Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 58 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1537
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 09:45:00 -
[1351] - Quote
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:On the 8/4/7 Tempest:
I think it's fairly pointless. The point of going armor tempest is having 5 mids for utility. If I wanted massive tank with just the standard amount of midslot utility I'd you know... fly another battleship. The only thing the Tempest has going for it is its versatility and slightly above average mobility.
What would be more useful is if the tempest acquired either: 1. More speed (for the shield tempest to not be crap); OR 2. At least one damage bonus increased to 7.5%; OR 3. One damage bonus increased to 10% and the other changed to tracking (only because a falloff bonus would make the nado redundant); OR 3. An extra turret hardpoint (for a total of 7).
Also the Abaddon is not fine. It's role has been taken over by the Apoc. At least give it a little more cap so merely firing its guns doesn't deplete my cap charges as rapidly as it currently does.
This night I had a dream about a tempest... with 7.5% rof bonus and 15% Neutralizer Strenght bonus.... a ship that would have again a role. And no would not be overpowered since it would still do less damage and less neuting range than a geddon.
Also woudl fit PERFECLTY the lore. What else minmatar would develop to fight specifically the amarr ships? "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Rab See
Fool Mental Junket
117
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 15:08:00 -
[1352] - Quote
So summery so far:
Tempest - 4 mids = NO. Its DPS /scope is so poor it makes many sad. The worst ship in the game?
Ishtar - eclipses everything, small tweak is insult.
Comments from Dev down to near zero (they may be on hols). |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
874
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 15:22:00 -
[1353] - Quote
The tempest needs too be a bit like a big hurricane .. versatile, mobile and with utility but still able to put out good dps comparative too other attack battleships .. as the Maelstrom is a bit niche with a active tank bonus
.. really the Maelstrom needs a nerf too HP and maybe lose a turret but improve its solo playability it has powerful shield boost after-all just look at the Hyperion changes .. more mobility is needed on it.. the tempest needs too become more competitive in the shield tanking/armour tanking area .. make it the premier projectile boat that matches minmatar philosophy much more than a buffer tanked high Alpha Maelstrom..
a 7-6-6 layout with 6 turrets stronger dps bonuses perhaps a small falloff bonus tempest with higher shield and armour HP than the Maelstrom would make sense.. you could trade off some drone bandwidth maybe down too 50mbit would match better with a falloff bonus anyway .. a mini mach basically 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. |
RTSAvalanche
The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos
37
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 15:34:00 -
[1354] - Quote
Long live shield tempest!
and lets not forget - the best thing about minmatar is their ability to roll nicely in armor or shield!!
how about we forget about null crap & wh's for once and give a hoot to those that dwell in the solo & small gangs of low-sec! |
Malwadas Kadmos
The Eleusinian The Imicus Contract
3
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 16:13:00 -
[1355] - Quote
ishtar changes are good but wont be enough, 125mbit drone boats with tracking bonus are just a joke(in small scale pvp) since the release of geckos ... heavy drones going with over 4k m/s and having good enough tracking to hit full speed moving frigates without needing web/scram/target painting is pretty strong. |
Heinrich Erquilenne
Foundation Cutting-Edge Mordus Angels
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 16:17:00 -
[1356] - Quote
Ishtars aren't the issue, sentry drones are. They're battleship class weapons and can track anything including small frigates or fast cruisers. It makes any ship carrying them the perfect jack of all trades, works in every situation, etc. It should be something like a siege weapon. If sentries get their tracking nuked then Ishtars are perfectly fine and balanced. |
cool4nd
The Tuskers The Tuskers Co.
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 16:20:00 -
[1357] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:
PS - how would you feel about an 8/4/7 Tempest?
How about 7/5/7 with 7 guns? |
Khellan Charante
DerpWaffe
5
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 17:00:00 -
[1358] - Quote
These are great changes, although I still think that heavy drones are a battleship weapon, and that no cruiser should have access to a full set of battleship grade weapons, but I digress slightly. Drones are, after all, in a funky category of their own.
Regardless, I am much more interested in the proposed change to the tempest. I honestly think that it needs another turret as well. So, 7 turrets, 8 hi slots, 4 mids, and 7 lows. That would be awesome. |
Arthur Aihaken
Halas Hooligans
3752
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 17:13:00 -
[1359] - Quote
cool4nd wrote:How about 7/5/7 with 7 guns? How about separate threads for Battlecruiser and Battleship passes? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Hakaari Inkuran
State War Academy Caldari State
173
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 17:17:00 -
[1360] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote: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. This obsessive need to deal with rebalances in a class-by-class basis is weird and doesn't really help the game. Individual ships that need nerfs or buffs need to be identified, and the correct changes should be applied with every content / rebalance patch. |
|
Arthur Aihaken
Halas Hooligans
3752
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 17:19:00 -
[1361] - Quote
Hakaari Inkuran wrote:This obsessive need to deal with rebalances in a class-by-class basis is weird and doesn't really help the game. Individual ships that need nerfs or buffs need to be identified, and the correct changes should be applied with every content / rebalance patch. Hey, don't look at me... I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Hakaari Inkuran
State War Academy Caldari State
173
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 17:23:00 -
[1362] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Hakaari Inkuran wrote:This obsessive need to deal with rebalances in a class-by-class basis is weird and doesn't really help the game. Individual ships that need nerfs or buffs need to be identified, and the correct changes should be applied with every content / rebalance patch. Hey, don't look at me... I'm not, I just felt it needed to be said since we're on the subject. Too many beautiful ships go too long being "bad" simply because they don't get their "turn" for absolutely forever.
Doesn't the rifter need help? I believe the rifter needs help and has needed it for a very long time now. It could have gotten that help several times now but its waiting its "turn".
How does that help the game to have turns at rebalances? |
Arthur Aihaken
Halas Hooligans
3752
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 17:25:00 -
[1363] - Quote
Hakaari Inkuran wrote:How does that help the game to have turns at rebalances? I agree. And honestly, there aren't entirely that many ships that need a major overhaul - just a few tweaks. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Samuel Wess
Stain Police Happy Cartel
59
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 17:30:00 -
[1364] - Quote
Ishtar is a unique well defined ship left in eve, most of the others are now a mix of features and flat attributes (like BC, all equal doesnt matter which I choose). I would like to see more unique ships, each really powerful on a niche and having a hard counter at least. Flattening the game trough balance will make it dull, I want to board a ship and really feel the unique experience of that ship, and not just a skin with 500 dps @ 20 + 40km. Walk into the club like "What up? I got a big cockpit!" |
xlop
Dem Funk
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 17:30:00 -
[1365] - Quote
Please leave the tempest alone! |
Justin Cody
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
252
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 17:41:00 -
[1366] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:
projectiles are not good enough. so your solution is to buff the tempest
Projectiles are more than good enough. Consider the following facts:
1) They use no capacitor 2) They apply damage better than their capacitor using counterparts (artillery track better than railguns for example) 3) They have the smallest fitting requirements in CPU and Power Grid of any type of weapons system 4) They can choose their damage type within a good range 3 short range, 2 mid range and 3 long range types.
So autocannons don't shoot as far as pulse lasers? So what? Lasers have a great optimal but a crap falloff, are restricted to EM/Thermal and use tremendous amounts of capacitor. Wanna beat an amarr laser boat? put a neut on it.
Vs blasters? again...neut them. Blasters have a similar range to autos...usually a longer optimal but smaller falloff. Blasters out DPS and out track them but again draw hideous amounts of cap and also is restricted to kin/therm.
railguns? - Pfft use artillery - sov fleets with eagles are only kinda meh. You never see them in small gangs being effective.
beam lasers? Wanna cap yourself out REALLY fast? use those. Their short range ammo isn't any better than most pulse laser ranges anyway. No real reason to use them.
Projectiles are right where they need to be. NOT OP.
|
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
875
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 17:43:00 -
[1367] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Hakaari Inkuran wrote:How does that help the game to have turns at rebalances? I agree. And honestly, there aren't entirely that many ships that need a major overhaul - just a few tweaks.
Recons and T3's need a lot of work 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. |
Arthur Aihaken
Halas Hooligans
3752
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 17:45:00 -
[1368] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Recons and T3's need a lot of work I should have prefaced that with a disclaimer of ships that have already received a balance pass. Recons, T3s and Black Ops (to name a few) have yet to see any kind of serious overhaul - so yes, I agree. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
705
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 18:08:00 -
[1369] - Quote
RE: The Tempest I've always liked it in nanopest loadout bridging the gap a bit between BCs and BS if it does change mid slot layout would be nice if it got the same shield/armor ratios as maelstrom so ~9300 or so shields (if it kept its current armor HP). |
GeeShizzle MacCloud
464
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 18:22:00 -
[1370] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Hi guys
Ishtar: Bonus to drone tracking and optimal range from 7.5% per level -> 5% per level Max Velocity from 195 -> 185
Eagle: Max Velocity from 180 -> 190
yes i also believe that a ship with nearly twice the tank of the former should also be faster too!
you want to rebalance HACs? u do realise theres more than just 3 HACs in the game right?
CCP Rise wrote: We expect that some of you will feel this is far too gentle on the Ishtar, and we understand that (it's what we heard from the CSM as well), but we get releases very often now and we're happy to be conservative here, rather than nuke it out of the game, and just make more changes if they're needed in the following release.
Good, i understand the softly softly approach especially with a community that will jump on the opportunity of using something OP or ditching something completely thats nerfed into the floor :cough: heavy missiles :cough:
CCP Rise wrote: PS - how would you feel about an 8/4/7 Tempest?
hate to see the near extinction of shield BS's having the final nail in its coffin slammed home with the last real shield BS becoming an obvious armor ship. but as it stands id rather see a rework of shield BS's in general to become viable in fleet warfare again. |
|
Goin Off
Manson Family Advent of Fate
10
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 18:24:00 -
[1371] - Quote
LOL, CCP doesn't address the issue again! The ishtar nerf you're proposing for this release is a bad joke at best. Does virtually nothing to re-balance the ishtar with its peers, because as a hac it has no peers. |
Justin Cody
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
252
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 18:38:00 -
[1372] - Quote
The easiest way to rebalance the ishtar isn't through stats or bonuses. It is through control range. It needs a separate sentry control range. They should have to remain within 30km of wherever they drop their sentries. It allows some mobility while limiting the ships ability to be effective at *any* range. |
Inslander Wessette
primordial star Universal Paranoia Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 18:42:00 -
[1373] - Quote
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.
HACs on the other hand are a slightly different story. In general the class gained a lot of power in the last pass and it's seeing plenty of use across the board, but there are some pretty clear imbalances between certain ships in the class. If you've undocked lately you probably know the Ishtar especially is a little out of control. Here's the small set of changes we're going to make:
Ishtar: Bonus to drone tracking and optimal range from 7.5% per level -> 5% per level Max Velocity from 195 -> 185
Eagle: Max Velocity from 180 -> 190
Muninn: Max velocity from 210 -> 230
We expect that some of you will feel this is far too gentle on the Ishtar, and we understand that (it's what we heard from the CSM as well), but we get releases very often now and we're happy to be conservative here, rather than nuke it out of the game, and just make more changes if they're needed in the following release.
Looking forward to your feedback as always
PS - how would you feel about an 8/4/7 Tempest?
