Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Adarnof
Free Trade Monopoly You Are Being Monitored
25
|
Posted - 2014.08.08 19:49:00 -
[151] - Quote
To harp on cataclysmics once more,
Take a look around the game. Spider-tanking carriers are the ideal fleet comp these days in nullsec (do they even field subcaps any more?). The flaw you're addressing isn't with cataclysmics, it's with carriers in general. I'd advise you don't punish the wormhole community and instead take a hard look at them as a platform. |
Ghost RedFox
501st Rogue Squadron
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.08 22:18:00 -
[152] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone! This thread is for all of your feedback and discussion surrounding the wormhole effect changes from our recently released dev blog.
Good day. CCP Fozzie do not you think that you are completely kill a class of WH as a pulsar? after all shild format ships and so the greatest signature in the game, and you make it even more, thereby increasing the number of times of applied thereon damage, as well shild ships suffer congenital problem cap be stable - and you amplify effect of Nos that automatically leads to dead shild format in a pulsar - for which and was created by this type of WH. In fact, it contributes only part of pvp and it armor fleets that specialize in Nos and murder Shild format, while in the WH designed for fleets armor you step position armor fleet - but as not to be destroyed this fleet.
Thank you for your attention, and please forgive me for any errors during the translete. |
Spillrag
Lazerhawks
19
|
Posted - 2014.08.09 02:36:00 -
[153] - Quote
Michael1995 wrote:So from reading the wormhole effect changes, you'll be removing the targeting range bonus on pulsars?
Is this true? |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
699
|
Posted - 2014.08.09 02:50:00 -
[154] - Quote
Adarnof wrote:To harp on cataclysmics once more,
Take a look around the game. Spider-tanking carriers are the ideal fleet comp these days in nullsec (do they even field subcaps any more?). The flaw you're addressing isn't with cataclysmics, it's with carriers in general. I'd advise you don't punish the wormhole community and instead take a hard look at them as a platform.
As much as I hate to suggest it, it would make more sense to make it a penalty to energy rr range in CVs than amount (given cv generally has a boost to remote assistance amount), bringing tactics back into play to break the energy spider. |
Adarnof
Free Trade Monopoly You Are Being Monitored
28
|
Posted - 2014.08.09 03:27:00 -
[155] - Quote
Rroff wrote: As much as I hate to suggest it, it would make more sense to make it a penalty to energy rr range in CVs than amount (given cv generally has a boost to remote assistance amount), bringing tactics back into play to break the energy spider.
We've been discussing this as well. Allows smart FCs to strategically bump carriers out of cap range while not eliminating the mechanism entirely. |
Threll Lornax
Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance
9
|
Posted - 2014.08.09 06:34:00 -
[156] - Quote
Adarnof wrote:Rroff wrote: As much as I hate to suggest it, it would make more sense to make it a penalty to energy rr range in CVs than amount (given cv generally has a boost to remote assistance amount), bringing tactics back into play to break the energy spider. We've been discussing this as well. Allows smart FCs to strategically bump carriers out of cap range while not eliminating the mechanism entirely.
I like this idea a lot more. The fleets are still viable and smaller groups are not hurt, but the fleets will have a new weakness a smart and prepared enemy can take advantage of. |
Amy Farrah FowIer
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.09 07:40:00 -
[157] - Quote
1. If you buff the "Black Hole Effect" you make it more interesting for large groups. Black hole was a chance for smaller Corporations.
2. Allow the possibilty to attach/reinforce a WH system. The attacker should not have the initiative at all in EVE.
3. Allow the owner to upgrade a Wormhole. The owner should be able to get some advantages that deter "fun attacks" or make them unattraktive at least.
