| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 .. 15 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Komi Toran
Paragon Trust
The Bastion
256
   |
Posted - 2014.09.25 11:58:00 -
[391] - Quote
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:I noticed that as well and had similar thoughts, but I decided that it's probably more likely that he just forgot and doesn't view the LML nerf "important" in the bigger scheme.
More likely that the change was not finished when he did the interview and he didn't know if it would be ready for Oceanus, but it was implemented in time for editing.
|
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
interstellar initiative Incorporated
293
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 13:32:00 -
[392] - Quote
Komi Toran wrote:scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:I noticed that as well and had similar thoughts, but I decided that it's probably more likely that he just forgot and doesn't view the LML nerf "important" in the bigger scheme. More likely that the change was not finished when he did the interview and he didn't know if it would be ready for Oceanus, but it was implemented in time for editing.
8 days it was in the interceptor thread with the statement wording that it will happen. I should clarify, I mean that I think it's as simple as he forgot to say LML changes for the video, although you could be right as well depending on when he aat down for the interview.
The not viewig LMLs as important is my forum paranoia showing itself, Dev conspiracies dontcha know. |
Faren Shalni
Future Corps
Sleeper Social Club
64
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 14:57:00 -
[393] - Quote
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:Andrew Indy wrote:Komi Toran wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote:I'd note that just because it's on SiSi doesn't mean it's coming with Oceanus.
They didn't list missile launchers in the module list they were tiericiding, so that could just be an early Sisi update for the next release also that isn't finalised yet. Actually, they did. its funny though, he did not say missile launchers yet it comes up on he text. He also mentions that they will no important stuff like guns later which confuses the matter even more. (Are missiles not important ?) Only time will tell i guess. I noticed that as well and had similar thoughts, but I decided that it's probably more likely that he just forgot and doesn't view the LML nerf "important" in the bigger scheme. Of course, we could stop with the conspiracy crafting if they would find the time to get around to posting the tiericide info for the patch that drops in 5 days. Or, maybe, it's a surprise!  The interceptor and interdictor threads are 8 days old now, 5 days to the patch, and still no Devs to be seen around these parts....
Devs have been a lot quieter theses days. you should see the WH thread on mass changes, the ratio of dev responses to player questions is astronomically bad
So Much Space |
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
interstellar initiative Incorporated
293
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:53:00 -
[394] - Quote
Well folks, here it is.
https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/rebalancing-eve-one-module-at-a-time
Finally...... |
Edmund Andre
EVE University
Ivy League
1
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 17:56:00 -
[395] - Quote
I'm confused, if these are just to tackle with, why do they have any offensive bonuses at all? Take my rocket bonuses from my mal and give me more tackle power anytime! I'm still likely to fill the highs with whatever fits after I've fit the rest of my slots and rigs... You want a damaging inty? Take the combat one that sux ;)
And to those that want to take the bubble immunity from the inties, hush... |
Jak'at
Supersedeas
51
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 18:56:00 -
[396] - Quote
Crow gets better. Malediction gets worse.
WRONG DIRECTION, CCP.
As if Interceptors somehow have 'too much DPS'..
Who the f_ck wants to fly a rocket interceptor?
I TACKLED HIM, BUT HE SCRAMMED ME. WEIRD.
|
Longdrinks
Love Squad
Pasta Syndicate
102
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 19:27:00 -
[397] - Quote
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
2,5 times 5 adds up to a 12,5% which is how much a hac5 ishtar got its tracking and range nerfed with that. Please factcheck your posts before putting them out there. |
Capqu
Love Squad
Pasta Syndicate
685
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 20:00:00 -
[398] - Quote
patch notes out but you still wont even respond when everyone agrees the malediction changes are pointless
i know you don't do balance by consensus but actually communicating why you're doing something for once would be nice
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNpMiT5qpyI |
Vincintius Agrippa
F L O O D
61
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 20:05:00 -
[399] - Quote
nope, don't like some of the tiericide.
Seems like ccp is trying to simplify the games modules too much.
To me it looks like everything will follow this category route:
1. Noob sh*t
2. Somewhat effective sh*t.
3 T2 Sh*t......
I for one liked the variety that the wealth of ship modules bring. Each different type has different cost and fitting stats. There should b more manufacturers that produce different types of t2 stuff as well. Everyone right now is just building the same stuff.
Theres nothing wrong with meta 4's. They have the same or almost the same damage modifiers for guns and launchers as their t2 counterparts, but have lower fitting requirements. The downside is that they can cost over 2-3x as much as t2, and weapons cannot use the specialized weapon skills or ammo of t2 variations.
Light missiles are fine leave them alone.
Only YOU can prevent internet bullying! |
Vincintius Agrippa
F L O O D
61
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 20:10:00 -
[400] - Quote
Another thing I don't understand is why the crow is getting a explosion radius bonus in replace of its damage bonus. Why? Most of the time these ships will be catching bigger ships anyway so explosion radius is irrelevant.
Only YOU can prevent internet bullying! |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
900
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 21:40:00 -
[401] - Quote
CCP could the ranis get some extra pg so it can use that spare high for a nos?
alternatively move that mostly useless high too a lowslot .. ares already has it
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 ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please |
Komi Toran
Paragon Trust
The Bastion
256
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 22:14:00 -
[402] - Quote
Vincintius Agrippa wrote:Each different type has different cost and fitting stats.
That being on a clear spectrum from good to bad and expensive to cheap. There was no real choice in the matter for 95% of the modules: you used meta 4 over 3, 2, and 1. The only other choice was if meta 4 was too expensive, in which case you used meta 3. That was the sum total of choice for metas.
This tiericide at least tries: you can have fewer reload cycles, or you can have less CPU demand. That's an actual choice. I'm just disappointed that CCP is doing this to LMLs now, rather than with the rest of the long-range frigate-size weaponry. |
Arla Sarain
80
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 07:10:00 -
[403] - Quote
Jak'at wrote:
I TACKLED HIM, BUT HE SCRAMMED ME. WEIRD.
Yeah
I microwarp approach him for maek damage but I dead. bug? |
Brother Mercury
Fire on the Mountain
12
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 14:01:00 -
[404] - Quote
It's still clear that the change to force the Malediction to rockets is ill-conceived.
The damage was never a problem: it was anemic in the first place. If a Malediction, currently, wants to put speed, alignment, and agility in front of damage, it's going to be putting at most ~80 dps.
80 DPS is what Fozzie and Rise are worried about? I'm still baffled by this. I'll say it again, if a Malediction catches a ratting PVE ship and kills it with 80 DPS, nerfing Male's missile bonus and LMLs is not going to change this.
Of course the Malediction can get more DPS--but everyone here praising the nerf, including the DEVS--are missing the key point that seems to be glossed over: If the Malediction, currently, wants more DPS it already has to sacrifice speed, alignment, and agility.
On the other hand, the nerf creates very negative effects for the Male in other areas. If the Malediction wants to sacrifice some speed and alignment for DPS, you're forcing it to use rockets. Why would you use rockets when you've got a Taranis-- it's being placed into an area where there are far superior options.
The Malediction already has to sacrifice speed and alignment if it wants to have any meaningful DPS.
The nerfs are not properly thought out. You are worried about speed and agility.
A better targeted nerf to the Malediction specifically is to keep the bonuses the way they are and instead reduce its speed or agility.
Please really think about what you're aiming to do with these changes and realize this makes more sense. |
rsantos
TEC-NOLOGY
Sorry We're In Your Space Eh
22
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 15:06:00 -
[405] - Quote
My "Overpowered Fail Ratting Ship Killing Machine" Malediction does 5057-7238 m/s, 94-111 dps (526 alpha) with Fury at 31 km and 77-91 dps (431 alpha) with Caldary Navy Ammo at 39 km, with level 5 skills (second number is heated module number).
and Aligns in 2.5 seconds
[Malediction, Malediction]
Micro Auxiliary Power Core II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Overdrive Injector System II
Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I
Medium Shield Extender II
Warp Disruptor II
Light Missile Launcher II, Mjolnir Fury Light Missile
Light Missile Launcher II, Mjolnir Fury Light Missile
Light Missile Launcher II, Mjolnir Fury Light Missile
Small Bay Loading Accelerator I
Small Warhead Calefaction Catalyst I
Hard to Catch? Yes.
Instalockable? Easly.
Overpowered? If you drop wardens to kill me you deserve to die!
RIP the Malediction! |
Zao Elongur
Porphyr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 19:00:00 -
[406] - Quote
rsantos wrote:
94-111 dps (526 alpha) with Fury at 31 km and
77-91 dps (431 alpha) with Caldary Navy Ammo at 39 km,
now you will be able to use rockets and get
109 dps (202 alpha) with Rage at 8.4 km
90 dps (168 alpba) with faction at 10.1 km
70 dps (135 alpha) with javelin at 15.2km
isn't that OP or what?
|
Foxstar Damaskeenus
Soul Takers
210
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 19:28:00 -
[407] - Quote
No need to double nerf the malediction. Light missiles are already getting a nerf that will be fine. |
Jennifer Maxwell
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
Heiian Conglomerate
166
|
Posted - 2014.09.27 20:00:00 -
[408] - Quote
"apply more polish"
Don't you mean "hit with a hammer a couple time"?
First the "nerf" to the Ishtar, and now this. Obviously missiles are supposed to take the place of the secondary weapon choice like Drones were when Eve first started. |
Kiryen O'Bannon
Thrall Nation
Brave Collective
125
|
Posted - 2014.09.27 22:45:00 -
[409] - Quote
Brother Mercury wrote:It's still clear that the change to force the Malediction to rockets is ill-conceived.
The damage was never a problem: it was anemic in the first place. If a Malediction, currently, wants to put speed, alignment, and agility in front of damage, it's going to be putting at most ~80 dps.
80 DPS is what Fozzie and Rise are worried about? I'm still baffled by this. I'll say it again, if a Malediction catches a ratting PVE ship and kills it with 80 DPS, nerfing Male's missile bonus and LMLs is not going to change this.
Of course the Malediction can get more DPS--but everyone here praising the nerf, including the DEVS--are missing the key point that seems to be glossed over: If the Malediction, currently, wants more DPS it already has to sacrifice speed, alignment, and agility.
On the other hand, the nerf creates very negative effects for the Male in other areas. If the Malediction wants to sacrifice some speed and alignment for DPS, you're forcing it to use rockets. Why would you use rockets when you've got a Taranis-- it's being placed into an area where there are far superior options.
The Malediction already has to sacrifice speed and alignment if it wants to have any meaningful DPS.
The nerfs are not properly thought out. You are worried about speed and agility.
A better targeted nerf to the Malediction specifically is to keep the bonuses the way they are and instead reduce its speed or agility.
Please really think about what you're aiming to do with these changes and realize this makes more sense.
People dont catch and kill ratters with one malediction or crow; they do it with a squad. This change means greater numbers are needed and cuts into the practicality of roving interceptor gangs that have a huge safe zone where short guns cant reach and long guns cant track, outrun Warrior IIs and take anemic damage from missiles with no chance of webbing except for specialized ships. If you have a small weapon with excellent application and range, its DPS SHOULD be ****.
|
Brother Mercury
Fire on the Mountain
12
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 05:46:00 -
[410] - Quote
Kiryen O'Bannon wrote:Brother Mercury wrote:It's still clear that the change to force the Malediction to rockets is ill-conceived.
The damage was never a problem: it was anemic in the first place. If a Malediction, currently, wants to put speed, alignment, and agility in front of damage, it's going to be putting at most ~80 dps.
80 DPS is what Fozzie and Rise are worried about? I'm still baffled by this. I'll say it again, if a Malediction catches a ratting PVE ship and kills it with 80 DPS, nerfing Male's missile bonus and LMLs is not going to change this.
Of course the Malediction can get more DPS--but everyone here praising the nerf, including the DEVS--are missing the key point that seems to be glossed over: If the Malediction, currently, wants more DPS it already has to sacrifice speed, alignment, and agility.
On the other hand, the nerf creates very negative effects for the Male in other areas. If the Malediction wants to sacrifice some speed and alignment for DPS, you're forcing it to use rockets. Why would you use rockets when you've got a Taranis-- it's being placed into an area where there are far superior options.
The Malediction already has to sacrifice speed and alignment if it wants to have any meaningful DPS.
The nerfs are not properly thought out. You are worried about speed and agility.
A better targeted nerf to the Malediction specifically is to keep the bonuses the way they are and instead reduce its speed or agility.
Please really think about what you're aiming to do with these changes and realize this makes more sense. People dont catch and kill ratters with one malediction or crow; they do it with a squad. This change means greater numbers are needed and cuts into the practicality of roving interceptor gangs that have a huge safe zone where short guns cant reach and long guns cant track, outrun Warrior IIs and take anemic damage from missiles with no chance of webbing except for specialized ships. If you have a small weapon with excellent application and range, its DPS SHOULD be ****.
So, you're agreeing with me. Yes it's a small weapon on a fast ship with good range... and it's DPS is ****.
So, how does this change the point I'm making?
It seems like it's too late already for Fozzie to change this anyway, they are intent on the change.
We will now see Maledictions once in a blue moon now -- Thanks DEVS!
|
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings
Point Blank Alliance
501
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 07:13:00 -
[411] - Quote
I think it's really tragic that the Malediction is losing the iconic light missile bonus it's had for years. I can scarcely imagine that anyone would've ever have used it if it hadn't had that. |
Anthar Thebess
711
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 11:45:00 -
[412] - Quote
From my perspective :
Interceptors should not be nullified.
Add subsystem slot.
You can put there 3 variants :
T1 ( yes T1 materials used ) - speed lock , range , agility etc bonus , disrupt range bonus
T2 ( T2 materials) - dps bonuses
T3 (wh materials ) - nullification , without the ability to online cyno.
Cost of those subsystems should be low , 1-2 mil per T3 version.
Because currently interceptors are bit to unbalanced , especially when their numbers are big.
You can easily get long range , nullified , alpha doctrine that is hard to kill, by any fleet , including ceptor one.
Support Needed : Jump Fuel Consumption
Support Needed : Faction Crystal Changes |
Capqu
Love Squad
Pasta Syndicate
692
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 15:54:00 -
[413] - Quote
A tiny launcher that can carry a very limited supply of rockets. Not really intended as a primary weapon but rather as a cheap supplementary weapon system.
so when are you going to buff rockets if you intend them to be a primary weapon system now? everyone knows they are complete trash except for the person doing the balancing apparently, even the guy who writes the module descriptions knows more than fozzie lmao
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNpMiT5qpyI |
Liam Inkuras
Mafia Redux
1295
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 16:24:00 -
[414] - Quote
Milton Middleson wrote:I think it's really tragic that the Malediction is losing the iconic light missile bonus it's had for years. I can scarcely imagine that anyone would've ever have used it if it hadn't had that.
Sarcasm meter just broke
I wear my goggles at night.
Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone |
Sal Landry
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
236
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 18:26:00 -
[415] - Quote
Capqu wrote:A tiny launcher that can carry a very limited supply of rockets. Not really intended as a primary weapon but rather as a cheap supplementary weapon system.
so when are you going to buff rockets if you intend them to be a primary weapon system now? everyone knows they are complete trash except for the person doing the balancing apparently, even the guy who writes the module descriptions knows more than fozzie lmao
This is a new era, soon drones and hybrids will be the only officially supported primary weapon system. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
834
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 21:08:00 -
[416] - Quote
Capqu wrote:A tiny launcher that can carry a very limited supply of rockets. Not really intended as a primary weapon but rather as a cheap supplementary weapon system.
so when are you going to buff rockets if you intend them to be a primary weapon system now? everyone knows they are complete trash except for the person doing the balancing apparently, even the guy who writes the module descriptions knows more than fozzie lmao
what's actually wrong with them other than being on the list of weapons that needs to reload during fights? |
Robotic Lincoln
Viziam
Amarr Empire
37
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 12:34:00 -
[417] - Quote
I suppose since the new release goes live tomorrow, there wonGÇÖt be a time when the devs honor the alleged purpose behind this thread GÇô you know, feedback. I recognize that sometimes it makes sense for devs to REJECT feedback, but itGÇÖs very disappointing to see them IGNORE feedback.
I hope you all wonGÇÖt think less of me if IGÇÖm weeping uncontrollably as I load my maledictions into a dumpster fire.
|
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots
Black Legion.
155
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 15:50:00 -
[418] - Quote
RIP Crowz Online 2014
I haven't done the math but I kind of wonder, since I'm always shooting EM at AFKtars, does the 4th launcher now mean I'll actually do more damage, even considering the nerf. |
Rowells
Unknown Soldiers
Fidelas Constans
1368
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 15:56:00 -
[419] - Quote
SFM Hobb3s wrote:RIP Crowz Online 2014
I haven't done the math but I kind of wonder, since I'm always shooting EM at AFKtars, does the 4th launcher now mean I'll actually do more damage, even considering the nerf.
non-kinetic damage yes. If you are a kinetic-missile diehard then no. |
HarlyQ
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
19
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 23:49:00 -
[420] - Quote
is it down time yet? becasue im looking forward to seeing what people to instead of roaming in interceptors maybe real pvp ships? |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 .. 15 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |