EVE Search - Sticky:[Rhea] Pulse Lasers and Scorch

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Rhea] Pulse Lasers and Scorch

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 12052	Posted - 2014.11.27 16:42:59 - [1] - Quote Hey everyone. We're making some tweaks to Pulse Lasers of all sizes in Rhea, as well as Scorch ammo. At the moment Pulse Lasers are quite reliant on T2 Scorch ammo to be viable and powerful. The main goal of these changes is to reduce the reliance on Scorch for Pulse Lasers, making other ammo types a bit more useful. Secondary goals are improving the balance between different tiers of Pulse Lasers and improving the quality of Capital Pulse Lasers a bit. The basics of the change are: The base optimal range of all Pulse Lasers is being increased by 5%. The falloff range of all Pulse Lasers is being increased. The optimal range bonus provided by Scorch ammo is being reduced from 50% to 40%. The result is that optimal range for Pulses without Scorch will be increasing 5%, and optimal range for Pulses with Scorch will be decreasing by 2%. The percentage increase in falloff is different between the different sizes of Pulses, which helps even out the power levels of the different Pulse laser tiers slightly. Falloff increase per Pulse type is: Small Focused Pulses, Heavy Pulses, Mega Pulses: +25% Dual Light Pulses, Focused Medium Pulses, Dual Heavy Pulses: +33.3% Gatling Pulses, Giga Pulses: +100% These changes are on SISI for your testing pleasure, feel free to give them a try and let us know what you think! Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 524	Posted - 2014.11.27 16:49:36 - [2] - Quote Pulses and scorch will remains bonkers with little alternative at the ranges discussed.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 1169	Posted - 2014.11.27 16:51:37 - [3] - Quote Yeah, I was expecting a scorch nerf sooner or later. It'll be interesting to see this in practice. I'm a little surprised the damage wasn't reduced as well. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Unskilled Alt Drugs for Winners 1	Posted - 2014.11.27 16:55:33 - [4] - Quote Nice to see things that kill the ishtar being nerfed. Good one fozzie.
Gay Pornstar Surprisingly Deep Hole Try Rerolling 18	Posted - 2014.11.27 17:05:14 - [5] - Quote Other than the falloff changes it seems like this is a really really light touch pass. I fly almost exclusively scorch based ships and I can say that this will have almost no effect on me other than the falloff. There is an idea of a Gay Pornstar; some kind of abstraction. But there is no real me: only an entity, something illusory. And though I can hide my cold gaze, and you can shake my hand and feel flesh gripping yours and maybe you can even sense our lifestyles are probably comparable... I simply am not there.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 979	Posted - 2014.11.27 17:07:16 - [6] - Quote yes i think you missed the main point of why scorch is used the most... because the other ammo needs a big buff too be useful.. theres about 8 T1 crystals - faction multi is the only one worth using for the tracking at close range over conflag much the same story with all of the guns really , projectiles have the best case usage as the different damage profiles are helpful in different scenarios , emp, phased plasma, they could use a smaller reload too help their usefulness on projectiles mind i bet you have read the autocannon thread already though?? 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
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 881	Posted - 2014.11.27 17:22:58 - [7] - Quote 5% and 2%? that's really underwhelming. do bigger things please. you should be tring to make scorch/null/barrage into being like javelin or something, and making the guns usable with proper ammos. t2 ammo should be a niche thing imo.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 980	Posted - 2014.11.27 17:27:38 - [8] - Quote Unskilled Alt wrote: Nice to see things that kill the ishtar being nerfed. Good one fozzie. a sentry nerf thread would be more popular im sure 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
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 980	Posted - 2014.11.27 17:28:29 - [9] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: 5% and 2%? that's really underwhelming. do bigger things please. you should be tring to make scorch/null/barrage into being like javelin or something, and making the guns usable with proper ammos. t2 ammo should be a niche thing imo. javelin is pretty useless ammo as are all the T2 short range ammo on long range guns.. 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
Igor Nappi Perkone Caldari State 92	Posted - 2014.11.27 17:30:36 - [10] - Quote Scorch can't really be nerfed too severely because it's really the only thing going for most laser ships. When considering balance, weapon systems can't be separated from the ships using them. Furthermore, I think that links must be removed from the game.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 881	Posted - 2014.11.27 17:33:41 - [11] - Quote Harvey James wrote: TrouserDeagle wrote: 5% and 2%? that's really underwhelming. do bigger things please. you should be tring to make scorch/null/barrage into being like javelin or something, and making the guns usable with proper ammos. t2 ammo should be a niche thing imo. javelin is pretty useless ammo as are all the T2 short range ammo on long range guns.. no, javelin is a nice example of T2 ammo done well. it's not a game-breaking replacement like scorch or null, it's an occasionally useful thing you carry around for when you really need more tracking.
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 486	Posted - 2014.11.27 17:38:42 - [12] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: 5% and 2%? that's really underwhelming. do bigger things please. you should be tring to make scorch/null/barrage into being like javelin or something, and making the guns usable with proper ammos. t2 ammo should be a niche thing imo. And why do they all have to have the same range again? You are aware that projectile guns need no capacitor to work right? signature
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10728	Posted - 2014.11.27 17:39:12 - [13] - Quote The damage type distributions also need to be diversified. EM or nothing when it comes to long range just pigeonholes the entire weapon class. Not that EM is bad, but having that and only that is not awesome. My kingdom for a Thermal heavy weapon crystal. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Dramaticus GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 612	Posted - 2014.11.27 17:39:46 - [14] - Quote All of my dudes have Amarr BS V and Pulse Spec V because I will never ***** train into Baltec Megas ** Gallente forever The 'do-nothing' member of the GoonSwarm Economic Warfare Cabal The edge is REALLY hard to see at times but it DOES exist and in this case we were looking at a situation where a new feature created for all of our customers was being virtually curbstomped by five of them
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 1003	Posted - 2014.11.27 17:47:43 - [15] - Quote WTF is the point of 2% less optimal with Scorch?
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 881	Posted - 2014.11.27 17:55:08 - [16] - Quote Rivr Luzade wrote: WTF is the point of 2% less optimal with Scorch? so they can say they've done something, when really they haven't done anything.
Liam Inkuras Mafia Redux 1341	Posted - 2014.11.27 18:07:13 - [17] - Quote CCP Fozzie when will you balance medium autocannons? They are quite weak when compared to Blasters and Pulse lasers at their respective ranges, and selective damage type is not as strong as you make it out to be. I wear my goggles at night. Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone
rhiload Feron-drake TURN LEFT The Camel Empire 14	Posted - 2014.11.27 18:09:49 - [18] - Quote nerfing weapon system used heavily in small gang pvp. gj fozzie your doing great, also when is the medium AC balance going to be? barrage is a terrible ammo type
Arla Sarain 145	Posted - 2014.11.27 18:34:55 - [19] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: Harvey James wrote: TrouserDeagle wrote: 5% and 2%? that's really underwhelming. do bigger things please. you should be tring to make scorch/null/barrage into being like javelin or something, and making the guns usable with proper ammos. t2 ammo should be a niche thing imo. javelin is pretty useless ammo as are all the T2 short range ammo on long range guns.. no, javelin is a nice example of T2 ammo done well. it's not a game-breaking replacement like scorch or null, it's an occasionally useful thing you carry around for when you really need more tracking. At half the optimal range you get with Javelin in comparison to Navy Anti Matter you will need a lot more tracking than the ammo offers. Argue that the Javelin concept is ok all you want The stats suck regardless. rhiload Feron-drake wrote: nerfing weapon system used heavily in small gang pvp. gj fozzie your doing great The change is borderline irrelevant. Calling it a nerf is laughable.
Mag's the united 18213	Posted - 2014.11.27 18:38:51 - [20] - Quote Well, this is a thing. Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 881	Posted - 2014.11.27 18:40:24 - [21] - Quote Arla Sarain wrote: TrouserDeagle wrote: Harvey James wrote: TrouserDeagle wrote: 5% and 2%? that's really underwhelming. do bigger things please. you should be tring to make scorch/null/barrage into being like javelin or something, and making the guns usable with proper ammos. t2 ammo should be a niche thing imo. javelin is pretty useless ammo as are all the T2 short range ammo on long range guns.. no, javelin is a nice example of T2 ammo done well. it's not a game-breaking replacement like scorch or null, it's an occasionally useful thing you carry around for when you really need more tracking. At half the optimal range you get with Javelin in comparison to Navy Anti Matter you will need a lot more tracking than the ammo offers. Argue that the Javelin concept is ok all you want The stats suck regardless. rhiload Feron-drake wrote: nerfing weapon system used heavily in small gang pvp. gj fozzie your doing great The change is borderline irrelevant. Calling it a nerf is laughable. it doesn't suck, it's situational.
Billy Hardcore Jaded. The Natural Order 271	Posted - 2014.11.27 18:45:23 - [22] - Quote Yes..lets just nerf lasers. Cuz the most effective (only) way to easily counter stealth bombers and Ishtars is the logical step #BillyFleet
Barton Breau University of Caille Gallente Federation 96	Posted - 2014.11.27 19:09:17 - [23] - Quote Careful with these 5% here 5% there changes, i know the marine biologist on the team says "up the saltiness in the tank by 5% till the fishes dont like it", but if you, god forbid, apply it to something important, by the time you approach good numbers and a meaningful change, 4 patches later, the people really affected by the important thing will be long gone.
Capqu Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 912	Posted - 2014.11.27 19:17:14 - [24] - Quote im having trouble finding the dev blog on ishtars i mean dont get me wrong scorch is strong but the relative imbalance of ishtars is a lot more obvious and widespread so surely the developers would not ignore that and make minor adjustments in other places for no reason??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 486	Posted - 2014.11.27 19:22:05 - [25] - Quote Capqu wrote: im having trouble finding the dev blog on ishtars i mean dont get me wrong scorch is strong but the relative imbalance of ishtars is a lot more obvious and widespread so surely the developers would not ignore that and make minor adjustments in other places for no reason??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? I think we could all agree that the best couse of action would be to nerf missiles again.. signature
Capqu Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 912	Posted - 2014.11.27 19:24:06 - [26] - Quote elitatwo wrote: Capqu wrote: im having trouble finding the dev blog on ishtars i mean dont get me wrong scorch is strong but the relative imbalance of ishtars is a lot more obvious and widespread so surely the developers would not ignore that and make minor adjustments in other places for no reason??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? I think we could all agree that the best couse of action would be to nerf missiles again.. i think the best course of action would involve a job at riot personally https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
Frostys Virpio The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc 1382	Posted - 2014.11.27 19:26:27 - [27] - Quote elitatwo wrote: Capqu wrote: im having trouble finding the dev blog on ishtars i mean dont get me wrong scorch is strong but the relative imbalance of ishtars is a lot more obvious and widespread so surely the developers would not ignore that and make minor adjustments in other places for no reason??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? I think we could all agree that the best couse of action would be to nerf missiles again.. -50% max velocity +100% flight time
Viribus Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 308	Posted - 2014.11.27 19:33:14 - [28] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: elitatwo wrote: Capqu wrote: im having trouble finding the dev blog on ishtars i mean dont get me wrong scorch is strong but the relative imbalance of ishtars is a lot more obvious and widespread so surely the developers would not ignore that and make minor adjustments in other places for no reason??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? I think we could all agree that the best couse of action would be to nerf missiles again.. -50% max velocity +100% flight time the other day I saw a triple-painted double-webbed interceptor-class warvessel die after a mere 60 seconds of being shot by heavy missiles, frankly this kind of damage application is disgustingly overpowered. I propose the following changes to heavy missiles: current (proposed) Explosion radius: 140 (250) Explosion velocity: 81 (120) this would bring heavies more in-line with CCP's vision for missiles, imo watch me be a scurb and get owned
Jayne Fillon 438	Posted - 2014.11.27 19:37:22 - [29] - Quote I'm shocked to hear that these changes preceded the inevitable, and imho overdue, nerfs to medium rails. Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
Gnadolin Space Pioneers Odin's Call 23	Posted - 2014.11.27 19:37:40 - [30] - Quote Is it just me or am i missing the change at all? 2% less optimal with +25% falloff is something like 1%less damage at current optimal?
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 1587	Posted - 2014.11.27 19:39:06 - [31] - Quote Yes, changes need to be made. No, this is not adequate. And please don't tell us that it's OK because you can always tweak it again next release. That's what you said about the Ishtar. Btw, when is the next module tiericide round? Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Capqu Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 913	Posted - 2014.11.27 19:40:45 - [32] - Quote Jayne Fillon wrote: I'm shocked to hear that these changes preceded the inevitable, and imho overdue, nerfs to medium rails. ur delusional -2.5% per level fixed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
Ix Method Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 341	Posted - 2014.11.27 19:50:25 - [33] - Quote No... no, nothing for tracking? sobs Travelling at the speed of love.
Capqu Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 914	Posted - 2014.11.27 19:52:46 - [34] - Quote https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=388038&find=unread https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 983	Posted - 2014.11.27 19:57:40 - [35] - Quote Gnadolin wrote: Is it just me or am i missing the change at all? 2% less optimal with +25% falloff is something like 1%less damage at current optimal? the point being the nerf too scorch. via buffing the guns themselves (-10 scorch range nerf) 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
DR BiCarbonate Basgerin Pirate 91	Posted - 2014.11.27 20:15:07 - [36] - Quote Cool, a pretty much useless nerf. Now Fix medium autocannons. we've been living with the tracking enhancer nerf for quite some time now.
Arronicus Fusion Enterprises Ltd Shadow of xXDEATHXx 1309	Posted - 2014.11.27 20:15:43 - [37] - Quote whelp.... 5%.... yea, that isn't going to make any difference whatsoever. Conflag, navy multifreq, and scorch are still with these new numbers the ONLY ammo types worth carrying on a pulse boat.
Lady Rohk The Cuddlefish Ethereal Dawn 17	Posted - 2014.11.27 20:28:18 - [38] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Giga Pulses: +100% So now a rev with 3x tracking computers (cause what else are you gonna fit the mids with) now hits 40km optimal and 86km total range? So, what's the point of even having other crystals at this point then? You'll never be using them so you might as well just take them out of the game. Just have a single ammo type for XL turrets, I mean that's what's happening with the moros, so why not the rev too. You're sure as ** never going to fit XL beams now either. The problem with the rev (and the moros) isn't range. It's DPS over range. There's still no reason to ever use the Rev over the Moros when the Moros has equivalent range and more damage and tracking over the same distance. Nerf antimatter range, so that Moros have to use other types of ammo and the DPS advantage of the Moros becomes less ideal. Likewise, the range of the Rev was always advantageous over the Moros, but not at the cost of it's **** DPS (some 2K-6K less over equivalent distances), and with a cap penalty as well. If you want XL lasers to be attractive, give them more damage, not range. They already have range advantages.
Lucas Quaan Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 78	Posted - 2014.11.27 20:30:37 - [39] - Quote Not sure I like the increased falloff, tbh. It was always one of those flavour things that made you choose between different weapon systems; fast ammo switching, but harsh cut-off outside their optimal. Now they are just a different take on hybrids with another damage type. It's also yet another nail in the coffin for projectiles, but we're not supposed to use them any more, right?
MeBiatch GRR GOONS 2023	Posted - 2014.11.27 20:35:15 - [40] - Quote Harvey James wrote: TrouserDeagle wrote: 5% and 2%? that's really underwhelming. do bigger things please. you should be tring to make scorch/null/barrage into being like javelin or something, and making the guns usable with proper ammos. t2 ammo should be a niche thing imo. javelin is pretty useless ammo as are all the T2 short range ammo on long range guns.. I wish jav gave a falloff bonus. That way it would have a niche use on Duval labs ships like the deimos or ranis. There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote: Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
MeBiatch GRR GOONS 2023	Posted - 2014.11.27 20:43:10 - [41] - Quote Arla Sarain wrote: TrouserDeagle wrote: Harvey James wrote: TrouserDeagle wrote: 5% and 2%? that's really underwhelming. do bigger things please. you should be tring to make scorch/null/barrage into being like javelin or something, and making the guns usable with proper ammos. t2 ammo should be a niche thing imo. javelin is pretty useless ammo as are all the T2 short range ammo on long range guns.. no, javelin is a nice example of T2 ammo done well. it's not a game-breaking replacement like scorch or null, it's an occasionally useful thing you carry around for when you really need more tracking. At half the optimal range you get with Javelin in comparison to Navy Anti Matter you will need a lot more tracking than the ammo offers. Argue that the Javelin concept is ok all you want The stats suck regardless. rhiload Feron-drake wrote: nerfing weapon system used heavily in small gang pvp. gj fozzie your doing great The change is borderline irrelevant. Calling it a nerf is laughable. SOUNDS like the 1.25 is not enough maybe 1.5 and a roden ship with a 50% bonus to rails would turn rails into a psudo auto canon There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote: Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
MeBiatch GRR GOONS 2023	Posted - 2014.11.27 20:47:07 - [42] - Quote Capqu wrote: im having trouble finding the dev blog on ishtars i mean dont get me wrong scorch is strong but the relative imbalance of ishtars is a lot more obvious and widespread so surely the developers would not ignore that and make minor adjustments in other places for no reason??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Magic 8 ball says ishtar should drop heavy drone bonus and get medium hybrid turret damage bonus back and remove optimal range bonus but keep tracking bonus for sentries. Remove mid slot move it as a turret high slot. There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote: Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Arla Sarain 145	Posted - 2014.11.27 21:09:59 - [43] - Quote Viribus wrote: interceptor-class warvessel Working as intended. Interceptors are the real PvP ship. Expecting anything else to be as good as them is like having a Venture that compresses ore. Get real. Get on with the times. Git gud. Train interceptors. Adapt or die. Better your killboard. If your interceptor can't bash structures your fit is bad. If you don't have a Stiletto PvP vid you are a nonfactor. EVE is real. MeBiatch wrote: SOUNDS like the 1.25 is not enough maybe 1.5 and a roden ship with a 50% bonus to rails would turn rails into a psudo auto canon So an Ares gets 0.32 tracking with Javs on 75mm Rails. At 3.5km optimal with less than 80 DPS. And 0.17 with 125mm at 6.8km optimal. Who cares? Javelin is bad. Saying it's good is like saying Capacitor Batteries are good. Or using Automatic Targeting Systems is justified cos it gives you more targets. Javelin. Bad. Should be one word - Javelinbad : "Have you see the new video? - Ah yes, its javelinbad
X ATM092 Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension 433	Posted - 2014.11.27 21:23:20 - [44] - Quote Liam Inkuras wrote: CCP Fozzie when will you balance medium autocannons? They are quite weak when compared to Blasters and Pulse lasers at their respective ranges, and selective damage type is not as strong as you make it out to be. Actually I heard that if you fit a mega beam laser on a hurricane then it gets less damage at 0km than autocannons.
Sizeof Void Ninja Suicide Squadron 523	Posted - 2014.11.27 21:24:40 - [45] - Quote Dear Fozzie - I have to agree with other posters, in that this is an underwhelming change. In fact, this is the sort of non-consequential change we used to get to ships and weapons (one sihp at a time, one weapon system at a time, one ammo type at a time), back before you joined CCP and did such a magnificient job with ship tiericide, rebalancing an entire class for each release (which was the right way to do it). Quite frankly, we need to see the same thing (tiericide) on the weapon systems and ammo. In this particular case, there is still no reason to use most T1 crystals, and no reason to ever use T1 lasers or heat sinks. And, why should only projectile ammo and missiles do different types of damage - every class of weapon should have that capability, to some extent.
McChicken Combo HalfMayo The Happy Meal 77	Posted - 2014.11.27 21:38:09 - [46] - Quote You can probably go further on the Scorch nerf. I'd bring it's optimal range down 15% and damage 10%, which gives it about the same range as Infrared while maintaining a 15% DPS edge. Alternatively nuke it's DPS and make it push out farther than Radio. Falloff buff is long overdue happy about that. ~ Bookmarks in overview ~ Fleet improvements
Unsuccessful At Everything The Troll Bridge 18043	Posted - 2014.11.27 21:38:50 - [47] - Quote I didn't realize that Scorch + pulse was such a game breaking thing that needed critical balancing at a time when so many other things need love. I must have missed the 40000 whine threads about it... which is odd.. seeing as that I tend to keep track of things like whine threads... for.. reasons. *Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?* Vote Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10!
Bullet Therapist Caldari Provisions Caldari State 196	Posted - 2014.11.27 21:54:04 - [48] - Quote Unsuccessful At Everything wrote: I didn't realize that Scorch + pulse was such a game breaking thing that needed critical balancing at a time when so many other things need love. I must have missed the 40000 whine threads about it... which is odd.. seeing as that I tend to keep track of things like whine threads... for.. reasons. This is kind of what I was thinking here. Maybe scorch could have used a nerf? IDK. There's just so many other things that could be looked at right now, like bombers (still), tech 3s, missiles, combat battecruisers, battleships, ishtars... sentry drones. vOv I like the confessor though.
Chelso Hedion University Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2014.11.27 22:31:18 - [49] - Quote I saw this graph the other day of damage done by weapon type and by ship type, funnily enough pulse lasers weren't the system that looked worrying on that graph fozzie. Fix med rails and t3's and fix sentries and Ishtars. PleaseOkThanksCyaBye.
Viribus Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 311	Posted - 2014.11.27 22:43:23 - [50] - Quote can i just point out that scorch is literally the only thing keeping pulses relevant in this game they're by far the worst turret for brawling, with fixed damagetype, bad cap usage, bad tracking, bad fitting, and mediocre damage. If not for Scorch they'd go the way of HMLs watch me be a scurb and get owned
Qvar Dar'Zanar EVE University Ivy League 305	Posted - 2014.11.27 22:48:41 - [51] - Quote Wow, really? Nobody uses any ammo type other than navy multifreq and Scorch because they suck... So we are going to nerf Scorch. As if being limited to EM wasn't enough of a problem, our damage also has to be nerfed to be equal to those who can change their damage types. Ah, the beauties of coexistance between PVE and PVP. Tbh I'm disappointed about the direction this is taking.
Aram Kachaturian Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 136	Posted - 2014.11.27 22:51:50 - [52] - Quote Viribus wrote: current (proposed) Explosion radius: 140 (250) Explosion velocity: 81 (120) this would bring heavies more in-line with CCP's vision for missiles, imo I would propose 420 for explosion radius. Thanks CCP Fozzie for those really important changes. Ishtar absolute supremacy issue can wait, chill guys. Official Poster:-áhttp://i.imgur.com/oTdKSTi.jpg (Limited stock, contact me to order)
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 983	Posted - 2014.11.27 23:01:23 - [53] - Quote so other things that need buffing about lasers are - better tracking - lower cap usage - lower fitting - buff the other crystals -50% range on ammo is bad especially -75% range - maybe reduce scorch to 35% op range and add the 5% into base guns 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
Catherine Laartii Dominion Fleet Group Templis CALSF 407	Posted - 2014.11.27 23:19:04 - [54] - Quote When are you going to take another look at missiles? Rapid launchers are in dire need of a boost. At the very least, battleships like the raven need a range bonus to rapid heavies like the caracal gets to rapid lights.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 885	Posted - 2014.11.27 23:41:11 - [55] - Quote rapid launchers are in dire need of deletion more like
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 985	Posted - 2014.11.27 23:55:41 - [56] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: rapid launchers are in dire need of deletion more like i agree .. adding something like new launchers or missiles too fill the gaps of the appropriate sizes make more sense 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
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 486	Posted - 2014.11.28 00:25:15 - [57] - Quote Harvey James wrote: TrouserDeagle wrote: rapid launchers are in dire need of deletion more like i agree .. adding something like new launchers or missiles too fill the gaps of the appropriate sizes make more sense Or, and let's think totally out of the box here, jet's make medium and large missile useful for a change? signature
Zed Zucker State War Academy Caldari State 0	Posted - 2014.11.28 00:26:44 - [58] - Quote What a waste of time. Guess I will just skill to Ishtars like everyone else. Who was griping about Scorch anyway? Why the nerf? Maybe improve some of the less useful ammo types. CCP has been doing well the last few changes but IMO this is a miss.
Gorski Car 425	Posted - 2014.11.28 00:50:12 - [59] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: rapid launchers are in dire need of deletion more like They are really only borderline overpowered on 1 ship. On all the others they are kinda ****. Collect this post
Zomgnomnom Royal Black Watch Highlanders DARKNESS. 43	Posted - 2014.11.28 01:08:34 - [60] - Quote Swing and a miss.... How about making the other Crystals worth using, adjusting tracking, or cap usage or yah know, any of the actual problems with pulse lasers?
afkboss Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 48	Posted - 2014.11.28 01:44:43 - [61] - Quote Can you please look at the damage the Revelation does. When i'm in siege beside a Naglfar I have to fit 5 cap modules to stay at jump cap and that is doing less DPS and non selectable damage.
Skyler Hawk The Scope Gallente Federation 30	Posted - 2014.11.28 01:46:19 - [62] - Quote why are people acting like losing a whole 2% of optimal range on pulses with scorch is something to get worked up about it is 2% if it bothers you that much get a 3% optimal range hardwiring or something, idk
Bullet Therapist Caldari Provisions Caldari State 196	Posted - 2014.11.28 01:50:08 - [63] - Quote Skyler Hawk wrote: why are people acting like losing a whole 2% of optimal range on pulses with scorch is something to get worked up about it is 2% if it bothers you that much get a 3% optimal range hardwiring or something, idk I don't think that everyone here is really worked up over the changes to pulses and scorch itself, it's just that a few of us feel like there are probably more important things to balance right now.
M1k3y Koontz Thorn Project Surely You're Joking 617	Posted - 2014.11.28 02:00:34 - [64] - Quote So that's a thing that CCP is doing... any word of nerfing the Ishtar or buffing medium autocannons already? I want to fly Minmatar, it's been ages! I had to switch over to mostly Caldari since even missiles are more viable than the Vagabond or a Muninn DR BiCarbonate wrote: Cool, a pretty much useless nerf. Now Fix medium autocannons. we've been living with the tracking enhancer nerf for quite some time now. And, to be clear on this point, the tracking enhancer nerf has completely **** over autocannons. I fit a Cynabal with artillery. Felt dirty afterward. Selectable damage type is rarely used to any effect, since if you're changing your ammo in the middle of a fight to hit a resist hole you're probably doing it wrong since there's a 10 second delay where you're doing no damage whatsoever, and you'd be better off with whatever ammo was already loaded. Lady Rohk wrote:** So now a rev with 3x tracking computers (cause what else are you gonna fit the mids with) now hits 40km optimal and 86km total range? Um... two cap boosters? Like everyone else? How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Aralieus The Inf1dels 225	Posted - 2014.11.28 02:17:38 - [65] - Quote Scorch seems overpowered because the other crystals suck and don't offer much advantages over our purple overlord. Why not give the other ammo some unique bonus like +x% tracking. Idk but it's usually never a good thing to nerf one thing because others in that group are lacking. In other words raise the performance of other crystals instead of hitting scorch with the nerf bat. Oderint Dum Metuant
Naoru Kozan Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 84	Posted - 2014.11.28 02:47:10 - [66] - Quote Don't suppose you guys could take a quick look at Medium Autocannons? They are kind of bad atm.
Catherine Laartii Dominion Fleet Group Templis CALSF 409	Posted - 2014.11.28 02:48:46 - [67] - Quote Zomgnomnom wrote: Swing and a miss.... How about making the other Crystals worth using, adjusting tracking, or cap usage or yah know, any of the actual problems with pulse lasers? What I would really like to see is a 50% tracking buff to close range t2 ammo like conflag and void.
Terraniel Aurelius High Flyers The Kadeshi 9	Posted - 2014.11.28 03:15:25 - [68] - Quote Current T1 laser crystals can be used for 2 things in pulse lasers: Multifrequency - damage Everything else - rainbow light show Scorch is used more relative to everything else because everything else is useless. Does it need a nerf? Only if you want us to use it as much as we use ultraviolet. Which is 0. Buff the rest of the t1 crystal range's damage or this is just a nerf to an already underutilized weapon system.
MirrorGod North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion 39	Posted - 2014.11.28 03:31:07 - [69] - Quote Consider that perhaps 4 sets of crystals is enough, (hell sometimes Imperial Standard and Standard crystals are needed to, 1/m3 per unit stacks up fast) 2% is the most scorch needs to be nerfed by. Laserboats are one thing that are fairly well balanced right now. Look at the ishtar swarms; that's the HAC you're looking for m8. http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6070/6122338654_85e9bbfca9_z.jpg
Mharius Skjem Opacity Circles 211	Posted - 2014.11.28 05:07:43 - [70] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: Harvey James wrote: TrouserDeagle wrote: 5% and 2%? that's really underwhelming. do bigger things please. you should be tring to make scorch/null/barrage into being like javelin or something, and making the guns usable with proper ammos. t2 ammo should be a niche thing imo. javelin is pretty useless ammo as are all the T2 short range ammo on long range guns.. no, javelin is a nice example of T2 ammo done well. it's not a game-breaking replacement like scorch or null, it's an occasionally useful thing you carry around for when you really need more tracking. And that's why nobody uses it. A recovering btter vet, with a fresh toon and a determination to like everything that CCP does to Eve... Don't take me too seriously though, I like to tease a bit on the forums, but that's only because I love you...
Mara Rinn Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium 5576	Posted - 2014.11.28 05:12:33 - [71] - Quote As a proponent of tweaking with a jeweller's screwdriver rather than a sledgehammer, i will be interested to see how this pans out. A nice little almpst-nothing tweak to scorch, while subtly boosting all the other crystals. At some point nerfing Scorch range would result in Scorch never being used. There needs to be some value in using scorch, though with enough buffing to other crystals it should end up being the case that faction crystals end up being almost as good for less ISK. Day 0 Advice for New Players
Luscius Uta 115	Posted - 2014.11.28 07:28:51 - [72] - Quote Not liking the changes since Conflagration is still bad, mostly due to its tracking penalty. Highsec sucks.
Cassius Invictus Thou shalt not kill A Nest of Vipers 105	Posted - 2014.11.28 07:38:21 - [73] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. We're making some tweaks to Pulse Lasers of all sizes in Rhea, as well as Scorch ammo. Thx fo post CCP Fozzie, but don't u Guys feel that lasers need a little more love? This is hardly a nerf to scorch and hardly a buff to non-scorch lasers. Pulse lasers are a medium range weapon, but the the medium range combat is a rare sight in EVE nowdays. Ps. the -10 % cap use bonus and lasers cap usage shoud be adressed ASAP - that would simplify future update of laser boats and their hull bonuses...
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1905	Posted - 2014.11.28 09:44:44 - [74] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. We're making some tweaks to Pulse Lasers of all sizes in Rhea, as well as Scorch ammo. At the moment Pulse Lasers are quite reliant on T2 Scorch ammo to be viable and powerful. The main goal of these changes is to reduce the reliance on Scorch for Pulse Lasers, making other ammo types a bit more useful. Secondary goals are improving the balance between different tiers of Pulse Lasers and improving the quality of Capital Pulse Lasers a bit. The basics of the change are: The base optimal range of all Pulse Lasers is being increased by 5%. The falloff range of all Pulse Lasers is being increased. The optimal range bonus provided by Scorch ammo is being reduced from 50% to 40%. The result is that optimal range for Pulses without Scorch will be increasing 5%, and optimal range for Pulses with Scorch will be decreasing by 2%. The percentage increase in falloff is different between the different sizes of Pulses, which helps even out the power levels of the different Pulse laser tiers slightly. Falloff increase per Pulse type is: Small Focused Pulses, Heavy Pulses, Mega Pulses: +25% Dual Light Pulses, Focused Medium Pulses, Dual Heavy Pulses: +33.3% Gatling Pulses, Giga Pulses: +100% These changes are on SISI for your testing pleasure, feel free to give them a try and let us know what you think! Sorry Fozie but Yet again you guys are homogenizing the weapons. Now lasers lose one of their disadvantages.. same as blasters that lost their every short range. Will you be fair and take the issue of AC having effective zero RANGE? Or you make all weapons effectively the same, or stop that and keep them different very different boostign them in their STRONG points when needed. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1905	Posted - 2014.11.28 09:45:47 - [75] - Quote Luscius Uta wrote: Not liking the changes since Conflagration is still bad, mostly due to its tracking penalty. It is the same for all short range t2 ammos. Yet they are very useful when you are fighting ships larger than you. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Cassius Invictus Thou shalt not kill A Nest of Vipers 105	Posted - 2014.11.28 09:50:27 - [76] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: Luscius Uta wrote: Not liking the changes since Conflagration is still bad, mostly due to its tracking penalty. It is the same for all short range t2 ammos. Yet they are very useful when you are fighting ships larger than you. And you know webs & stuff ;)
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 892	Posted - 2014.11.28 11:02:20 - [77] - Quote conflagration is one of the most powerful t2 ammos, since you barely have to think, and it has the prettiest colour.
Akemon Numon Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 2	Posted - 2014.11.28 11:23:59 - [78] - Quote Zomgnomnom wrote: Swing and a miss.... How about making the other Crystals worth using, adjusting tracking, or cap usage or yah know, any of the actual problems with pulse lasers? ^ Yes this.
Luscius Uta 115	Posted - 2014.11.28 11:48:23 - [79] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: Luscius Uta wrote: Not liking the changes since Conflagration is still bad, mostly due to its tracking penalty. It is the same for all short range t2 ammos. Yet they are very useful when you are fighting ships larger than you. I know that Hail and Void also have a 25% tracking penalty, thank you very much But pulse lasers also have much worse tracking than blasters and autocannons, so adding another tracking penalty on top of that is a bit too much I think. Also I reckon it's one of the reasons why nobody uses Punishers for frig PvP anymore Highsec sucks.
Qvar Dar'Zanar EVE University Ivy League 307	Posted - 2014.11.28 14:15:57 - [80] - Quote Nvm
Qvar Dar'Zanar EVE University Ivy League 307	Posted - 2014.11.28 14:26:05 - [81] - Quote Skyler Hawk wrote: why are people acting like losing a whole 2% of optimal range on pulses with scorch is something to get worked up about it is 2% if it bothers you that much get a 3% optimal range hardwiring or something, idk It's not about the 2%, it's about setting precedent. It's about CCP saying "even if X wouldn't merit a nerf, we are going to nerf it so you use the other things that are useless and cannot be bothered to adequately tweak". Also because if this change doesn't seem to have enough effect, then it's sure to be followed by MORE undeserved nerfs. So I say no thanks.
Cartheron Crust Matari Exodus 152	Posted - 2014.11.28 16:01:51 - [82] - Quote Hahaha seriously wtf?! Much change. So balance. Very dev. :2percent:
Anthar Thebess 811	Posted - 2014.11.28 16:48:39 - [83] - Quote DPS on Revelation also need some boosting.
Vibrance Sovereign Sovereign Fleet Tax Shelter 0	Posted - 2014.11.28 16:56:20 - [84] - Quote The problem is not in scorch, or pulses. The problem is in the ammo penalties. Autocannons: optimal is insignificant so the range penalties/bonuses of T1 ammo is irrelevant T2 ammo gives a boost of ~50% range over the "standard" range Blasters: optimal is important, but a large part of the range comes from falloff so the range penalties/bonuses of T1 ammo don't matter very much T2 ammo boosts falloff, and returns the lost optimal, its a 40% bonus over the "unmodified" range of the guns, but a larger bonus considering anti-matter as the "standard" since the optimal is not insignificant Pulse: optimal is very important, so the range penalties/bonuses of T1 ammo very much matter Scorch ammo gives a boost of 50% optimal range over the "unmodified" range, but considering multifrequency to be "standard" its actually more like 3x If you look at the stats of the guns themselves, which is probably how the balance started, they seem fine. But lasers lose massive range when going for high damage ammo, whereas blasters lose only a little, and autos almost nothing. Further diverging from the stats unmodified by ammo, the already high tracking autos get tracking boosts (no other T1 ammo gives tracking boosts) The T1 ammo is defective, not the T2 scorch. On top of this, is the TE/TC which boosts the effective range of autos and blasters far more than it does for lasers. If high damage T1 ammo has an optimal penalty, but no falloff penalty for projectiles, then high damage T1 laser crystals should have a falloff penalty, but no optimal penalty. Hyrbids should have a split optimal/faloff penalty, just like the T2 ammo has a split optimal/falloff boost. Scorch is not OPd. Either the other T1 ammos are OPd, or the T1 crystals and under powered. This boosts T1 crystals a little, while leaving scorch mostly alone.... I'd still like to see a complete overhaul of optimal vs fallof vs tracking modifiers. Then base the guns on that, or make it so all the ammo sleections have similar relative effects to the unmodified stats. Scorch was fine, not whining about the changes. Am whining about the focus wasted on this instead of other things
God's Apples Pod Liberation Authority HYDRA RELOADED 500	Posted - 2014.11.28 17:03:30 - [85] - Quote The different crystals not being used in short range lasers isn't a problem specific to lasers. Nobody ever carries plutonium or lead in blaster boats or uranium or proton in AC boats (with the exception of titanium sabot because that is actually useful for its tracking bonus). T1 crystals and hybrid ammo do use less cap towards the middle ranges, and more cap at the extreme ranges. e.g. Standard and lead are the most cap efficient t1 laser and hybrid ammos respectively, while antimatter/multi and iron/radio are the most cap intensive (not entirely true but the point still stands). The reason nobody uses t1 ammo besides the highest damage one is because t2 long range ammo gives the same range as the longest range t1 ammo while doing the same damage as the mid range t1 ammo. There's really no way to compete. Long ranged weapons are more balanced in this sense because long range t2 ammo has an actual drawback and because they actually have the range to utilize the minute differences in range that the t1 ammos offer. So what does this mean for balance? Well first there are too many damn t1 ammos. Even in my beam phantasm, where I'm constantly switching between multi, xray, standard, infrared, and aurora to suit the range I'm at, I'm still not carrying half of all the varieties of t1 ammo. If you want to give meaningful advantages to different t1 ammos, a good place to start would be cutting the absurd number of them down. "Hydra Reloaded are just jealous / butthurt on me / us because we can get tons of PVP action in empire while they aren't good enough to get that." - NightmareX
Spc One The Chodak Void Alliance 229	Posted - 2014.11.28 17:04:56 - [86] - Quote Scorch is quite bad as is, because it mostly does EM damage, other weapon systems do more thermal kinetic explosive damage which is way better than only EM.
Unsuccessful At Everything The Troll Bridge 18061	Posted - 2014.11.28 17:16:15 - [87] - Quote Fozzie, show us on the ship doll where the ebil Zealot touched your alt.... *Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?* Vote Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10!
Ralph King-Griffin Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 7135	Posted - 2014.11.28 18:47:08 - [88] - Quote Unsuccessful At Everything wrote: Fozzie, show us on the ship doll where the ebil Zealot touched your alt.... i would guess "I'm also quite confident that you are laughing and it's the kind of laugh that gives normal people shivers." =]I[=
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 541	Posted - 2014.11.28 18:49:49 - [89] - Quote God's Apples wrote: The different crystals not being used in short range lasers isn't a problem specific to lasers. Nobody ever carries plutonium or lead in blaster boats or uranium or proton in AC boats (with the exception of titanium sabot because that is actually useful for its tracking bonus). T1 crystals and hybrid ammo do use less cap towards the middle ranges, and more cap at the extreme ranges. e.g. Standard and lead are the most cap efficient t1 laser and hybrid ammos respectively, while antimatter/multi and iron/radio are the most cap intensive (not entirely true but the point still stands). The reason nobody uses t1 ammo besides the highest damage one is because t2 long range ammo gives the same range as the longest range t1 ammo while doing the same damage as the mid range t1 ammo. There's really no way to compete. Long ranged weapons are more balanced in this sense because long range t2 ammo has an actual drawback and because they actually have the range to utilize the minute differences in range that the t1 ammos offer. So what does this mean for balance? Well first there are too many damn t1 ammos. Even in my beam phantasm, where I'm constantly switching between multi, xray, standard, infrared, and aurora to suit the range I'm at, I'm still not carrying half of all the varieties of t1 ammo. If you want to give meaningful advantages to different t1 ammos, a good place to start would be cutting the absurd number of them down. This fine gentleman gets it.
Anthar Thebess 811	Posted - 2014.11.28 21:59:40 - [90] - Quote Put also some love to ammo. Why Sansha or Blood crystals are worst than imperial navy in all aspects? Make them the same or at least different.
Qvar Dar'Zanar EVE University Ivy League 307	Posted - 2014.11.29 00:16:44 - [91] - Quote But why should T1 ammo be comparable to T2? T2 and faction get used up. They have to be better. The main problem I see is conflag and the faction ammos that aren't multifreq. edit: I'm not saying that T1 ammo couldn't use a buff. Only that not necessarily so big that it's an alternative to T2/faction ammo.
Torei Dutalis IceBox Inc. Lasers Are Magic 15	Posted - 2014.11.29 01:34:59 - [92] - Quote I'm really curious as to what the thought process behind what needs to be balanced is for the balance team. There are plenty of things in the game that are so obviously and totally broken (is the vigil even a ship?) that I sometimes wonder if the devs are really in touch with the game at all. These little nickle and dime changes to weapons and ships that either don't need changes or need more comprehensive looks are starting to get a little tiring. Tracking enhancers, light missiles, scorch. All these changes just seem like they are meant to make players feel like you guys are doing "something." Where are the iterations on ship balance? And I don't mean the tweaks where you add +3 CPU to the punisher.
God's Apples Pod Liberation Authority HYDRA RELOADED 503	Posted - 2014.11.29 03:22:25 - [93] - Quote Qvar Dar'Zanar wrote: But why should T1 ammo be comparable to T2? T2 and faction get used up. They have to be better. The main problem I see is conflag and the faction ammos that aren't multifreq. edit: I'm not saying that T1 ammo couldn't use a buff. Only that not necessarily so big that it's an alternative to T2/faction ammo. By t1 ammo we mean the t1 line of crystals. By saying multi or standard we are meaning imperial navy multi and imperial navy standard. Anyone with half a clue understands this. Please don't propagate ignorance. Thanks. "Hydra Reloaded are just jealous / butthurt on me / us because we can get tons of PVP action in empire while they aren't good enough to get that." - NightmareX
Gavin Dax Repercussus Goonswarm Federation 89	Posted - 2014.11.29 03:32:41 - [94] - Quote I agree with the overall sentiment here. It would be nice to see some actual data and a more comprehensive balancing of the weapon systems. By that I mean graphs of things like effective damage at different ranges, vs. different velocities, etc. for all weapons (including drones, sentries). I'm going to take a guess and say that those numbers would expose some obvious imbalances. For example, compare barrage to null - even though ACs give about 20% more falloff, their DPS is so much lower than the blasters that ACs barely match (and in most cases do less) damage at their max falloff (don't even mention close ranges). It would also expose things like the huge ranges you can get on some of the larger supposedly short-range guns (e.g. why use beams when you can hit so far out with pulse lasers on a rev, as was mentioned here previously?). Sentries need re-balancing way more than lasers, probably followed by ACs, then beams and missiles (select-able damage types don't mean as much when most of the ships only get a bonus for kinetic anyway). And hybrids really need a major range nerf, since their only drawbacks right now are no EM/explosive damage option and cap use - pretty much makes them the no-brainer best option outside of sentries. It's pretty ridiculous that hybrids can match AC ranges... I'd say that's a bigger problem than all this scorch stuff.
Nordalis Rmith The Scope Gallente Federation 7	Posted - 2014.11.29 04:14:54 - [95] - Quote I really do like the effort of addressing scorch. I feel like buffing other types is better than nerfing scorch.
Gregor Parud 765	Posted - 2014.11.29 09:21:47 - [96] - Quote I'm kinda amazed by how people are calling this a nerf. MUCH more workable ranges that actually matter: the falloff increases are pretty massive and the optimal bonus is nice, at a total cost of.... 2% derived optimal loss on Scorch (which no one is going to notice and will easily be made up for by the falloff buff). It's a BUFF folks, the only reason that scorch overall loses some optimal is so that they could use rounded numbers with the balancing changes.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 542	Posted - 2014.11.29 09:31:06 - [97] - Quote The thing is, it doesnt change the choice of crystal compared to today. It rearranges some deckchairs, but the ship's overall condition remains the same.
Eessi Murderous Inc 22	Posted - 2014.11.29 12:51:06 - [98] - Quote As someone who flies scorch ships alot thank you for being gentle with the changes. The balance pass factors in nicely with the release of the confessor and as such will change the fitting meta. Thank you for your awesome work!
Mr Floydy Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 250	Posted - 2014.11.29 13:23:47 - [99] - Quote I'm happy this isn't a huge change. I was worried that I was going to come in here and find it over nerfed like arguably happened with HML. CCP don't need to make balance changes perfectly every single time, doing things incrementally where they have the option of doing a little more at a later date is much less disruptive and better for the game.
Qvar Dar'Zanar EVE University Ivy League 307	Posted - 2014.11.29 17:22:48 - [100] - Quote God's Apples wrote: By t1 ammo we mean the t1 line of crystals. By saying multi or standard we are meaning imperial navy multi and imperial navy standard. Anyone with half a clue understands this. Please don't propagate ignorance. Thanks. Woah really? Your words are LSD to my mind. I wouldn't have never realized that T1 = T1 if not for your savvy words, thank you sir. How did you came up with such brilliant convention?
Faren Shalni Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 78	Posted - 2014.11.29 17:50:04 - [101] - Quote Why does scorch need nerfing even if slightly? when rails (mid to super long range), sentries (everything), beams (mid to long range), Arty's (Short-mid to Long Range) and blasters (Brawling) do its job better So Much Space
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 995	Posted - 2014.11.29 18:01:16 - [102] - Quote Faren Shalni wrote: Why does scorch need nerfing even if slightly? when rails (mid to super long range), sentries (everything), beams (mid to long range), Arty's (Short-mid to Long Range) and blasters (Brawling) do its job better technically a nerf, but in reality a buff.. you'll get more range from the falloff buffs than you lose in optimal range when using scorch 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
M1k3y Koontz Thorn Project Surely You're Joking 618	Posted - 2014.11.29 18:30:04 - [103] - Quote Unsuccessful At Everything wrote: Fozzie, show us on the ship doll where the ebil Zealot touched your alt.... Really? People still say this? It's not furthering any cause, especially not with a dev. How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 900	Posted - 2014.11.29 18:48:09 - [104] - Quote Faren Shalni wrote: Why does scorch need nerfing even if slightly? when rails (mid to super long range), sentries (everything), beams (mid to long range), Arty's (Short-mid to Long Range) and blasters (Brawling) do its job better absurd tracking at range destroys small ships.
Faren Shalni Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 78	Posted - 2014.11.29 20:13:00 - [105] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: Faren Shalni wrote: Why does scorch need nerfing even if slightly? when rails (mid to super long range), sentries (everything), beams (mid to long range), Arty's (Short-mid to Long Range) and blasters (Brawling) do its job better absurd tracking at range destroys small ships. try spiralling I hear it helps avoid that So Much Space
FT Diomedes The Graduates Forged of Fire 651	Posted - 2014.11.29 20:19:24 - [106] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: Faren Shalni wrote: Why does scorch need nerfing even if slightly? when rails (mid to super long range), sentries (everything), beams (mid to long range), Arty's (Short-mid to Long Range) and blasters (Brawling) do its job better absurd tracking at range destroys small ships. Then get closer. All weapons track better at long range. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Schneevva Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 4	Posted - 2014.11.29 21:30:53 - [107] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: TrouserDeagle wrote: Faren Shalni wrote: Why does scorch need nerfing even if slightly? when rails (mid to super long range), sentries (everything), beams (mid to long range), Arty's (Short-mid to Long Range) and blasters (Brawling) do its job better absurd tracking at range destroys small ships. Then get closer. All weapons track better at long range. They also track well at close range. The problem with Scorch was that it gave you incredible range on a gun with good tracking, which means it tracked incredibly well at range whereas actual long range guns did not. It was the only reason things like the Slicer worked at all. Now, none of this fixes the fact that barring scorch, pulse lasers are fairly awful. That's the main reason I dislike this change, lasers are now being brought "into line" with other turrets, while also very clearly not being in line because of their massive and utterly pointless cap penalty, which CCP tacitly admits to with their constant attempts to band aid over.
Shelom Severasse The Maythorn 28	Posted - 2014.11.30 09:53:44 - [108] - Quote i feel that if pulses are getting a slight nerf to scorch range, then the tracking penalty on scorch should also be taken down a bit
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1002	Posted - 2014.11.30 11:02:46 - [109] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: Harvey James wrote: TrouserDeagle wrote: 5% and 2%? that's really underwhelming. do bigger things please. you should be tring to make scorch/null/barrage into being like javelin or something, and making the guns usable with proper ammos. t2 ammo should be a niche thing imo. javelin is pretty useless ammo as are all the T2 short range ammo on long range guns.. no, javelin is a nice example of T2 ammo done well. it's not a game-breaking replacement like scorch or null, it's an occasionally useful thing you carry around for when you really need more tracking. like null makes blasters pawnmobiles ??? 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
Ocih Space Mermaids Somethin Awfull Forums 828	Posted - 2014.11.30 11:16:48 - [110] - Quote I wasn't aware this was a thing. I use Imperial Navy clears as much as scorch. My observation on lasers is, you have Heavy Pulse, dual pulse, heavy beam, dual beam and nobody uses 3 of them. If you want to balance lasers you need to look further and larger than Pulse/ Scorch.
Sizeof Void Ninja Suicide Squadron 523	Posted - 2014.12.01 01:45:24 - [111] - Quote Ocih wrote: My observation on lasers is, you have Heavy Pulse, dual pulse, heavy beam, dual beam and nobody uses 3 of them. If you want to balance lasers you need to look further and larger than Pulse/ Scorch. Module tiericide, anyone?
AspiB'elt Aries Engineering Quasar Generation 16	Posted - 2014.12.01 06:43:22 - [112] - Quote Hi Fozzie, it's nice for laser. But can you also adapt the lens about damage. Now we have a lot of lens. This is useful when you have Large beam only. My idea will be to have right now two lens in the same range but will different damage. One lens make more damage in EM the second make more damage in Thermal.
Pertuabo Enkidgan Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 132	Posted - 2014.12.01 19:40:19 - [113] - Quote Alright it's a step; But can you please buff/change other crystals as well? I'm tired of looking at Purple lasers.
Phaade Perimeter Defense Systems Templis CALSF 293	Posted - 2014.12.02 05:38:14 - [114] - Quote ........why.... this is your solution to a broken weapon system? These changes are irrelevant....
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1909	Posted - 2014.12.02 09:11:17 - [115] - Quote Schneevva wrote: FT Diomedes wrote: TrouserDeagle wrote: Faren Shalni wrote: Why does scorch need nerfing even if slightly? when rails (mid to super long range), sentries (everything), beams (mid to long range), Arty's (Short-mid to Long Range) and blasters (Brawling) do its job better absurd tracking at range destroys small ships. Then get closer. All weapons track better at long range. They also track well at close range. The problem with Scorch was that it gave you incredible range on a gun with good tracking, which means it tracked incredibly well at range whereas actual long range guns did not. It was the only reason things like the Slicer worked at all. Now, none of this fixes the fact that barring scorch, pulse lasers are fairly awful. That's the main reason I dislike this change, lasers are now being brought "into line" with other turrets, while also very clearly not being in line because of their massive and utterly pointless cap penalty, which CCP tacitly admits to with their constant attempts to band aid over. No that is NOT the reason why pulses have issues. THe main problem with pulses is that high damage cristals have same penalty as the other types of high damage ammunitions ( antimatter and EMP).. what you ask? How can that be an disadvantage? Because the MAIN advantage of pulses over other weapons is RANGE. Result.. High damage ammunition penalty is FUNCTIONALLY much HIGHER on pulse lasers than on Blasters and AC. On AC the bonuses and penalties of T1 ammo were fixed long ago by making a tracking vs damage tradeoff. On blasters you use AM or NOTHING of t1 ammunition. The AM range penalty is irrelevant since you will already need to be very close. Reduce MF range penalty to 30% and scale the other crystals .. and pulse lasers will be in a much more healthy place because they will be able to use their main advantage. That of REMOVE COMPLETELY the range penalty on T1 ammunition and exchange it for TRACKING vs Damage scaling. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1909	Posted - 2014.12.02 09:13:33 - [116] - Quote Spc One wrote: Scorch is quite bad as is, because it mostly does EM damage, other weapon systems do more thermal kinetic explosive damage which is way better than only EM. It is good against Sansha in PVE, but that's about it. Try shooting angel cartel with sorch, it takes FOREVER. Game balance is made and DISCUSSED around PVP. PVE balance is secondary and is emergent from the PVP balance. No logic on changing a weapon system because of ANGEL rats, when its better to focus on PVP balance and then if there are PVE problems you tweak the RATS. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1909	Posted - 2014.12.02 09:15:59 - [117] - Quote Naoru Kozan wrote: Don't suppose you guys could take a quick look at Medium Autocannons? They are kind of bad atm. The problem of AC are blasters. Blasters were overbuffed and that combined with the nerf to track enhancers means that AC have no engagement envelope where they are decent unless the ship has falloff bonus. When you get in tackle range Blasters completely WIPE AC, with a hand tied behind their back. Outside that range AC are completely outdone by rails and missiles. That results in AC not having ANY LOGICAL usage at all. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION The Obsidian Front 571	Posted - 2014.12.02 12:25:51 - [118] - Quote Gonna throw my 2 cents in here.... I feel that the major issues with weapons (especially hybrid and lasers) is that most of the ammo is more or less useless. I've posted in the past that the ammo does need a full rework however it didn't gain much traction. Original Thread The meat and two veg of my idea is this: Quote: LASERS Two "Short Range" High damage ammo's that give the weapons a choice in damage type within the weapons damage profile Multifrequency (short range EM) ........: Hi EM low Thermal -50% optimal Infra-red (Short rng Thermal) .............: Hi thermal damage low EM -50% optimal Two "Short Range" Speciality ammo's that offer either a ROF bonus (useful for specific ships) and a High Tracking ammo Gamma (short range hi RoF) ............. : +100% RoF -50% Damage -50% optimal (Double RoF but 1/2 the damage per shot) X-Ray (Short Range hi tracking) .........: -50% optimal +10% tracking low dmg Two "Mid Range" Ammo's Ultraviolet (Mid range Mid dmg)...........: +25% optimal Standard (V.Low Cap Use Mid Rng) ..: +25% optimal -50% cap use -20% damage Two "Long Range" ammo's. One offering heavy volley damage at the expense of tracking and one "Extreme" range ammo Microwave (Sniper/Alpha low RoF)......: +75% dmg -75% Rof +40% optimal +100% Cap use Radio (Extreme long range)..................: +60% optimal HYBRIDS Two "Short Range" High damage ammo's that give the weapons a choice in damage type within the weapons damage profile Antimatter (Short rng Thermal)..............: High Thermal low Kinetic damage -50% optimal Lead (Short rng Kinetic)...........................: hi kinetic low Thermal -50% optimal Two "Short Range" Speciality ammo's that offer either a ROF bonus (useful for specific ships) and a High Tracking ammo Uranium (Short-Mid rng Hi RoF).............: +100% Rof -50% dmg -25% optimal -25% falloff (Double RoF but 1/2 damage per shot) Plutonium (Short-Mid rng Hi tracking):.... -25% optimal & falloff +10% tracking low dmg Two "Mid Range" Ammo's Thorium (Hi falloff low optimal)................: +50% Falloff Iridium (Hi optimal Low falloff)..................: +50% Optimal Two "Long Range" ammo's. One offering heavy volley damage at the expense of tracking and one "Extreme" range ammo Tungsten (Sniper/Alpha low RoF)............: +75% dmg -75% Rof +40% optimal & falloff +100% Cap use Iron (Extreme long range)..........................: +60% Optimal & fall off I think the ammo really needs fixing first then look at the turrets and meta or tier cide it. Whatever we're gonna call it
Xequecal GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 268	Posted - 2014.12.02 20:55:18 - [119] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: No that is NOT the reason why pulses have issues. THe main problem with pulses is that high damage cristals have same penalty as the other types of high damage ammunitions ( antimatter and EMP).. what you ask? How can that be an disadvantage? Because the MAIN advantage of pulses over other weapons is RANGE. Result.. High damage ammunition penalty is FUNCTIONALLY much HIGHER on pulse lasers than on Blasters and AC. On AC the bonuses and penalties of T1 ammo were fixed long ago by making a tracking vs damage tradeoff. On blasters you use AM or NOTHING of t1 ammunition. The AM range penalty is irrelevant since you will already need to be very close. Reduce MF range penalty to 30% and scale the other crystals .. and pulse lasers will be in a much more healthy place because they will be able to use their main advantage. That of REMOVE COMPLETELY the range penalty on T1 ammunition and exchange it for TRACKING vs Damage scaling. Lasers are a kiting weapon system that only gets put on brawling hulls. Similarly, projectiles are a brawling weapon system that only gets put on kiting hulls. This, in addition to the fact that sentry drones are strictly superior to any weapon system that doesn't outrange them, makes them bad. Imagine for a second if the Vagabond had laser bonuses while the Zealot had projectile bonuses. Both ships would be incredibly good.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1015	Posted - 2014.12.02 23:11:11 - [120] - Quote could the harbinger get some much needed fitting so it can actually fit a warfare link or a Nos please .. it needs some help too be useful 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
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 502	Posted - 2014.12.03 00:53:00 - [121] - Quote Harvey James wrote: could the harbinger get some much needed fitting so it can actually fit a warfare link or a Nos please .. it needs some help too be useful I would like to fit heavy beams on a Harbinger instead of the focused mediums. signature
Eric Shang Living Asylum 171	Posted - 2014.12.03 15:23:16 - [122] - Quote Fozzie I was wondering why pulses and beams are a bit well weird. All ranges are lvl 5 skills Pulse: Multi (3.8 + 2.5) = dps range of 3.8 - 6.3KM Conflag (3.8 + 2.5) = dps range of 3.8 - 6.3KM Scorch (11 + 2.5) = dps range of 11 - 13.5KM Beam: Multi (7.5 + 5) = dps range of 7.5 - 12.5KM Gleam (3.8 + 5) = dps range of 3.8 - 8.8KM Aurora ( 27+ 5) = dps range of 27 - 32KM If you look at the gleam and the scorch. Why is there a short range beam ammo that is brawler range and then there is a pulse ammo that is overheated web range at its base. I have been finding this very confusing. Pulse: Multi (3.8 + 2.5) = dps range of 3.8 - 6.3KM Conflag (3.8 + 2.5) = dps range of 3.8 - 6.3KM Scorch (3.8 + 5) = dps range of 3.8 - 8.8KM Beam: Multi (7.5 + 5) = dps range of 7.5 - 12.5KM Gleam (11 + 2.5) = dps range of 11 - 13.5KM Aurora ( 27+ 5) = dps range of 27 - 32KM I would have said this would have been a bit more acurate. It means pulse are there for close range and beam are there for long range. Member of The Bastards - http://www.the-bastards.net/ My Pirate Journey: http://ericshangthepirate.wordpress.com/
Mr Floydy Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 250	Posted - 2014.12.03 20:05:56 - [123] - Quote You think making Scorch so that it barely has any more range than Multi is something that would be good? Your numbers would be utterly terrible, why would anyone ever use Scorch?
almanac Omaristos Hollow Blood Hunters Surely You're Joking 4	Posted - 2014.12.03 20:22:39 - [124] - Quote Lasers as a weapon system defiantly need more work. I would suggest also looking at conflag ammo as it needs a buff so that pulse lasers may be on par with the other weapons systems close range weapons.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1018	Posted - 2014.12.03 21:38:59 - [125] - Quote almanac Omaristos wrote: Lasers as a weapon system defiantly need more work. I would suggest also looking at conflag ammo as it needs a buff so that pulse lasers may be on par with the other weapons systems close range weapons. lasers need better tracking for sure.. you don't see many brawling laser ships .. its all about mobile scorch omens/Apocs/ slicer. that and the tanky brawling ships like maller abbadon etc .. are so poorly designed , they need cap mods just too use the guns, the dps is low and then you add trying to tracking something... or you get cap use bonuses and less tanky ships, which don't offer much in mobility, tank, dps or application/projection.. i also think the prophecy should be put back to a laserboat.. its just used as a bati brick like it used too but now it has drones for dps so the trade off is no longer there and the harbinger is too light on tank or useful bonuses too fill that maller to abbadon gap , harbi needs a proper apoc style mobility/projection too be useful, but ofc the oracle is in the way of it becoming a proper ABC as it needs too be useful.. so move ABC's to T2 too make room.. 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
almanac Omaristos Hollow Blood Hunters Surely You're Joking 4	Posted - 2014.12.03 22:12:34 - [126] - Quote Harvey James wrote: almanac Omaristos wrote: Lasers as a weapon system defiantly need more work. I would suggest also looking at conflag ammo as it needs a buff so that pulse lasers may be on par with the other weapons systems close range weapons. lasers need better tracking for sure.. you don't see many brawling laser ships .. its all about mobile scorch omens/Apocs/ slicer. that and the tanky brawling ships like maller abbadon etc .. are so poorly designed , they need cap mods just too use the guns, the dps is low and then you add trying to tracking something... or you get cap use bonuses and less tanky ships, which don't offer much in mobility, tank, dps or application/projection.. i also think the prophecy should be put back to a laserboat.. its just used as a bait brick like it used too but now it has drones for dps so the trade off is no longer there and the harbinger is too light on tank or useful bonuses too fill that maller to abbadon gap , harbi needs a proper apoc style mobility/projection too be useful, but ofc the oracle is in the way of it becoming a proper ABC as it needs too be useful.. so move ABC's to T2 too make room.. everything you said up until the second paragraph was pure genus but the third paragraph not so much ... drones are a good thing, they made amarr much much better shh.. we don't need to talk about nerfing the prophecy solo prophecy for the win:D
almanac Omaristos Hollow Blood Hunters Surely You're Joking 4	Posted - 2014.12.03 22:17:37 - [127] - Quote Vibrance Sovereign wrote: The problem is not in scorch, or pulses. The problem is in the ammo penalties. Autocannons: optimal is insignificant so the range penalties/bonuses of T1 ammo is irrelevant T2 ammo gives a boost of ~50% range over the "standard" range Blasters: optimal is important, but a large part of the range comes from falloff so the range penalties/bonuses of T1 ammo don't matter very much T2 ammo boosts falloff, and returns the lost optimal, its a 40% bonus over the "unmodified" range of the guns, but a larger bonus considering anti-matter as the "standard" since the optimal is not insignificant Pulse: optimal is very important, so the range penalties/bonuses of T1 ammo very much matter Scorch ammo gives a boost of 50% optimal range over the "unmodified" range, but considering multifrequency to be "standard" its actually more like 3x If you look at the stats of the guns themselves, which is probably how the balance started, they seem fine. But lasers lose massive range when going for high damage ammo, whereas blasters lose only a little, and autos almost nothing. Further diverging from the stats unmodified by ammo, the already high tracking autos get tracking boosts (no other T1 ammo gives tracking boosts) The T1 ammo is defective, not the T2 scorch. On top of this, is the TE/TC which boosts the effective range of autos and blasters far more than it does for lasers. If high damage T1 ammo has an optimal penalty, but no falloff penalty for projectiles, then high damage T1 laser crystals should have a falloff penalty, but no optimal penalty. Hyrbids should have a split optimal/faloff penalty, just like the T2 ammo has a split optimal/falloff boost. Scorch is not OPd. Either the other T1 ammos are OPd, or the T1 crystals and under powered. This boosts T1 crystals a little, while leaving scorch mostly alone.... I'd still like to see a complete overhaul of optimal vs fallof vs tracking modifiers. Then base the guns on that, or make it so all the ammo sleections have similar relative effects to the unmodified stats. Scorch was fine, not whining about the changes. Am whining about the focus wasted on this instead of other things You the real MVP CCP listen to this guys fix everything about lasers please :)
Reynas Arthie The Church of Awesome Caldari State Capturing 9	Posted - 2014.12.03 22:24:09 - [128] - Quote Lasers are all wrong right now! Right now they are back asswards. Pulse lasers SHOULD be massive ALPHA weapons with huge cap usage but decent tracking with low rof to help with overall cap usage and dps balancing. Beam laser SHOULD be dps lasers with NO 'alpha'. i.e. they do damage each second. Effectively very low damage but with very fast rof (1 second).
almanac Omaristos Hollow Blood Hunters Surely You're Joking 4	Posted - 2014.12.03 22:32:08 - [129] - Quote Reynas Arthie wrote: Lasers are all wrong right now! Right now they are back asswards. Pulse lasers SHOULD be massive ALPHA weapons with huge cap usage but decent tracking with low rof to help with overall cap usage and dps balancing. Beam laser SHOULD be dps lasers with NO 'alpha'. i.e. they do damage each second. Effectively very low damage but with very fast rof (1 second). OMG little girl scream I like the idea of having close range alpha lasers with good tracking this is the best one so far CCP listen to this guy too
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1018	Posted - 2014.12.03 22:32:46 - [130] - Quote almanac Omaristos wrote: Harvey James wrote: almanac Omaristos wrote: Lasers as a weapon system defiantly need more work. I would suggest also looking at conflag ammo as it needs a buff so that pulse lasers may be on par with the other weapons systems close range weapons. lasers need better tracking for sure.. you don't see many brawling laser ships .. its all about mobile scorch omens/Apocs/ slicer. that and the tanky brawling ships like maller abbadon etc .. are so poorly designed , they need cap mods just too use the guns, the dps is low and then you add trying to tracking something... or you get cap use bonuses and less tanky ships, which don't offer much in mobility, tank, dps or application/projection.. i also think the prophecy should be put back to a laserboat.. its just used as a bait brick like it used too but now it has drones for dps so the trade off is no longer there and the harbinger is too light on tank or useful bonuses too fill that maller to abbadon gap , harbi needs a proper apoc style mobility/projection too be useful, but ofc the oracle is in the way of it becoming a proper ABC as it needs too be useful.. so move ABC's to T2 too make room.. everything you said up until the second paragraph was pure genus but the third paragraph not so much ... drones are a good thing, they made amarr much much better shh.. we don't need to talk about nerfing the prophecy solo prophecy for the win:D so you like the prophecy as it is .. i just think its a bit a poor mans bastard myrmidon .. what do you think about the oracle ABC's becoming T2 too allow 4 of the CBC's too become proper ABC's? 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
almanac Omaristos Hollow Blood Hunters Surely You're Joking 4	Posted - 2014.12.03 22:35:45 - [131] - Quote Harvey James wrote: almanac Omaristos wrote: Harvey James wrote: almanac Omaristos wrote: Lasers as a weapon system defiantly need more work. I would suggest also looking at conflag ammo as it needs a buff so that pulse lasers may be on par with the other weapons systems close range weapons. lasers need better tracking for sure.. you don't see many brawling laser ships .. its all about mobile scorch omens/Apocs/ slicer. that and the tanky brawling ships like maller abbadon etc .. are so poorly designed , they need cap mods just too use the guns, the dps is low and then you add trying to tracking something... or you get cap use bonuses and less tanky ships, which don't offer much in mobility, tank, dps or application/projection.. i also think the prophecy should be put back to a laserboat.. its just used as a bait brick like it used too but now it has drones for dps so the trade off is no longer there and the harbinger is too light on tank or useful bonuses too fill that maller to abbadon gap , harbi needs a proper apoc style mobility/projection too be useful, but ofc the oracle is in the way of it becoming a proper ABC as it needs too be useful.. so move ABC's to T2 too make room.. everything you said up until the second paragraph was pure genus but the third paragraph not so much ... drones are a good thing, they made amarr much much better shh.. we don't need to talk about nerfing the prophecy solo prophecy for the win:D so you like the prophecy as it is .. i just think its a bit a poor mans bastard myrmidon .. what do you think about the oracle ABC's becoming T2 too allow 4 of the CBC's too become proper ABC's? okay way to many I really don't understand what you just said
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1018	Posted - 2014.12.03 22:39:36 - [132] - Quote almanac Omaristos wrote: Harvey James wrote: almanac Omaristos wrote: Harvey James wrote: almanac Omaristos wrote: Lasers as a weapon system defiantly need more work. I would suggest also looking at conflag ammo as it needs a buff so that pulse lasers may be on par with the other weapons systems close range weapons. lasers need better tracking for sure.. you don't see many brawling laser ships .. its all about mobile scorch omens/Apocs/ slicer. that and the tanky brawling ships like maller abbadon etc .. are so poorly designed , they need cap mods just too use the guns, the dps is low and then you add trying to tracking something... or you get cap use bonuses and less tanky ships, which don't offer much in mobility, tank, dps or application/projection.. i also think the prophecy should be put back to a laserboat.. its just used as a bait brick like it used too but now it has drones for dps so the trade off is no longer there and the harbinger is too light on tank or useful bonuses too fill that maller to abbadon gap , harbi needs a proper apoc style mobility/projection too be useful, but ofc the oracle is in the way of it becoming a proper ABC as it needs too be useful.. so move ABC's to T2 too make room.. everything you said up until the second paragraph was pure genus but the third paragraph not so much ... drones are a good thing, they made amarr much much better shh.. we don't need to talk about nerfing the prophecy solo prophecy for the win:D so you like the prophecy as it is .. i just think its a bit a poor mans bastard myrmidon .. what do you think about the oracle ABC's becoming T2 too allow 4 of the CBC's too become proper ABC's? okay I really don't understand what you just said basically making the oracle, talos etc into T2 bc's and then moving harbinger,drake, brutix and hurricane into the Attack bc category with the improved mobility/projection etc.. 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
almanac Omaristos Hollow Blood Hunters Surely You're Joking 4	Posted - 2014.12.03 22:55:40 - [133] - Quote no not really, that would just be confusing for starters. In all honesty its lasers that need the biggest changes right now they are the most untouched weapon system by ccp. The entire line needs a rework as they are indeed broken, the only thing laser have going for them right now is range, and even that's out done by sentries. What lasers are missing is some awesome close range weapon system that can match blasters and auto cannons (rockets and HAMS are fine right now) currently amarr ships more specifically the t1 frigs and destroyers are heavily out match by the other races counter parts . CCP should keep playing with small lasers and figure out a way to make them awesome. AMARR MASTER RACE!!!
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 505	Posted - 2014.12.03 23:50:10 - [134] - Quote almanac Omaristos wrote: -snip- CCP should keep playing with small lasers and figure out a way to make them awesome. AMARR MASTER RACE!!! That is easy, increase tracking on pulse lasers to counter the shortcomings of the Amarr ship slot layouts. Bring down capacitor usage by a bit on beams and voil+á, lazors awesome. signature
Shelom Severasse The Maythorn 32	Posted - 2014.12.04 00:43:23 - [135] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: Schneevva wrote: FT Diomedes wrote: TrouserDeagle wrote: Faren Shalni wrote: Why does scorch need nerfing even if slightly? when rails (mid to super long range), sentries (everything), beams (mid to long range), Arty's (Short-mid to Long Range) and blasters (Brawling) do its job better absurd tracking at range destroys small ships. Then get closer. All weapons track better at long range. They also track well at close range. The problem with Scorch was that it gave you incredible range on a gun with good tracking, which means it tracked incredibly well at range whereas actual long range guns did not. It was the only reason things like the Slicer worked at all. Now, none of this fixes the fact that barring scorch, pulse lasers are fairly awful. That's the main reason I dislike this change, lasers are now being brought "into line" with other turrets, while also very clearly not being in line because of their massive and utterly pointless cap penalty, which CCP tacitly admits to with their constant attempts to band aid over. No that is NOT the reason why pulses have issues. THe main problem with pulses is that high damage cristals have same penalty as the other types of high damage ammunitions ( antimatter and EMP).. what you ask? How can that be an disadvantage? Because the MAIN advantage of pulses over other weapons is RANGE. Result.. High damage ammunition penalty is FUNCTIONALLY much HIGHER on pulse lasers than on Blasters and AC. On AC the bonuses and penalties of T1 ammo were fixed long ago by making a tracking vs damage tradeoff. On blasters you use AM or NOTHING of t1 ammunition. The AM range penalty is irrelevant since you will already need to be very close. Reduce MF range penalty to 30% and scale the other crystals .. and pulse lasers will be in a much more healthy place because they will be able to use their main advantage. That of REMOVE COMPLETELY the range penalty on T1 ammunition and exchange it for TRACKING vs Damage scaling. would like to try this out, but it sounds interesting
Kalihira Ultramar Independent Contracting 26	Posted - 2014.12.04 14:16:17 - [136] - Quote So when are you going to increase the base damage of mainly medium and also large pulses hmm? Pigeonholed into one damage type and high cap consumption could come with a bigger advantage then just good range. Tweak scorch at the same time so it doesnt become overpowered and I would call it balanced.....
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1019	Posted - 2014.12.04 14:27:18 - [137] - Quote cap usage just isn't a viable bonus too a ship, it needs removing entirely.. just build the cap regen into the ships inatead if the point is too stop off races using them. then tracking bonuses or something useful instead in their place. its the only weapon system that has too waste a bonus too use 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
Kalihira Ultramar Independent Contracting 26	Posted - 2014.12.04 14:47:01 - [138] - Quote Harvey James wrote: cap usage just isn't a viable bonus too a ship, it needs removing entirely.. just build the cap regen into the ships inatead if the point is too stop off races using them. then tracking bonuses or something useful instead in their place. its the only weapon system that has too waste a bonus too use it. I completely agree. Reducing cap usage across the board might be even better beceause it would also make lasers more viable on non amarr hulls.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1020	Posted - 2014.12.04 14:48:49 - [139] - Quote Kalihira wrote: Harvey James wrote: cap usage just isn't a viable bonus too a ship, it needs removing entirely.. just build the cap regen into the ships inatead if the point is too stop off races using them. then tracking bonuses or something useful instead in their place. its the only weapon system that has too waste a bonus too use it. I completely agree. Reducing cap usage across the board might be even better beceause it would also make lasers more viable on non amarr hulls. i doubt the Amarr Empire would allow such heresy 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
Kalihira Ultramar Independent Contracting 26	Posted - 2014.12.04 14:56:34 - [140] - Quote Harvey James wrote: Kalihira wrote: Harvey James wrote: cap usage just isn't a viable bonus too a ship, it needs removing entirely.. just build the cap regen into the ships inatead if the point is too stop off races using them. then tracking bonuses or something useful instead in their place. its the only weapon system that has too waste a bonus too use it. I completely agree. Reducing cap usage across the board might be even better beceause it would also make lasers more viable on non amarr hulls. i doubt the Amarr Empire would allow such heresy F*ck the Amarr! I will shoot their boats with laser fitted minnie boats!
Eric Shang Living Asylum 171	Posted - 2014.12.04 16:12:11 - [141] - Quote Mr Floydy wrote: You think making Scorch so that it barely has any more range than Multi is something that would be good? Your numbers would be utterly terrible, why would anyone ever use Scorch? Increase the range to 10 so its overheated scram range and you golden. Short range: (frigate level) Pulse Lasers Blasters Autocannons Rockets Long range: (frigate level) Beam Rail Artie Light Missle How can you make scorch hit so far when it is to be a short range ammo and then you have gleam thats long range ammo but hits like its a pulse ammo? There is a fault here. Member of The Bastards - http://www.the-bastards.net/ My Pirate Journey: http://ericshangthepirate.wordpress.com/
Schneevva Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 5	Posted - 2014.12.05 02:08:05 - [142] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: No that is NOT the reason why pulses have issues. THe main problem with pulses is that high damage cristals have same penalty as the other types of high damage ammunitions ( antimatter and EMP).. what you ask? How can that be an disadvantage? Because the MAIN advantage of pulses over other weapons is RANGE. Result.. High damage ammunition penalty is FUNCTIONALLY much HIGHER on pulse lasers than on Blasters and AC. On AC the bonuses and penalties of T1 ammo were fixed long ago by making a tracking vs damage tradeoff. On blasters you use AM or NOTHING of t1 ammunition. The AM range penalty is irrelevant since you will already need to be very close. Reduce MF range penalty to 30% and scale the other crystals .. and pulse lasers will be in a much more healthy place because they will be able to use their main advantage. That of REMOVE COMPLETELY the range penalty on T1 ammunition and exchange it for TRACKING vs Damage scaling. This is no different from saying that "blasters give functionally more damage from the same ammo type because they all have the same base damage and blasters have a higher damage mod". Or that it's unfair that close range t2 ammo gives a penalty tracking on blasters because blasters have more tracking to lose. It's nonsense. Lasers still end up with more range and better ratio of optimal/to falloff than the others (and this will only be increased with the next patch) , and don't try to pretend that falloff is identical to optimal, or that Conflag isn't insanely good.
Nevil Kincade Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels 2	Posted - 2014.12.05 04:57:55 - [143] - Quote since you asked what we think: Due to laser cap consumption many Amarr ships loose a full ship hull skill bonus slot to a laser cap consumption bonus where other races get nice things like DMG, ROF or tracking which i find perverse. Those ships that have been reworked in the past to get an actually useful bonus suffer from the high cap use. considering the neut vulnerability, horrible tracking and the predictable dmg pattern laser platforms are hardcountered too easy in too many ways (especially in fleet doctrines). most of them lack the speed to keep the desired range to make use of the lasers advantageous optimal range and do not have the cap to keep burning and firing their guns at the same time anyway. this usually results in fitting a cap booster occupying one of the sparse mid slots which amarr usually have the fewest of to begin with. thus the ships utility is being crippled and range control made impossible while excessive amounts of power grid are required for the cap booster. so what i'm asking for is the same amount of ship hull bonuses any other platform gets and the ability to fire my weapon system constantly like any other ship so that the cap booster can stay an optional counter to neuts. this can be achieved by drastically reducing laser cap consumption.
Ashlar Vellum 24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire 128	Posted - 2014.12.05 09:03:19 - [144] - Quote Eric Shang wrote: Mr Floydy wrote: You think making Scorch so that it barely has any more range than Multi is something that would be good? Your numbers would be utterly terrible, why would anyone ever use Scorch? Increase the range to 10 so its overheated scram range and you golden. Short range: (frigate level) Pulse Lasers Blasters Autocannons Rockets Long range: (frigate level) Beam Rail Artie Light Missle How can you make scorch hit so far when it is to be a short range ammo and then you have gleam thats long range ammo but hits like its a pulse ammo? There is a fault here. Then you will have a weapon system with poor tracking, extensive cap use, and none flexible damage type that will fail at close range and won't have enough damage in scram kite range. btw Scorch=Xrays/Gamma on beams, not gleam; and gleam is not a long range ammo it's a short range ammo for long range guns.
Goldensaver Lom Corporation Shadow of xXDEATHXx 407	Posted - 2014.12.05 23:10:33 - [145] - Quote Ashlar Vellum wrote: btw Scorch=Xrays/Gamma on beams, not gleam; and gleam is not a long range ammo it's a short range ammo for long range guns. Exactly. Each short range weapon system has a high damage, lower tracking, low range ammo for use in a close orbit against larger enemies where the tracking/range penalty is moot and the damage is more important to break tanks. They also have a lower tracking, longer range ammo with decent damage for use against enemies hanging outside of the base range. In the case of lasers, it's a bit imbalanced compared to the other ammo types, but that's because the other ammo types besides MF/Conflag are worthless. On the other hand, long range guns have two types of T2 ammo. A short range, high tracking "oh ****" ammo type for use against enemies who have gotten under your guns, and a long range, low tracking ammo meant for extreme range sniping.
Commander Haruhi Ministry of War Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2014.12.06 17:50:24 - [146] - Quote I'm very much for having pulse lasers be very high alpha, very low RoF close range weapons and beams be very low cycle time / RoF, very low alpha long range weapons. It would differentiate them from the minmatar in particular with their high alpha long range guns and fast RoF "short"-range guns. I mean, if you're gonna have lasers, why not have a continous beam of amarrian facemelting?
Mr Floydy Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 251	Posted - 2014.12.07 11:16:21 - [147] - Quote A shake up of lasers to change the beams into a continues beam of facemelt gets my vote :D
Schneevva Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 5	Posted - 2014.12.08 00:57:53 - [148] - Quote Goldensaver wrote: Not exactly. Have you seen the downsides to using long range faction ammo compared to close range faction ammo on Autocannons? The range downside is almost non-existent because of the huge falloff and the already pathetic optimal. Even if you do more than triple the optimal of autocannons, the optimal is a smal fraction of the overall range of the guns. Just for example. Not saying I endorse his idea. Also, Conflag isn't insanely good. You're high or something. It's pretty solid if you don't mind capping yourself out and you're shooting something two size classes higher than you, but even with a Coercer (a destroyer with a 50% tracking bonus) it's possible for frigates to get under your guns. You know, on a ship specialized in killing frigates, with a close range weapon system. It's still a great choice for when you don't need the tracking/can force the range to be at the edge of your optimal where the tracking isn't as bad, but it's not insanely good. Scorch is, but that's because of the low damage penalty and the high optimal of lasers recieving a huge bonus from an increase to optimal (you know, like I touched on in the first paragraph of this reply.) You shouldn't be treating falloff as identical to optimal in any scenario. And yes, conflag is "bad" if you exist in some weird vacuum where webs don't exist. Otherwise it's probably the best of the t2 high damage ammos. The cap penalty is fairly irrelevant, a coercer for example can run a full rack of small pulses using conflag, a prop mod, and a warp scram and have 16 minutes of cap, which is more than enough. And the tracking penalty is just that, not particularly a big deal. Something can get "under your guns" if had MF loaded as well.
Goldensaver Lom Corporation Shadow of xXDEATHXx 407	Posted - 2014.12.08 02:55:59 - [149] - Quote Schneevva wrote: Goldensaver wrote: Not exactly. Have you seen the downsides to using long range faction ammo compared to close range faction ammo on Autocannons? The range downside is almost non-existent because of the huge falloff and the already pathetic optimal. Even if you do more than triple the optimal of autocannons, the optimal is a smal fraction of the overall range of the guns. Just for example. Not saying I endorse his idea. Also, Conflag isn't insanely good. You're high or something. It's pretty solid if you don't mind capping yourself out and you're shooting something two size classes higher than you, but even with a Coercer (a destroyer with a 50% tracking bonus) it's possible for frigates to get under your guns. You know, on a ship specialized in killing frigates, with a close range weapon system. It's still a great choice for when you don't need the tracking/can force the range to be at the edge of your optimal where the tracking isn't as bad, but it's not insanely good. Scorch is, but that's because of the low damage penalty and the high optimal of lasers recieving a huge bonus from an increase to optimal (you know, like I touched on in the first paragraph of this reply.) You shouldn't be treating falloff as identical to optimal in any scenario. And yes, conflag is "bad" if you exist in some weird vacuum where webs don't exist. Otherwise it's probably the best of the t2 high damage ammos. The cap penalty is fairly irrelevant, a coercer for example can run a full rack of small pulses using conflag, a prop mod, and a warp scram and have 16 minutes of cap, which is more than enough. And the tracking penalty is just that, not particularly a big deal. Something can get "under your guns" if had MF loaded as well. What the **** is a web? Something I put in my prop slot, my point slot, or my cap booster slot? Because it's a minority of laser using ships that have more than 3 mids. The number of laser based ships that have enough mids for everything they need and a web is quite low, most of them being ship classes that can't even use a web effectively like Battleships or caps. Ships up to BC don't have slots for a web, and BCs and BSes are trash anyways. And just saying, none of my Coercer fits get over 3 mins of cap life, most less than that by a lot. the 10mn fit gets 2:32 with Scorch, 2:02 with Conflag. The "Slicer" style fit gets 1:22 with Conflag. Which prop mod do are you using, and why a scram when your damage range is out to long point range with pulses? Also, Void is probably better. It's available on Gallente ships, an overwhelming number of which have a tracking bonus which allows them to apply damage more easily to similar sized ships. They also tend to have a decent amount of midslots, typically 4 or more on every ship over Destroyer. The range is poor, but Gallente ships are largely fast enough to get into range, and when in range can apply tackle while tracking well despite the penalty. I won't dispute though, that it is far superior to Hail still. Hail's bad. Just terrible. And no, falloff isn't indentical to optimal. But the point stands that range is dictated by 2 distinct variables that are affected independantly of each other, therefore the weapons which have a higher concentration of their range in one or the other are more affected by modifiers to that stat than other weapons. IE. Lasers suffer greatly by reducing their primary range by changing to high DPS ammo. Autocannons are almost completely unaffected due to the very small percentage of their effective range being in optimal.
Schneevva Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 5	Posted - 2014.12.08 03:46:03 - [150] - Quote Quote: What the **** is a web? Something I put in my prop slot, my point slot, or my cap booster slot? No, you put it into a mid a slot. You have two of them on a coercer. Yes I agree that needing cap boosters on many amarr ships is terrible and Amarr ships have too few slots to compensate for their cap problems. This has nothing to do with the fundamental balance of lasers, and webs, in general, in solo, solo or large scale pvp are basically par for the course. Webs on the tormentor, coercer and omen/maller are all possible and in fact kind of required if you intend to use pulse outside of massive blobs (where odds are you will still probably having webbing support and tackle.) or kiting (but scorch kiters are terribly predictable).
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1911	Posted - 2014.12.11 14:01:36 - [151] - Quote Schneevva wrote: Kagura Nikon wrote: No that is NOT the reason why pulses have issues. THe main problem with pulses is that high damage cristals have same penalty as the other types of high damage ammunitions ( antimatter and EMP).. what you ask? How can that be an disadvantage? Because the MAIN advantage of pulses over other weapons is RANGE. Result.. High damage ammunition penalty is FUNCTIONALLY much HIGHER on pulse lasers than on Blasters and AC. On AC the bonuses and penalties of T1 ammo were fixed long ago by making a tracking vs damage tradeoff. On blasters you use AM or NOTHING of t1 ammunition. The AM range penalty is irrelevant since you will already need to be very close. Reduce MF range penalty to 30% and scale the other crystals .. and pulse lasers will be in a much more healthy place because they will be able to use their main advantage. That of REMOVE COMPLETELY the range penalty on T1 ammunition and exchange it for TRACKING vs Damage scaling. This is no different from saying that "blasters give functionally more damage from the same ammo type because they all have the same base damage and blasters have a higher damage mod". Or that it's unfair that close range t2 ammo gives a penalty tracking on blasters because blasters have more tracking to lose. It's nonsense. Lasers still end up with more range and better ratio of optimal/to falloff than the others (and this will only be increased with the next patch) , and don't try to pretend that falloff is identical to optimal, or that Conflag isn't insanely good. Wrong.. ratio is just a measurement that you make in spreasheet balance. In real eve things are different. If amarr lasers lose range they are suddenly pulled inside a range, where they will get SLAUGHTERED by blasters. You cannot analyse just the stats of the weapons, you need to think on the effect they have on a real combat scenario. Range alone is not everything. If you have 7.5 km optimal while blasters have 2 km.. that is NOT a LOT more! Because these very few KM means 2-3 seconds of movement in combat conditions. Since any reaction in game can only take effect after 2 seconds, that means that getting at that range is suicidal for an amarr ship because it means that SURELY they will get caught and pushed to near zero range before they can react to a direction change or prop overheat. For a blaster ship, it is nearly irrelevant in this scenario if their range was 2 km and then became 1. BEcause in real eve, not in a spreadsheet, 1 or 2 km is exactly the same ! "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1048	Posted - 2014.12.11 16:55:44 - [152] - Quote so this change has had such little effect. - conflag had 7.5km optimal 5km falloff now has 7.8km optimal and 6km falloff -scorch 22.5km op 5km falloff 22.05km op 6km falloff which tell us this was far too little a change... try again fozzie try 10% this time in addition , so scorch down to 30% range and add the 10% to pulses optimal, then reduce the 50% to conflag and multis down to 30% 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.
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1912	Posted - 2014.12.12 08:52:21 - [153] - Quote Harvey James wrote: so this change has had such little effect. - conflag had 7.5km optimal 5km falloff now has 7.8km optimal and 6km falloff -scorch 22.5km op 5km falloff 22.05km op 6km falloff which tell us this was far too little a change... try again fozzie try 10% this time in addition , so scorch down to 30% range and add the 10% to pulses optimal, then reduce the 50% to conflag and multis down to 30% They made it little because the can see that pulses are not weak. They are already stronger than AC for most scenarios. THe problem lies in blasters and rails that cover the WHOLE engagement envelope with advantage over energy weapons and projectiles (with the exception of arties having the alpha strike niche). But current game designers have a very skewed view of racial balance and for some reason thing gallente needs more and more help when they are already by far the most powerful race on small scale engagement (where these type of details matter) "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.