|
rvbk
Regicide and Sororitas
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.09 07:55:00 -
[158] - Quote
-+-¦ -à-+-ç-¦-é-ü-Å -¦-ï-+-ï-¦-¦-é-î -¦-â-Ç-+-¦-+-+-Å -¦-+-¦-+ -+ -+-Ç-+-ç-¦-¦ , -+-+ -¦-ü-¦ -Ç-¦-¦-+-+ , -¦-+-+-Ç-+-ü : -â -+-¦-+-Å -¦-¦-¦ -â-ç-¦-é-¦-+ -+-¦ -+-+-¦-é-+-+-¦ -+-+-¦-+-+-ü-¦-¦ , -¦-ü-é-î -+-+ -ê-¦-+-ü -¦-+-+-¦-Ç-¦-é-î -¦-+ -+-¦-+-+-¦-+-¦-+-+-Å -¦-+-+-¦-Ç-+-+-+ , -¦ -+-+ -¦-ï-à-+-¦-â -+-¦-+-+-¦-+-¦-+-+-Å -+-é-¦-+-Ä-ç-+-é-î -+-+-¦-+-+-ü-¦-â , -+-¦-¦-+-+-¦-+-Ç-+-¦-¦-é-î -¦-¦-¦-¦-â-+-é-ï -+ -ü-¦-+-+-¦ -¦-+-¦-¦-+-+-¦ - -+-+-+-â-ç-+-é-î -+-¦-+-¦-¦ -¦-¦-+-î-¦-+ -+-¦ -+-ü-é-¦-¦-ê-+-¦-ü-Å -+-Ç-+-+-+-¦-ç-¦-+-+-ï-+-+ -+-¦-+-+-+ -¦-¦-â-à -+-¦-ü-Å-å-¦-¦ -+-¦-Ç-+-¦-+-¦-+ -¦-Ç-¦-+-¦-+-+ ? -Å -+-Ç-¦-¦-Ç-¦-ü-+-+ -+-+-+-+-+-¦-Ä , -ç-é-+ -+-+-+-¦-+-+ -+-+-+-Ç-¦-¦-+-é-ü-Å -+-ç-¦-Ç-¦-¦-+-+-¦ -+-¦-+-+-¦-+-¦-+-+-¦ , -+-+ -+-+-ç-+-+ -+-+-¦ - -+-¦-é . -+ -Å -+-¦ -à-+-ç-â -+-+-¦-é-+-é-î -+-ü-+-¦-+-¦-å-¦-+ -+-¦ -+-¦-Ç-â , -¦-+-é-+-Ç-¦-Å -+-+-ç-+-+ -+-+-¦ -+-¦-Ç-¦-ü-é-¦-¦-é -+-Ç-¦-¦-+-é-ü-Å -¦-ü-¦ -¦-+-+-î-ê-¦ -+ -¦-+-+-î-ê-¦. -ú -+-¦-+-Å -¦-+-+-î-ê-¦-Å -+-Ç-+-ü-î-¦-¦ - -+-¦ -+-¦-ç-+-+-¦-é-î -¦-+-¦-Ç-â-¦ -+-+-¦-¦-+ -+-+-ü-é-¦ -¦-ï-ê-¦-+-¦-+-¦-¦-+-+-+-¦ -¦-â-Ç-+-¦-+-+-¦ , -Å -+-¦ -à-+-ç-â -¦-¦-+-¦-é-î -¦-+-¦-ü-ü-+-ç-¦-ü-¦-+-¦ "-¦-¦-Ç-+-ü -+-¦ -¦-¦-+-é-+-+-Å-é-+-Ç" , -+-Ç-+-ü-é-+ -à-+-ç-â -â-é-+-ç-+-+-é-î -ä-+-+-¦-+-ü-+-¦-ï-¦ -¦-ü-+-¦-¦-é |
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
346
|
Posted - 2014.08.09 09:46:00 -
[159] - Quote
Amy Farrah FowIer wrote:1. If you buff the "Black Hole Effect" you make it more interesting for large groups. Black hole was a chance for smaller Corporations.
2. Allow the possibilty to attach/reinforce a WH system. The attacker should not have the initiative at all in EVE.
3. Allow the owner to upgrade a Wormhole. The owner should be able to get some advantages that deter "fun attacks" or make them unattraktive at least.
Nothing about black holes encourages a corporation of any size to be there. There were 5 penalties and one "bonus" that in conjuntion with the penalties was just a penalty too. The change is the best thing for them, it creates a totally unique pvp environment that gives no bonuses to big fleets, helps snipers and missile users and most importantly doesn't particularly favour armour or shield doctrines. You'd think so, but no. Also diminished returns from using lots of Lokis means that particular meta has to change as well. Do expect to see many more farming corps establish themselves in black holes as if the missile explosion velocity does scale upwards to capital missiles it will give phoenix's a particularly solid platform to be fielded in as well.
Attacker needs the initiative. It's the principle of unilateral aggression.
If you're getting attacked for fun and losing then it says a lot about both sides of the battlefield doesn't it.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
|
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
346
|
Posted - 2014.08.09 09:50:00 -
[160] - Quote
rvbk wrote:-+-¦ -à-+-ç-¦-é-ü-Å -¦-ï-+-ï-¦-¦-é-î -¦-â-Ç-+-¦-+-+-Å -¦-+-¦-+ -+ -+-Ç-+-ç-¦-¦ , -+-+ -¦-ü-¦ -Ç-¦-¦-+-+ , -¦-+-+-Ç-+-ü : -â -+-¦-+-Å -¦-¦-¦ -â-ç-¦-é-¦-+ -+-¦ -+-+-¦-é-+-+-¦ -+-+-¦-+-+-ü-¦-¦ , -¦-ü-é-î -+-+ -ê-¦-+-ü -¦-+-+-¦-Ç-¦-é-î -¦-+ -+-¦-+-+-¦-+-¦-+-+-Å -¦-+-+-¦-Ç-+-+-+ , -¦ -+-+ -¦-ï-à-+-¦-â -+-¦-+-+-¦-+-¦-+-+-Å -+-é-¦-+-Ä-ç-+-é-î -+-+-¦-+-+-ü-¦-â , -+-¦-¦-+-+-¦-+-Ç-+-¦-¦-é-î -¦-¦-¦-¦-â-+-é-ï -+ -ü-¦-+-+-¦ -¦-+-¦-¦-+-+-¦ - -+-+-+-â-ç-+-é-î -+-¦-+-¦-¦ -¦-¦-+-î-¦-+ -+-¦ -+-ü-é-¦-¦-ê-+-¦-ü-Å -+-Ç-+-+-+-¦-ç-¦-+-+-ï-+-+ -+-¦-+-+-+ -¦-¦-â-à -+-¦-ü-Å-å-¦-¦ -+-¦-Ç-+-¦-+-¦-+ -¦-Ç-¦-+-¦-+-+ ? -Å -+-Ç-¦-¦-Ç-¦-ü-+-+ -+-+-+-+-+-¦-Ä , -ç-é-+ -+-+-+-¦-+-+ -+-+-+-Ç-¦-¦-+-é-ü-Å -+-ç-¦-Ç-¦-¦-+-+-¦ -+-¦-+-+-¦-+-¦-+-+-¦ , -+-+ -+-+-ç-+-+ -+-+-¦ - -+-¦-é . -+ -Å -+-¦ -à-+-ç-â -+-+-¦-é-+-é-î -+-ü-+-¦-+-¦-å-¦-+ -+-¦ -+-¦-Ç-â , -¦-+-é-+-Ç-¦-Å -+-+-ç-+-+ -+-+-¦ -+-¦-Ç-¦-ü-é-¦-¦-é -+-Ç-¦-¦-+-é-ü-Å -¦-ü-¦ -¦-+-+-î-ê-¦ -+ -¦-+-+-î-ê-¦. -ú -+-¦-+-Å -¦-+-+-î-ê-¦-Å -+-Ç-+-ü-î-¦-¦ - -+-¦ -+-¦-ç-+-+-¦-é-î -¦-+-¦-Ç-â-¦ -+-+-¦-¦-+ -+-+-ü-é-¦ -¦-ï-ê-¦-+-¦-+-¦-¦-+-+-+-¦ -¦-â-Ç-+-¦-+-+-¦ , -Å -+-¦ -à-+-ç-â -¦-¦-+-¦-é-î -¦-+-¦-ü-ü-+-ç-¦-ü-¦-+-¦ "-¦-¦-Ç-+-ü -+-¦ -¦-¦-+-é-+-+-Å-é-+-Ç" , -+-Ç-+-ü-é-+ -à-+-ç-â -â-é-+-ç-+-+-é-î -ä-+-+-¦-+-ü-+-¦-ï-¦ -¦-ü-+-¦-¦-é
do not want to cause churning **** and stuff, but still, the question is: I have two uchetki on a paid subscription, is there a chance to finish the update hyperion, and on the output update to disable the subscription block accounts and the most important thing - to get money back for the remaining proplachennymi about two months of game time? I understand that many will like the next update, but for me personally - no. and I do not want to pay the Icelanders for a game that I personally no longer like it more and more. I have a big request - do not start around my post above-mentioned wildness, I do not want to do the classic "stuffing on a fan", I just want to clarify the financial aspect
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
|
|
Threll Lornax
Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance
9
|
Posted - 2014.08.09 19:49:00 -
[161] - Quote
Don't want to be the nagging one, but here I go.
When can we expect some feedback regarding cataclysmic variables? |
Apollo Eros
Daktaklakpak.
119
|
Posted - 2014.08.09 20:00:00 -
[162] - Quote
/me cracks knuckles. Yup looks like the work here is done. [Triple OG LVL 5 Space Wizard] |
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
1541
|
Posted - 2014.08.10 00:49:00 -
[163] - Quote
Numbers on CVs.
Archon, all 5 skills, fitting at end of poast. Paired with another Archon swapping 2 x cap Rr + 2 x Armour RR, rep running, no implants. Numbers are in GJ or GJ/s : Normal // C1 CV // C2 CV // C3 CV // C4 CV // C5 CV // C6 CV
Cap Pool - 97,900 // 127,200 // 140976 // 154,682 // 168,388 // 182,094 // 195,800 Total Cap Regen GJ/s - 904 // 695 // 704 // 710 // 715 // 718 // 719 Base cap regen GJ/s: 464 // 525 // 548 // 568 // 587 // 604 // 619 Cap from partner GJ/S: 200 // 170 // 156 // 142 / 128 // 114 // 100 Cap use w/inbound: 787 for all classes Excess or deficit: +117 // -92 // -83 // -77 // -72 // -69 // -68 Recharge time (s): 211 // 242 // 257 // 272 // 286 // 301 // 316
Results: C1 CV is harsher on carriers swapping capacitor because, a) cap pool increases with class of CV wormhole b) energy demand is flat - ie; you're always using the same amount of capacitor c) as cap pool increases, native cap regen increases, at a faster rate as you go up CV classes d) efficiency of cap transferring decreases, ie; becomes more newtonian and less EVE magic cap from nowhere
Solution is to use metalevel cap transfers, implants, etc. but essentially, spider tanking is dead because 3 heavy neuts into the system at any point in time will break any efficiencies.
Note, also, this is the Archon, which has magical nicorn levels of capacitor. Refer to this pile of EFTcrafting for a discussion relating to why the Archon is king (hint: it ain't the resist profile). So if you struggle to make ends meet in the new cat var after this change in an Archon, you are completely borked in anything else.
============== [Archon, C2 Cat Var]
Capital Armor Repairer I Imperial Navy Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane Capacitor Power Relay II Capacitor Power Relay II Capital Armor Repairer I Damage Control II Power Diagnostic System II
Cap Recharger II Cap Recharger II Cap Recharger II Cap Recharger II
Capital Remote Capacitor Transmitter I Capital Remote Capacitor Transmitter I Capital Remote Armor Repairer I Triage Module I Capital Remote Armor Repairer I
Capital Capacitor Control Circuit I Capital Capacitor Control Circuit I Capital Semiconductor Memory Cell I
J's before K's. Sudden Buggery is recruiting w-nerds and w-noobs. Mail your resume in today! http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
1541
|
Posted - 2014.08.10 01:18:00 -
[164] - Quote
Now, as to why this is being done.
The reason for the CV rejig, ostensibly, is that there are less people bearing and thus PVping and living, in cat var wormholes than WR's etc.
Currently, the capacitor penalty and local rep nerf discorages the usual species of wormhole bear, which is the solo or multiboxing neckbearded nerd running a solo Tengu. You can get away with solo in C1-2 by adding a bit of extra pimp, and lets be honest, it's as hard as falling out of bed. But C3+ it becomes impossible to solo.
The real reason the changes are coming in is obviously, but not explicitly stated, to weaken (read: completely nobble) some of the extreme possibilities available in C5 and C6 Cat vars where spider tanking Pantheon, Slowcat or Coolcat carriers can make everything a giant steaming pile of *****.
Certainly, the changes will address the potential for spider tanking carriers with uber pimp fits (ISK being a matter of when, not if in C5s) to throw up anomalies, but this will be done via basically nobbling every potential use for carriers in any class of wormhole (even though it's less of an issue in C4/C5).
The problem is, even right now, people are deserting CV's. I know we are, because it's pointless having a solo PVE nerf (local rep nerf) and an RR buff (for defensive PVP and POS repping shennanigans) coupled with a capital and Guard/Augoror nerf.
i mean, what's the point of CV's now? It's been turned from a poorly populated type of wormhole into the new Black Hole effect.
I think this is really a solution looking for a problem. It certainly won't fix the ostensible problem (population) but it goes overboard on fixing the explicit problem of C5-C6 craziness. J's before K's. Sudden Buggery is recruiting w-nerds and w-noobs. Mail your resume in today! http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
347
|
Posted - 2014.08.10 06:07:00 -
[165] - Quote
Well they have a choice between breaking CV to being hideously OP now and nerfing again once capitals are rebalanced OR nerfing CVs now and doing the carrier rebalance in their own sweet time. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
|
Samsara Nolte
Sternenschauer AG W.A.S. Alliance - Weapons Armor or Shield
17
|
Posted - 2014.08.10 10:14:00 -
[166] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:Well they have a choice between breaking CV to being hideously OP now and nerfing again once capitals are rebalanced OR nerfing CVs now and doing the carrier rebalance in their own sweet time.
So - and when is the capital revamp gonna happen ? - given the time they took so far for any changes to ship classes we will likely see them at earliest in 2 years - and until then everybody living in a Cataclysmic has to put up with that ? and to be honest even if they would annonce they take a serious look at cataclysmic Variable after they changed cap, i doubt it is gonna happen ... dev-¦s are quite prone to forget things over long periods of time as is a major part of the community ...
BTW the rebalance of Wolf-Rayets have you taken the existence of slave implant sets into consideration - then until now i always thougt this was the reason wolf-rayets didn-¦t give a flat out HP bonus ... considering this - tell me again why does an already disliked wh get a nerf to it-¦s states wheras a fairly liked one gets buffed twofold (small weapon damgage and armor-Hp) |
Samsara Nolte
Sternenschauer AG W.A.S. Alliance - Weapons Armor or Shield
17
|
Posted - 2014.08.10 10:27:00 -
[167] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:Now, as to why this is being done.
The reason for the CV rejig, ostensibly, is that there are less people bearing and thus PVping and living, in cat var wormholes than WR's etc.
Currently, the capacitor penalty and local rep nerf discorages the usual species of wormhole bear, which is the solo or multiboxing neckbearded nerd running a solo Tengu. You can get away with solo in C1-2 by adding a bit of extra pimp, and lets be honest, it's as hard as falling out of bed. But C3+ it becomes impossible to solo.
The real reason the changes are coming in is obviously, but not explicitly stated, to weaken (read: completely nobble) some of the extreme possibilities available in C5 and C6 Cat vars where spider tanking Pantheon, Slowcat or Coolcat carriers can make everything a giant steaming pile of *****.
Certainly, the changes will address the potential for spider tanking carriers with uber pimp fits (ISK being a matter of when, not if in C5s) to throw up anomalies, but this will be done via basically nobbling every potential use for carriers in any class of wormhole (even though it's less of an issue in C4/C5).
The problem is, even right now, people are deserting CV's. I know we are, because it's pointless having a solo PVE nerf (local rep nerf) and an RR buff (for defensive PVP and POS repping shennanigans) coupled with a capital and Guard/Augoror nerf.
i mean, what's the point of CV's now? It's been turned from a poorly populated type of wormhole into the new Black Hole effect.
I think this is really a solution looking for a problem. It certainly won't fix the ostensible problem (population) but it goes overboard on fixing the explicit problem of C5-C6 craziness.
As stated by you - Spider tanking in cataclysmic has some great synergy effects and becuase you transfer cap it is incredibly harder to make any neut count - but what counterbalances this to quite large degree is the fact that Triage isn-¦t a viable option in this Wormholes, because of the self rep nerf - what means in PVP engangments your are the sole primiary if you are stupid enough to go into triage ... and then you can-¦t get any cap from the other carriers and you have to survive under heavy neut pressure on your own with a heavy reduced self rep .....it will most likely result in you going down ... the whole reason why i think this is balanced is the fact then when you are aren-¦t in triage every other method of e-war is still a viable option - so instead of neut bring ECM in a Cataclymic bring DAMPS ... that is the e-war to go for in those holes ... and done right is gonna disrupt the Spiedertank on it-¦s own, no neut needed. but that would mean you-¦d have to adapt - instead of a Bhallgorn you-¦d need to bring Scorpion or a Widow ... seems like some are adverse to do that - so why change it ? - why punish the one living in cataclymsic for the lack of ships others can bring and are willing to ?
edit - some spelling mistakes |
Tahna Rouspel
Big Johnson's
108
|
Posted - 2014.08.10 12:59:00 -
[168] - Quote
I like these changes. I look forward to using odd fits depending on which wormhole we're fighting on.
The wolf-rayet changes will make it harder to do sites in our home, but I love the +200% small weapon bonus. |
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
1544
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 00:52:00 -
[169] - Quote
W-R changes are....interesting.
The resist nerf will make it harder to do sites in C5 and C6's because your web lokis won't have so many resists it is impossible to lose them, and more importantly, dreads won't get to go resist-light and blap-happy, and might need to put a cap fit in the hold and tank.
However, I think these changes could throw up some oddities. C6 WR with HG Slaves, Damnation boosts and HG-1005. Lets take the Impel. 725k EHP. Legion: Twin 1600 plated, 500K EHP Sacrilege: 300K EHP Vengeance: 30K EHP, sig radius 18.5 (ie; 20% application of medium weapon damage off the bat) Armour RLML Tengu, I can't get it to 2340 DPS (would like to know how you get a base RLML damage of 800 out of them) but I can get 850 DPS and 160K EHP. 2100 DPS gank Catalysts @ 16M a pop (yeah, T2 rigged, this is a C6 after all) - not that half the carebears here wwould dare field anything they could ever die in, but lets be honest, just field a wing of these with your third accounts and bring a suicide squad in against their logis and hope you get your pods back to POS for a reship. Revs: 3 x energized layering membranes and 2 x EANM, 1 x Explo hardener = 1.38M raw armour HP or 5M EHP. A bit shy of a Revhullation with T2 transverse bulkies at 7.13M but you get the idea.
I don't know if this is broken, or just heading towards being boring. I mean, who can record a 22.5 hour long fight on FRAPS as HK and SSC square off with 70 legions a side and Guardians and collectively field over 100M EHP on the field. Let alone the stupidity if they bring even a couple of triage carriers. J's before K's. Sudden Buggery is recruiting w-nerds and w-noobs. Mail your resume in today! http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
705
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 01:42:00 -
[170] - Quote
Webbing lokis will still be ridiculous in a wr - they have pretty high resists in normal systems, the extra armor hp means huge ehp coupled with tiny sig. |
|
Elyas Crux
Sefem Velox Swift Angels Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 07:44:00 -
[171] - Quote
Overall I'm happy with Effect Rebalance. Black Hole effect is unique and interesting. Wolf Rayet is more niche and more interesting. Will be leaving CV home system and moving to a WR but maybe the CV rebalance can be tweaked so that it doesn't just debuff every doctrine. |
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
1552
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 14:38:00 -
[172] - Quote
Rroff wrote:Webbing lokis will still be ridiculous in a wr - they have pretty high resists in normal systems, the extra armor hp means huge ehp coupled with tiny sig.
Not as extreme as some things. Scythe Fleet with MG Slaves and Loki booster - 90K EHp and sig of 35m (ie, a frigate), dishing out 975 DPS with RLMLs. I mean...OK, bring me your poor and huddles Catalysts, your hordes of shiftless Kestels, your Punishers (300DPS, 16K EHP), your Talwar alts. J's before K's. Sudden Buggery is recruiting w-nerds and w-noobs. Mail your resume in today! http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
Aureus Ahishatsu
Deadspace Knights
16
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 15:02:00 -
[173] - Quote
SwagYolo420 wrote:With black holes it still takes ages to get into warp with anything that is plated or a captial vessel - especially since webbing it into warp is nerfed.
Wormhole environments are already overtanked as it is - do you really have to hand out free erebus bonuses + HG slave set to anyone in a c5/6 WR?
I think you miss the part where your negative effect to inertia is going to be halved so the over all effect will be faster going to warp. Even with the web nerf. |
Jon Hellguard
X-COM
12
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 17:21:00 -
[174] - Quote
Looking forward to the Effect Rebalance.
Please, if you haven't already, consider showing these effect values somewhere in the UI or make them available somehow for new pilots. After years w-space volks have learned those values, most of them just looked them up on a website anyway - might as well make them visible to get have new pilots understand it better. Just like jump/dock/agression/suspect/ect. timers. |
Innar Mishi
Dirt 'n' Glitter I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 19:43:00 -
[175] - Quote
I quite like random spawning from wormholes, for the reasons that the devs gave. but I think there should be introduced a deployable structure that "stabilizes" the wormhole and drastically reduces the distance spawned on the other side (3000m max for Orca) . this way you can jump through safely and on your way back you're on home ground and the distance spawned away isn't as much of a problem for getting ganked. To balance this this wormhole stabilizer should be visable for everyone on there overview; so if you try set one up on the other end you run the risk of being immediately ganked. This also opens up the possibility of a wormhole destabilizer that increases the distance spawned; making shield fleets potentially viable. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
705
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 20:27:00 -
[176] - Quote
Innar Mishi wrote:I quite like random spawning from wormholes, for the reasons that the devs gave. but I think there should be introduced a deployable structure that "stabilizes" the wormhole and drastically reduces the distance spawned on the other side (3000m max for Orca) . this way you can jump through safely and on your way back you're on home ground and the distance spawned away isn't as much of a problem for getting ganked. To balance this this wormhole stabilizer should be visable for everyone on there overview; so if you try set one up on the other end you run the risk of being immediately ganked. This also opens up the possibility of a wormhole destabilizer that increases the distance spawned; making shield fleets potentially viable.
Doesn't change that 9 times out of 10 spawning whether 1 km or 149km out of jump range has little consequence when collapsing other than to slow things down - potentially considerably - for no enhancement of gameplay and that 1 time in 10 when it would make a difference you can't force people to take risks they aren't prepared to take. So the net effect will for the most part be incidental losses from smaller entities who can't defend their stuff so well if/when they occasionally get unlucky or do something careless/stupid.
Then you have the potential issues it adds of when people do actively engage in PVP it could potentially cause range based issues at the initiation of the fight that could do more to hinder things than anything else. |
CorranCHalcyon
THE AESIR.
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 21:23:00 -
[177] - Quote
After looking through the list of systems and the rebalance for each I have to say I liked most of what CCP is planning on doing. Black holes especially. Next of course cataclysmic systems. There are a few balances I do not like however. The Wolf-ryet conversion from resist bonus to HP bonus.
I understand CCPs position as to why they want to change it, but it doesn't sit right with me. I've been trying to put my finger on the reason why. It just doesn't feel right to me. And no I do not live in a Wolf-ryet.
All around though Nice job CCP.
On a side note:
CCP I have a suggestion. If you find it feasible, split the CSM into three smaller CSM councils of three or four people. One for Null, Lowsec and W-space. They would all have the same duties as the current incarnation of the CSM does, but they would also represent their own areas of space. Null would have no responsibilities nor any say in W-space or Lowsec. And the other two councils would follow the same guidelines respectively. Also with this paradigm for CSM it would break the sheer numbers that Null Alliances have to control the vote for the majority of the CSM. It would give other organizations to have a primary voice. |
Joraa Starkmanir
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
22
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 23:20:00 -
[178] - Quote
NOTE: offtopic
CorranCHalcyon wrote: On a side note:
CCP I have a suggestion. If you find it feasible, split the CSM into three smaller CSM councils of three or four people. One for Null, Lowsec and W-space. They would all have the same duties as the current incarnation of the CSM does, but they would also represent their own areas of space. Null would have no responsibilities nor any say in W-space or Lowsec. And the other two councils would follow the same guidelines respectively. Also with this paradigm for CSM it would break the sheer numbers that Null Alliances have to control the vote for the majority of the CSM. It would give other organizations to have a primary voice.
Thats a bad idea, since many players (and most likely CSM members also) tend to be split between 2 or all 3 of those. Would make null sec alliance loos some control on CSM, but the only reason thay have that control is that they actualy have pilots voting for them. Reducing null control by segmenting CSM is NOT the way to go, somehow make WH/low/hi sec people vote for their own candidates is the onyl good solution. Also since null people are generaly better organised, their candidates tend to good contact with their own market/industry guys. Its not the random null grunt thats usualy voted into CSM, its the people that have proven to their alliance/coalition that they know what they do |
Ness Phase
Hard Knocks Inc.
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.13 07:28:00 -
[179] - Quote
Nice work ccp. I like all the new wh effect changes and rebalances. Black holes look great now. I look foward to hunting in them . |
Laura Agathon
Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance
5
|
Posted - 2014.08.13 08:15:00 -
[180] - Quote
Gotta say, I'm a bit disappointed there has not been a dev reply in nigh on a week. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |