actually are. Thank you.
-Max
PS: The damage application of missiles is so abysmal that none of the missile launcher systems were being used with the exception RLMLs(because they were the only ones that actually applied any damage)... and now you wan't to nerf TPs thus furthering their uselessness.
. . . W T F. . .
When you lose touch with the player base and start catering to your agendas... you lose people. You're losing me. Player trust is dropping and if you cannot see that maybe someone needs to be put in charge that can. |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1161
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 08:57:00 -
[176] - Quote
Garviel Tarrant wrote:Scuzzy Logic wrote:Re'doubt wrote:I'm sure much has been said in this thread already, however I never thought that TP's and sebo's needed any kind of nerf.
This change hurts PVE players who use those items, and PVPers to an extent as well.
Really the only people who this change benefits are gate campers, who only need to overload for a few seconds in order to catch their prey.
I strongly encourage revisiting this change as well as others and rethinking their usefulness. This a million times. I still think damps should have less of a nerf and less of an OH bonus to compensate. EWAR really is more useful in long, drawn-out fights. Unbonused TD's are really really powerful in 1v1 situations. Way stronger than any of the other ewar.
Close range yes, ifyou want to harass an enemy group from range and just avoid coutner fire Damps are better. "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1161
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 08:59:00 -
[177] - Quote
Maxemus Payne wrote:
PS: The damage application of missiles is so abysmal that none of the missile launcher systems were being used with the exception RLMLs(because they were the only ones that actually applied any damage)... and now you wan't to nerf TPs thus furthering their uselessness.
. . . W T F. . .
When you lose touch with the player base and start catering to your agendas... you lose people. You're losing me. Player trust is dropping and if you cannot see that maybe someone needs to be put in charge that can.
That is completely wrong.. there is a reason why the ship we use the most are Tengus with HAMS. Usually only interceptors are safe from it. "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1161
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 09:00:00 -
[178] - Quote
Deerin wrote: Make TP"s scripted. But only let bonused ships use scripts, and remove their TP bonuses
.
Ok that makes no sense. Make only bonused ships be able to use scripts, but then remove all bonus from the ships.. therefore no bonused ships anymore.. negating your first statement...
"If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Vincintius Agrippa
F L O O D
22
|
Posted - 2014.01.24 17:57:00 -
[179] - Quote
TP's are barely worth the mids on any ship as it is. |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
905
|
Posted - 2014.01.27 10:03:00 -
[180] - Quote
All very fancy, love the attention heat gets, one of the best features in Eve ... but, why oh why don't you take this opportunity to revamp everything eWar?
It is a chaotic mix of 'why bother', 'nice' and 'OMG, spam that ****' ... |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |