|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
719
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 14:11:00 -
[1] - Quote
+50 hull again, is it?
I guess a few more months of waiting couldn't hurt.
edit: why is my armour/combat drone ishtar being nerfed? |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
720
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 14:18:00 -
[2] - Quote
Catherine Laartii wrote:CCP Rise wrote:Hi guys
You may or may not have seen me make a post a while back saying that we were intending to do a revisit on battleship and heavy assault cruiser balance for this summer, and I can now be a little more specific with you about that!
After digging into this we were both happy and a bit surprised to find that there weren't a lot of clear changes needed. Battleships especially seem to be in a pretty solid place. There are ships within the class getting less use than others, but that is almost completely due to either the meta favoring certain things (this is why the Abaddon isn't seeing a lot of action for example) or due to the ship falling into a niche that isn't extremely popular even though the ship performs exceptionally in that niche (the Hyperion is a great example of this). So the result is that for now we are going to leave BS alone and keep checking back for opportunities to make improvements.
PS - how would you feel about an 8/4/7 Tempest? I feel that while I would prefer to keep its flexibility in shield tanking since shield tempests are a thing, the more important thing to look at for it are its bonuses. It currently suffers the distinction as being the only "attack" battleship gunship without any damage projection bonuses, and while it CAN be argued that projectiles have superior range and tracking and thus don't need said bonuses, it's a poor case to make compared to laser ships like the Apocalypse. A tweak I would recommend that's been talked about would be to bring it up to a full 8 guns, and drop the firing rate bonus on it in favor of a tracking bonus. Not only would this give you a desirable alternate artillery platform to the tornado and maelstrom, it would cement its role as an "attack" battleship very nicely, as currently it remains the only shield attack battleship, except certain monsters spawned in the federation (We will not speak of the dominix in anything but hushed and fearful tones). TLDR; Tempest should keep its slots, but change its bonuses from 5% dmg and 5% firing rate to an 8 gun ships with 5% damage and 7.5% tracking speed per level.
I think it's a projectiles problem. they just have no dps at any ranges, ever. but a general weapons rebalance seems unlikely, considering how long this non-change has taken. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
720
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 14:23:00 -
[3] - Quote
Vlad Vladimir Vladinovsky wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote: I think it's a projectiles problem. they just have no dps at any ranges, ever. but a general weapons rebalance seems unlikely, considering how long this non-change has taken.
I disagree, I think the abilities of artillery is favorable because of its extremely high alpha and extreme range compared to say railguns. Yes Railguns and Beams might fire faster but the DPS is about the same I find, the huge alpha is the attraction to artillery.
but they don't have extreme range. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
720
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 14:24:00 -
[4] - Quote
BadAssMcKill wrote:Give the Muninn +1 mid -1 low tia in advance
And no keep the tempest as is
I think it's supposed to be able to do armour. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
720
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 14:27:00 -
[5] - Quote
Vlad Vladimir Vladinovsky wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Vlad Vladimir Vladinovsky wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote: I think it's a projectiles problem. they just have no dps at any ranges, ever. but a general weapons rebalance seems unlikely, considering how long this non-change has taken.
I disagree, I think the abilities of artillery is favorable because of its extremely high alpha and extreme range compared to say railguns. Yes Railguns and Beams might fire faster but the DPS is about the same I find, the huge alpha is the attraction to artillery. but they don't have extreme range. Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure artillery can reach farther than rails can they just have less tracking to balance
nope. they have no range, no tracking and no dps. it's all in the volley damage, and the no-cap and damage types thing. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
720
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 14:28:00 -
[6] - Quote
Requiescat wrote:solo battleship
please, rise and fozzie are delusional enough already |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
720
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 14:35:00 -
[7] - Quote
Guth'Alak wrote:CCP Rise wrote: Ishtar: Bonus to drone tracking and optimal range from 7.5% per level -> 5% per level Max Velocity from 195 -> 185
Of course you had to nerf them 1 week after i trained into them!
a tiny nerf like this confirms that there won't be a real nerf for a long time or possibly ever. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
720
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 14:44:00 -
[8] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Regarding the Ishtar, sentry drones are the problem, not the ship. Increase the signature radius or completely change their mechanics by having them stay within 5km of the ship and not be an independent stationary turret, which is unbalanced when compared to how every other weapon system works!
What's going to happen when this change makes no difference whatsoever? Are you going to remove the tracking speed bonus completely?
they need to distinguish between different ishtar fits. brawly armour ones are not broken or OP or ever used, and yet they are getting a speed nerf because of the abusive kitey ones. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
722
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 14:50:00 -
[9] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:The sentries have to go on the Ishtar. Its sad to say but it gives the Ishtar way too much range and flexibility.
Rebalance it to not be a sentry boat. I've suggested it before and I'll suggest it again.
Change heavy drone bandwidth from 25 to 20 Change the ishtar, navy vexor bandwidth from 125 to 100.
You now have a nitch for the Ishtar, (heavy drone operations ship), the navy vexor, stratios and the myrmidon functions better as they now have an option to launch a full flight of drones that are not sentries, but also are not some mismatch set of drones that the myrmidon, vexor and prophecy currently run.
Basically you don't make the damage of ishtars instantaneous, and you also create a better chase sequence for when they run
Change heavy drones to 20 bandwidth each Reduce bandwidth on Ishtar and vexor navy to 100.
stupid, just give them 50 bandwidth and x% medium drone damage bonus. like gila drone dps, but over 5 drones instead of 2. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
722
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 15:04:00 -
[10] - Quote
Dr Cedric wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Phoenix Jones wrote:The sentries have to go on the Ishtar. Its sad to say but it gives the Ishtar way too much range and flexibility.
Rebalance it to not be a sentry boat. I've suggested it before and I'll suggest it again.
Change heavy drone bandwidth from 25 to 20 Change the ishtar, navy vexor bandwidth from 125 to 100.
You now have a nitch for the Ishtar, (heavy drone operations ship), the navy vexor, stratios and the myrmidon functions better as they now have an option to launch a full flight of drones that are not sentries, but also are not some mismatch set of drones that the myrmidon, vexor and prophecy currently run.
Basically you don't make the damage of ishtars instantaneous, and you also create a better chase sequence for when they run
Change heavy drones to 20 bandwidth each Reduce bandwidth on Ishtar and vexor navy to 100.
stupid, just give them 50 bandwidth and x% medium drone damage bonus. like gila drone dps, but over 5 drones instead of 2. You're forgetting that there are a Handful of non-Ishtar ships out there that have exactly 100 Mbit bandwidth that could see this as a stealth buff, not to mention the folks that fly w/ 75Mbit bandwidth that could run a 3+2 heavy/medium setup. Also, there are a few frigs/destros out there (tristan, algos, Dragoon) that would now be able to field a Heavy. I'm betting that's not in the design process.
you shouldn't want to be using mixed-size drone groups, they're a horrible necessity. I'm not saying anything about dragoons or whatever. I'm saying cruisers and BCs with drone damage bonuses should have 50 bandwidth and appropriate drone damage.
for algos I'd probably drop it to 25 and up the damage bonus slightly to compensate. having to 'option' to fit extremely slow, no-tracking drones in my no-dronebay destroyer is something I've only exercised once, and immediately regretted because it's stupid. |
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
724
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 15:39:00 -
[11] - Quote
Aeril Malkyre wrote:Ishtar: remove the sentry/heavy bonuses, replace with mediums. That's why they're wrecking everything. My Vagabond isn't sporting Cruise Missiles or 1200mm artillery. Take the BS weapon systems away from the medium size HAC, suddenly it's back in it's own weight class, still punching above it with powerful medium weapons, T2 resists, the extra operation range, etc. The change being proposed might as well not happen. People will drop whatever utility they had in their mids and pop on an extra Omni. Nerf un-nerfed. Tempest: Pull the high slot. The current 8-5-6 is pretty versatile; stop trying to force her into an armor tank. Read your own flavor text Evelopedia wrote:The Tempest is one of the Republic Fleet's key vessels; a versatile gunship proficient at long-range bombardment and capable of dishing out specialized types of damage with great effectiveness. She's primarily an artillery boat. 'Long range bombardment' with artillery requires low slots for gyros and TEs. If you want the Tempest to come back into play, pull the extra hi and give it to the mids. Now you've got a 7-6-6 with room for either tank, she's still versatile with a utility hi, the option to mount missiles, and still built to hammer the hell out of targets.
versatile doesn't mean artillery, and flavour text comes after game balance.
I obviously would favour a split weapons ship like the old phoon, but that's obviously not happening with all the split weapons hate and CCP incompetence. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
724
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 15:50:00 -
[12] - Quote
Ripard Teg wrote:Do you feel like 10m/s is enough for the Eagle? Today, on MWD an Eagle is 150m/s slower than a heavily plated Deimos and 200+ m/s slower than the longer range Cerberus.
Even with this +10m/s, you are only giving Eagle pilots one viable fit and in doing so reducing player choice.
surely the slowest race should actually be the slowest? something else that bugs me is on some of their ships, CCP give them reduced sig radius, to make up for having to shield tank. it all just defeats the point. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
724
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:23:00 -
[13] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Impressively scattered discussion so far. I can respond to a few things directly:
Anything related to the tournament - the tournament has no impact on game balance decisions. We handle tournament balance using tournament rules and I don't think we would ever postpone balance changes based on the tournament schedule. We want to try and make sure tournament participants are informed of incoming balance changes but we will never make compromises to the whole player base because of a tournament.
Battleships are in a good place - an important distinction here is that I meant battleships are in a relatively good place WITHIN the class. Whether or not they are healthy relative to other classes is more complicated, but if there's issues there (because of bombers for instance) we would more likely want to deal with that problem from the other direction (by making changes to bombers for instance) rather than changing every BS to compensate. Between Duckslayer insulting me he mentioned MWD cap use on BS which I agree with and I may try to get a change for that in shortly.
Tempest - like watching this discussion, happy to see that a significant chunk of people seem to prefer it the way it is now.
Ishtar - really want to emphasize how we would rather take smaller steps more often than big ones more rarely. After some more feedback here we will definitely revisit and make sure we are happy with this change for this release.
Keep it comin
why do you think battleships are in a good place? I never see them used for anything. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
725
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:31:00 -
[14] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Quote:why do you think battleships are in a good place? I never see them used for anything. If you read the text you quoted you will see that I said battleships as a whole getting used isn't what I said was in a good place, rather that battleships are in a pretty good place relative to other battleships. Also, even though you've been very unlucky not to see them at all, I can assure you they are used for things.
eh. if you count highsec pve and addled nullsec people, I guess they are a bit. pls fix T3s and caps so they can be relevant again. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
725
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 17:17:00 -
[15] - Quote
we could just remove sentry drones altogether. they're silly and hard to balance. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
725
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 17:43:00 -
[16] - Quote
Role Play wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Requiescat wrote:solo battleship please, rise and fozzie are delusional enough already CCP Rise used to solo battheships all the time.
so did I, and it only worked because of bads. people are less bad now. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
725
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 18:20:00 -
[17] - Quote
eh. drones should be more consistently ewar resistant/immune than they are now. that and range flexibility is what they do... at the expense of, I don't know, something. being destroyable and being delayed damage, I guess. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
726
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 21:55:00 -
[18] - Quote
Arya Regnar wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:CCP Rise wrote:This "Ishtar has bonuses to battleship weapons" line that keeps coming up is interesting. We talked about it some earlier here. There's parts of it that we can agree about but it's also something that makes drones interesting across all drone using/bonused ships. You could use the same argument to say that Dominix's shouldn't get bonuses to light drones or that Vexors shouldn't be able to use lights or heavies or sentries. The biggest benefit that drone ships have is that they can carry multiple sizes of weapons without needing to refit the ship. This benefit is still there whether or not they get bonuses to the smaller size drones. On the Ishtar, I would like to see it get -1 Mid and +1 low to encourage armor tanking. Yeah because screw shield ALL the way.
gallente are supposed to armour tank. if you want to shield tank, you picked the wrong race. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
730
|
Posted - 2014.07.30 09:37:00 -
[19] - Quote
Vulfen wrote:Schmell wrote:Vulfen wrote:I like the changes you have put on here Rise
a 8-4-7 Tempest is good aswell, however i would like to mention that this should apply to the Republic Fleet Tempest aswell as the vanilla.
I'd rather not. Tempest fleet issue is 8-5-7, why would you want to nerf it that hard? What i meant was another low slot for the RF Pest i.e 8-4-8
pretty bland, having so many ships with the same slot layout. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
730
|
Posted - 2014.07.30 09:51:00 -
[20] - Quote
Maeltstome wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Vulfen wrote:Schmell wrote:Vulfen wrote:I like the changes you have put on here Rise
a 8-4-7 Tempest is good aswell, however i would like to mention that this should apply to the Republic Fleet Tempest aswell as the vanilla.
I'd rather not. Tempest fleet issue is 8-5-7, why would you want to nerf it that hard? What i meant was another low slot for the RF Pest i.e 8-4-8 pretty bland, having so many ships with the same slot layout. Regular Pest: 7-5-7, same stats as now Fleet Pest: 8-5-7, 7 guns, 5% Damage, 10% Falloff per level.
so you add a falloff bonus, but it still has absolutely no damage at all. this is a projectiles problem and a tempest problem. I think there should be changes to both. |
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
730
|
Posted - 2014.07.30 10:33:00 -
[21] - Quote
Maeltstome wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:so you add a falloff bonus, but it still has absolutely no damage at all. this is a projectiles problem and a tempest problem. I think there should be changes to both. Tempests Alpha is insane. It's not a DPS ship - it's about blapping things and projecting damage further than other BS. If you want to melt things point blank then gallente is the way forward.
so autocannons don't exist? |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
730
|
Posted - 2014.07.30 12:27:00 -
[22] - Quote
the insane fitting gap between ACs and arties causes stuff like this, I think. you give a ship fitting for arties and it has 99999999 infinite grid in AC mode, and you give a ship grid for ACs and it cannot artillery.
also optimal bonuses on minmatar are pretty bad. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
730
|
Posted - 2014.07.30 12:34:00 -
[23] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:the insane fitting gap between ACs and arties causes stuff like this, I think. you give a ship fitting for arties and it has 99999999 infinite grid in AC mode, and you give a ship grid for ACs and it cannot artillery.
also optimal bonuses on minmatar are pretty bad. Make munin range bonus be a half bonus to range and half to falloff on a signle bonus. Now it can work with AC soemwhat. Also add a ROEL bonus of arti PG requiriments reduction by 20%. Done.
I'd be more in favour of just a falloff bonus, or better, a generic optimal + falloff bonus for all half and half weapons like arties and blasters. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
730
|
Posted - 2014.07.30 12:43:00 -
[24] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:the insane fitting gap between ACs and arties causes stuff like this, I think. you give a ship fitting for arties and it has 99999999 infinite grid in AC mode, and you give a ship grid for ACs and it cannot artillery.
also optimal bonuses on minmatar are pretty bad. Make munin range bonus be a half bonus to range and half to falloff on a signle bonus. Now it can work with AC soemwhat. Also add a ROEL bonus of arti PG requiriments reduction by 20%. Done. I'd be more in favour of just a falloff bonus, or better, a generic optimal + falloff bonus for all half and half weapons like arties and blasters. But that is what I said. A single bonus being 5% bonus to range AND falloff of projectiles. It snto a specialzied role ad the vaga bonus. But faloff helps a bit arties as well.
5% is worse than 10%. if you're half optimal half falloff, a 10% per level bonus to both is no better than an all-optimal turret having 10% bonus. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
730
|
Posted - 2014.07.30 14:43:00 -
[25] - Quote
White Drop wrote:Please do the slot change for Tempest. Right now it can't compete with other battleships nither in armor, nor in shield tank. Focusing it on armor will make it much more interesting.
why? we already have typhoon as armour minmatar. tempest could just be either. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
730
|
Posted - 2014.07.30 14:52:00 -
[26] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:White Drop wrote:Please do the slot change for Tempest. Right now it can't compete with other battleships nither in armor, nor in shield tank. Focusing it on armor will make it much more interesting. why? we already have typhoon as armour minmatar. tempest could just be either. But something must be done. Easier way is to improve the ship bonuses. 7.5% damage instead of 5% would already help a lot. Right now it can be a bad shield tank battleship or a bad armor battleship. For the same treatment of having only 6 turrets the hyperion got a 10% damage per level bonus and KEPT his repair bonus and 125m drone bay and a superior slot layout . Tempest must use 2 bonuses to still be way worse.
yes, projectiles are terrible |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
731
|
Posted - 2014.07.30 15:11:00 -
[27] - Quote
White Drop wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:White Drop wrote:Please do the slot change for Tempest. Right now it can't compete with other battleships nither in armor, nor in shield tank. Focusing it on armor will make it much more interesting. why? we already have typhoon as armour minmatar. tempest could just be either. Typhoon is based on missiles. It means that he can't do that good instant alpha damage, and is not that good in close-range brawling becouse of torpedoes explosiun radius, even with the ship's bonus for it. It still is a nice ship, but it would be great to have armored ship capable of doing nice alpha-volley. With all that BS and HACs rebalancing happend past years tempest realy lost it's possitions. He is not good enough for armor fleet, as well as for shield. Nowadays it is only used to "cheap and quic" kill a few capitals, but this great ship deserves much more love from developers.
torpedoes being utterly awful is not intentional, it's just yet another balance issue to be resolved. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
735
|
Posted - 2014.07.31 11:58:00 -
[28] - Quote
you guys really make fozzie and rise look less bad. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
739
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 14:23:00 -
[29] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:Ewar against drones is bad idea. Remember that you can still assist your drones to someone if you get jammed or damped.
drones are supposed to keep on shooting when jammed or damped, their ewar resistance shouldn't be reliant on being in a fleet. I think they should be even more resistant to ewar, honestly, because they're pretty dodgy with random target switching, and just doing nothing if you get jammed before you launch them. very unreliable.
this should be what sets them apart, their flavour. along with range versatility and no cap, in exchange for very delayed damage (yeah, delete sentry drones they're dumb), not-amazing dps and being destroyable.
CCP should just do what I say, and then everyone can be happy except the bad people. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
739
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 14:50:00 -
[30] - Quote
afkalt wrote:And the point is, if you nerf sentries to reign ishtars in, you break everything else.
This is not quite necessary (yet). There are other ways to handle the ishtar and keep the changes limited to that for a small pass.
Like I say, initially I'd like to see them forced into reasonably tough (it's a HAC, after all so you should be skilled to fit it well) fitting compromises to stop it being able to do everything in a single fit and reassess from there.
Don't get me wrong, long term it probably all needs looking at but in there here and now the istar needs sorting and then we want to see how the meta settles from there.
only the dominix has a bonus specifically for sentry drones. if all these other drone ships are completely reliant on sentry drones, then that should be changed as well, because it's dumb. |
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
739
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 16:39:00 -
[31] - Quote
I guess all my high quality posting has made rise abandon this thread. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
739
|
Posted - 2014.08.01 20:30:00 -
[32] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:THB i would prefer if the HAC bonuses were increased to make medium long ranged weapons as effective at range as sentries.
do you know what 'power creep' is |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
739
|
Posted - 2014.08.02 11:12:00 -
[33] - Quote
that eos/tristan gun tracking bonus sure is utter trash. ccp please fix. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
743
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 08:30:00 -
[34] - Quote
I look forward to my armour combat drone ishtar being nerfed, since it is so OP. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
743
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 09:24:00 -
[35] - Quote
Adrie Atticus wrote: Stratios is a good ship, but it cannot even come close to Ishtars in damage or application. If you want to see more graphs feel free to make them yourself or drop a fit and I'll see what I can do.
how is stratios even remotely good if you aren't a cloakscrub? it's trash just like the other SOEs. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
743
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 10:01:00 -
[36] - Quote
hams are not good or bad |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
743
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 10:12:00 -
[37] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote: Sentry drones needs their tracking speed reduced heavily to make ishar less OP in PVP without affecting PVE aspect of drone ships to much.
range reduction, not tracking |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
743
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 10:16:00 -
[38] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote: TRACKING.. not range. Their trcking is 3 times other weapons of same class.
no it isn't |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
743
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 10:23:00 -
[39] - Quote
Vulfen wrote:How about this -
make the drone sentry and heavy drone bonus apply to all drones then make this a medium drone aimed ship
This is what i was thinking
Gallentee Cruiser Bonuses 7.5% Bonus to drone MWD, Tracking & Optimal range per level 10% Bonus to drone Damage & HP
Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonues +1 Drone controled per level +5km Drone control range per level
Reduce bandwidth to 100
This would mean that in an optimal fit it is designed to work with 10 medium drones. but it can still field 4 sentries if needed.
more like 50 bandwidth, 30% bonus to medium drone damage/hp per level, and swap the drone controlled bonus to a non-bonus like armour reps. I don't really like just drone mwd bonuses. should be drone speed with equal drone tracking bonus. or they could just fix the 'drones catch up and fire a volley, drones slow down and go out of range for 30s, drones catch up' thing, but obviously that'll never happen. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
743
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 10:26:00 -
[40] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote: TRACKING.. not range. Their trcking is 3 times other weapons of same class.
no it isn't Yes it is, on that table 2 pages ago. Clear as water. Multiply the range for the trackign to have an effective trackign ratio (because range affects the engagement envelope)
is this the table where all the turrets have -50% optimal range ammo loaded? 'same class' is just a thing you decided, and has no actual real basis. if you want to take range into account for effective tracking, then a range nerf would do this, with the added advantage of being an actual thing that matters lots and not being totally avoidable by competent people who know what webs and painters are. |
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
743
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 10:29:00 -
[41] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote: Sentries shoot more often , so missing 1/4 of shoots is way less impacting than missing 1/4 of shoots from 1400.
no, it isn't. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
744
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 11:52:00 -
[42] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote: TRACKING.. not range. Their trcking is 3 times other weapons of same class.
no it isn't Yes it is, on that table 2 pages ago. Clear as water. Multiply the range for the trackign to have an effective trackign ratio (because range affects the engagement envelope) is this the table where all the turrets have -50% optimal range ammo loaded? 'same class' is just a thing you decided, and has no actual real basis. if you want to take range into account for effective tracking, then a range nerf would do this, with the added advantage of being an actual thing that matters lots and not being totally avoidable by competent people who know what webs and painters are. If you select other ammo .. then the issue is EVEN worse because then sentries have damage of SHORT range guns, range of Long Range guns and tracking of short range guns. Sentries are completely MESSED UP
gardes and mega pulse lasers aren't so out of whack. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
744
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 13:05:00 -
[43] - Quote
Amarisen Gream wrote:Just thinking. . . maybe to fix the Ishtar - Domi, CCP should change how Drone Control Range works.
Instead of the current method - It should be the range in which players can issue "combat" orders, aggressive orders etc. The combat range would be set by the targeting/locking range of the players ships.
This would mean we would need to reduce the base DCR in all the ships. Give a bonus in DCR in roles/level. Reduce the DCR increase from skills.
i.e. Thorax would have a base of say 10km drone control range. And a ship targeting range of say 35km. The player could issue combat/attack orders to drone with in 10km, those drones could attack things up to 35km away. Vexor would have a base 10km DCR. Gain 1km per cruiser level. So at max skill say it could order drones 25km away, and have a targeting range of 50km.
This would make drones act more like mounted combat weapons. + Drones should count as mounted weapons toward a ships hull. 2.5 Drones to a turret. 2.5 light would = 1 small. 2.5 medium = 1 medium hard point. 2.5 heavy/sentry = 1 Large hard point.
This would make ships like the Domnix drop from 6 hard points to 3. This effect would be toward ships which use drones as their primary source of damage. So a Thorax which say is limited to 5 lights, wouldn't lose a medium hard point.
trashing combat drones to fix sentries. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
744
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 13:15:00 -
[44] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote: gardes and mega pulse lasers aren't so out of whack.
Unless you are using them on Isthar , Dominix Then the best tracking drone , top DPS one too, is having range of a scripted SCORCH. So we are again talking about bigger tracking , and more damage than SCORCH. Now try to put those lasers on a Cruiser ( isthar ) or capital ( carrier). You cannot because those guns L class, so only attack battlecruisers and battleships, and only those ships get bonus for them. I'm not against bonuses sentry have to PVE - every one have to make some isk, the more isk flows in , the more you can spend on ships. But in PVP sentry drones are just out of league now. What is worst, the more of them you have - this is more and more visible.
yes, bonuses do indeed improve the stats of weapons. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
744
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:48:00 -
[45] - Quote
Shock Beer wrote:Can the sacrilege please get a look in. Its just not a good ship all round. Its missile projection and DPS is bad compared to cerberus and its tank is so damn average because of its slot layout.
your wrong |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
745
|
Posted - 2014.08.07 07:59:00 -
[46] - Quote
Unezka Turigahl wrote:Hisec exploration sites seem to be about equally populated by the Ishtar, Gila, and Cerberus. Without sentries the Ishtar would be pretty terrible here I would think. What if the HAC sentry bonus only applied to Gardes? Kinda like how the Gila and Cerb get racial bonuses to kinetic/therm and kinetic, Ishtar could just get sentry bonus to the short range Gallente sentry.
Also, you know, CCP should probably let T3s back into these sites. They're not really any better than HACs and Gilas now.
ishtar is supposed to be able to use combat drones. if they suck, then you should be asking for them to be buffed. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
745
|
Posted - 2014.08.08 13:04:00 -
[47] - Quote
maybe they're just really busy doing a surprise 'nerf T3s, logis, links and caps' surprise feature, so they can't waste time posting here. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
745
|
Posted - 2014.08.08 15:12:00 -
[48] - Quote
why are you using the wrong missiles?
and why do missile scrubs think they should do full damage to everything with no effort? 373 with silly hml range is fine. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
745
|
Posted - 2014.08.08 15:28:00 -
[49] - Quote
yes, sentries are broken as ****.
perhaps you should be asking for game changes that enable very long range weapon systems to be usable, rather than wanting railgun stats ported over to heavy missiles. lol @ shield tanking gallente. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
745
|
Posted - 2014.08.08 15:44:00 -
[50] - Quote
I think it's alright. the people with capless, all-damage type weapons with total range flexibiliy always seem to be able to totally overlook the importance of these qualities in smaller pvp. |
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
745
|
Posted - 2014.08.08 15:56:00 -
[51] - Quote
muh ad populum |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
745
|
Posted - 2014.08.08 18:45:00 -
[52] - Quote
kagura you're terrible, tank bonuses are always useful. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
746
|
Posted - 2014.08.08 20:21:00 -
[53] - Quote
RLMLs are still very silly. should just be deleted honestly. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
748
|
Posted - 2014.08.10 09:22:00 -
[54] - Quote
sensible battlecruisers have cruiser weapons. 50 bandwidth, bigger medium drone damage bonus is the way to go. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
748
|
Posted - 2014.08.10 12:13:00 -
[55] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:I honestly don't think that carriers theoretically needing sentry drones to shoot at a POS is reason enough to justify keeping them.
And besides that, it shoves carriers out of the dreadnaught niche, where they have been encroaching for some time. If they can field only 5 sentries and have not many to replace, they would not be pushing dreads anywhere. THey would just be fat dominixes. Nothing unfair. What I think is needed is dreads be able to move (not warp neither jump) while in siege. That would at least open a few tactical avenues on short range dread action. adding T2 capital guns with ammo like scorch etc.. might help
lol |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
748
|
Posted - 2014.08.10 16:54:00 -
[56] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Xequecal wrote:At this point they should just allow T2 ammo to be used in T1 guns. Deadspace (if they existed) and Officer, sure. But not T1 or Faction.
there's no reason not to. but obviously, T2 ammo still needs a massive rework so all the offending types are on-par with javelin. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
748
|
Posted - 2014.08.10 19:27:00 -
[57] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Battlecruisers (with the exception of Attack Battlecruiers) and some of the Command Cruisers could use another pass (Caldari, Minmatar and Gallente should get a variant with +50% shield/armor, respectively). All T1 and Faction Battleships need another pass, as well as a few tweaks to T2 Marauders, T2 Blackops and two of the Pirate Battleships (Barghest and Nestor).
pretty much everything needs another pass. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
748
|
Posted - 2014.08.10 21:28:00 -
[58] - Quote
Starrakatt wrote:Christopher Mabata wrote: Also 8/4/7 tempest could be nice, light shield tank for maximum gank power or super heavy armor tank you have to slog through for the kill
It would NOT. Almost nobody shield tank a Tempest right now because it's not very good, 4 Mids would see it disappear completely. As for armor tanking it, the 5 Mids are what makes gives the Tempest it's 'versatlity' trademark, even if the ship itself is not very good compared to most others. I would much prefer see a High slot go for a new Low, but again it hurts the 'versatility' thing about the ship. One of the bonus needs to be changed, that's all. Dual DPS bonused looks nice when you see it, one would think: Hey! TWO dps bonuses, must make it a superior dps ship, right? It doesn't. Its no better dps wise than most BS and worse than many. I think the only way to make the Tempest better as a supposedly 'DPS' ship is reworking the ROF to 7.5%, or make one 10% and turn the other in a Tracking or Falloff bonus. Or alternatively, make the regular Tempest 7.5% ROF/5% Damage and the Fleet Tempest in a bigger FIS with a 10% ROF and 7.5% Tracking.
projectiles are not good enough. so your solution is to buff the tempest |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
754
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 21:34:00 -
[59] - Quote
or you could model them after AFs and make them move like BCs. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
754
|
Posted - 2014.08.13 11:53:00 -
[60] - Quote
power creep is done because people cry loads about nerfs, even though buffing 1 thing is basically the same as nerfing everything other than that thing. if you disagree, you're terrible. |
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
754
|
Posted - 2014.08.13 14:05:00 -
[61] - Quote
Astral Jesus wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:power creep is done because people cry loads about nerfs, even though buffing 1 thing is basically the same as nerfing everything other than that thing. if you disagree, you're terrible. And nerfing one thing is basically the same as buffing everything else against that one thing... what's your point? Nerfs lead to power creep just as easily as buffs do, it's just the direction of the creep that changes. If you disagree, you're even more terrible. Power creep is an inevitable result of adding variety to a game. The only way to avoid power creep is to achieve relative balance and then not implement anything new or unique ever again. Which is an even faster way to kill EVE than accepting power creep as an inevitability of change, and trying to manage it accordingly. The only difference between nerfing and buffing is the number of people you **** off when you get it wrong.
because we're talking about overpowered things, and there are crazy people saying stuff like 'buff all the other hacs', and being uninformed about power creep. nerfing an overpowered thing is not any kind of 'creep', neither is making new things. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
754
|
Posted - 2014.08.13 14:48:00 -
[62] - Quote
lolpve |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
762
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 11:41:00 -
[63] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Minty Aroma wrote:Don't change the slot layout (shield tempests should be a thing) but change the role bonuses to one strong dps increase and falloff as well as a small further buff to speed - then finally we'll have a autocannon kity pest, which fits in well with it's attack BS role. That is the obvious best solution. But I never dared to suggest it since CCP never follows the logical solutions. And frankly after 8 years trying.. I doubt we can make ccp to treat the tempest fairly on the same level they treated the hyperion.
hyperion got special treatment because active tanking is a joke. I think this is how they do active tanking now - they give the ship better stats to make up for having a useless bonus, so you can ignore it and use it in gangs. though I'm not sure when you'd want a buffer hype over a megathron, they overlap a lot. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
762
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 12:20:00 -
[64] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:Minty Aroma wrote:Don't change the slot layout (shield tempests should be a thing) but change the role bonuses to one strong dps increase and falloff as well as a small further buff to speed - then finally we'll have a autocannon kity pest, which fits in well with it's attack BS role. That is the obvious best solution. But I never dared to suggest it since CCP never follows the logical solutions. And frankly after 8 years trying.. I doubt we can make ccp to treat the tempest fairly on the same level they treated the hyperion. hyperion got special treatment because active tanking is a joke. I think this is how they do active tanking now - they give the ship better stats to make up for having a useless bonus, so you can ignore it and use it in gangs. though I'm not sure when you'd want a buffer hype over a megathron, they overlap a lot. needing 2 damage bonuses to still do less damage than almost all its peers seems a joke as well for the tempest. Tempest had an use when battleships warped as fast as cruisers. Now... nothing.
that's projectiles for you. more than tempest buffs, you should be pushing for projectile buffs. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
763
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 17:19:00 -
[65] - Quote
Stitch Kaneland wrote:Harvey James wrote:Stitch Kaneland wrote:Quote:you talk about the other T1 versions being the same role as their T2 HAC counterpart ... zealot - omen .. omen is much quicker caracal - cerberus .. caracal is faster thorax - deimos .. thorax is quicker stabber - vaga .. vaga is slightly quicker
and so on and so on .. point being only the vaga is quicker than its T1 attack counterpart.. so in exchange for say 25m/s so it would still be 270m/s base speed still very quick ...give it more shield HP and perhaps trade a high for midslot You do realize theres more to roles than speed right. zeal shines in fleet doctrines due to excellent projection and good tank. Deimos is slower because its one of the best brawlers.. if it got faster, it would be hard for people keep it from landing tackle. You seem to be tunnel visioned on speed and fail to see that each ship is specialized for a specific role. Vaga - speed/kite deimos - brawler cerb - anti frig/support zealot - anti-support, great projection/application All other ships are tankier than vagabond, but slower. That to me seems like a logical way to balance ships. caldari have always had a bigger shield pool. Minmatar have always been faster. Do you not even know the lore? you keep changing your argument when it suits you .. i was responding to your post about speed .. with a speed based post myself ... now your saying its not all about speed but something else... Im not changing anything ive been saying. You just dont seem to grasp the concept of the vagas ROLE is the speed. HAC specialize. The vaga is fast with a moderate tank. While other ships are slower, with more tank. What part do u not get? Ive been saying that from the beginning. You nerf a kiters speed, it no longer is a kiter, but a brawler. Vagas bonuses are not for brawling.
brawling is not inherently slow. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
763
|
Posted - 2014.08.16 09:46:00 -
[66] - Quote
Xequecal wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:The problem you are describing has little if anything to do with those ships. Their slot layouts and stats are just fine, many of them are powerful on their own.
But autocannons suck.
That's your real problem. And honestly, with the exception of hybrids, every weapon system in the entire game needs a balance pass. Missiles have problems with travel time and application falling off completely, lasers need better ammo variety (some Thermal damage for crying out loud, EM is the worst damage type in the game) and less restrictive cap use and fitting, and autocannons are too heavily penalized for being capless, they don't hit as hard as they should. EM is the best damage type in the game. It's not even close. EM is the lowest resist on the vast majority of PvP ships. Even armor battleships usually go for a 3-hardener setup now leaving EM as the lowest resist. EM used to be terrible during the winmatar days when everything had minnie T2 resists, but now Minmatar T2 ships are almost nonexistent and we have Gallente supremacy where all their T2 stuff has EM as the lowest (shield tank) or second-lowest (armor tank) resist. EM is only the strongest resist anymore on armor tanked T1 cruisers and battlecruisers, and even battlecruisers are seeing little use nowadays.
so it's good because people are bad? |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
766
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 11:57:00 -
[67] - Quote
it's called range |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
767
|
Posted - 2014.08.19 20:03:00 -
[68] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Jacob Holland wrote:Given that the Ishtar is overpowered in (at least) the current meta. And given that the primary complaint is its use of "drop & run" sentries...
What if its drone damage bonus was modified to Light, Medium and Heavy drones, leaving sentries usable but unbonused.
The Ishtar existed before Sentries were introduced, it still ran the "dump and run" shield fits (with heavies) but armour brawlers were also seen...
I will say that I've had Ishtars since about 2006 though I've never been rich enough to use them in PvP. damage bonuses to specific sized drones is the best way forward i feel Ishtar Gal bonuses 10% damage/HP to light and medium drones, 7.5% damage/HP to heavy drones, 5% damage to sentry drones 7.5% heavy drone max velocity and tracking speed HAC bonuses 5% tracking/optimal range to sentry drones 5km to drone operation range dronebay 125/325 Navy Vexor Gal bonuses 10% damage/HP to light and medium drones, 7.5% damage/HP to heavy drones, 5% damage to sentry drones 5% drone max velocity and tracking speed
10% is not really enough for usable mediums. it should do the same medium drone dps as a gila's mediums. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
781
|
Posted - 2014.08.25 11:02:00 -
[69] - Quote
Carniflex wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:w3ak3stl1nk wrote:Ishtar: Sentry drone bonus should be changed to heavy drone bonus optimal and tracking... Simple fix that encourages heavies. IT ALREADY HAVE BONUS TO HEAVIES on the other 2 bonsues. Geez peopel do nto even read the ship? The split bonuses on the isthar were already an attemtp to avoid making it too powerful The problem is nto the ishtar. The problem are the Damm sentries. Reminds me of the old good Drake. Got its balls ripped off by relatively heavy handed slap to both the hull itself and heavy missiles simultaneously. Compared to what happened then the current tweak is just a little tickle. Speaking of which, were the command ships already re-balanced? I cant remember and taking a look at a Nighthawk littering my hangar it seemed to still suck compared to, say, Tengu.
the drake hull nerf didn't really do anything. and nothing looks like much compared to T3s, because T3s are retardedly broken. |
|
|
|