Note for clarity: Hyperion release date is August 26
Remove a med slot from the Ishtar as well . It will b put into place for sure
|
Xorth Adimus
Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion
43
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 18:47:00 -
[1374] - Quote
Ishtar
Gallente Cruiser bonuses (per skill level): 7.5% bonus to Heavy Drone max velocity and tracking speed 10% bonus to Drone hitpoints and damage Heavy Assault Cruisers bonuses (per skill level): 5000m bonus to Drone operation range 7.5% bonus to Sentry Drone optimal range and tracking speed -> this should be 0% per level New bonus: 7.5% bonus to Medium Drone max velocity and tracking speed
Role Bonus: 50% reduction in Microwarpdrive signature radius penalty
This is a cruiser not a battleship if it uses battleship sized weapons I don't see why it should get damage application benefits too.
Muninn -1 high +1 mid
On the typhoon armor tank, if you are serious about this either the Typhoon (preferred) or the Tempest could be setup to armor tank and a bonus should be changed to give a HP increase for doing this or a full 8 low slots allocated, otherwise, what is the point?
I however prefer the flexibility of Minmatar to fit shield or armor on more ships but the basic hull HPs have always been pretty bad, speed and signature is supposed to make up for this, but on battleship hull, in today's game, just buff the hps? |
Kathorah
EVE Protection Agency Bloodline.
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 19:33:00 -
[1375] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Sentry drones have enormous downsides. They can be killed like other drones AND they don't return to your ship. There's a reason they were never used at all until assist + these tracking/optimal bonuses came along.
I honestly wanna just punch u in the face for making this comment. Maybe whack u with a crowbar as well. Sentry drones on a cruiser ship is BS. Drop drones kite all day. Do u even know whats going on in pvp with ishtars. they are complete BS. Again WHY DOES A CRUISER HAVE A BS WEAPON? what other Hac has battleship weapon bonus's to it? NON. honestly all u have to do to ishtars is take away sentrys. and they are fixed. Sentrys are a battleship drone. not a fing cruiser weapon. I can already see that u fly an Ishtar ur self. trying to defend the OP ship like theres nothing wrong with it. what a fing joke. remove sentry drones from ishtars and they are fixed. and no NXI wont be used over an Ishtar bc its resists are crap compared to an Ishtar. anyone who defends an Ishtar they suck the big D at pvp and have to be flying an OP ship to kill anyone. plz remove ur head from ur ass and nerf the ship. don't jsut remove a screw and say we nerfed it. the nerf u posted is a joke. its not even a nerf. 10% less tracking and 10 less ms? go f ur self calling that a nerf |
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
993
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 21:50:00 -
[1376] - Quote
CCP A Suggestion put in the simplest possible terms.
Do not Nerf Ships or weapons systems. If the balance is wrong then Boost the counters.
Kneejerk reactions are the province of politicians trying to please the masses. Glad to see you are resisting it.
You have another job.
To develop the tools and make the relationship BETWEEN the tools effective and balanced.
The players can then fight it out and pick the best tools and counters.
When one plays chess one does not continuously ask to rebalance the pieces, each one can, with intelligent play have a counter and be a counter to others. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
Marc Durant
85
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 21:51:00 -
[1377] - Quote
Just make it 100M3 and drop the ship bonus to 5%, problem solved. Yes, yes-áI am. Thanks for noticing.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8737
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 21:51:00 -
[1378] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote: Do not Nerf Ships or weapons systems. If the balance is wrong then Boost the counters.
It makes perfect that you would think power creep is a good thing. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
993
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 21:52:00 -
[1379] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:epicurus ataraxia wrote: Do not Nerf Ships or weapons systems. If the balance is wrong then Boost the counters.
It makes perfect that you would think power creep is a good thing.
I think intelligence is a good thing, rather than spouting platitudes and meaningless statements. Looks like I am disappointed, but not less than I expected. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
Echo Gunn
Mad Scientists At Work Mad Men League
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 21:59:00 -
[1380] - Quote
As a dedicated Hyperion pilot that rather enjoys the "niche", I only ask that maybe, just maybe, could we get a Navy or NPC faction Hyperion? Just needs a navy paint job and a buff to capacitor stability and I will call it good. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 58 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |