Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |
Pestillence
Chav-Scum
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 01:25:00 -
[211]
HP boost has so many implications
1) Cap sustainability in a battle
2) More blobs to make kills
3) Docking and jumping timers.
I'm sure theres plenty more but these ones make me wonder how well this change has been thought through.
|
Xordus
Beasts of Burden Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 02:10:00 -
[212]
Hooray Tuxford!!
I've been waiting for a stab nerf for so long and this one is actually one of the better ideas. Also can't wait to hear about ecm changes :D
I'm very happy about most changes. The only one I'm worried about is HP. It will effect alot more than just making a fight last longer. It will effect cap, ammo, cargo size (cap boosters/ammo), speed, aggression timers (30secs doesnt seem as long when you have 50% more hp). One thing I'm worried about most I think is 1600 plates on cruisers. 50% increase in plate/extender hp will influence smaller ships heavily I think. Already it is a bit unbalanced having large plates/extenders on smaller ships but not I think this may make them necessary.
We leave it in your hands, don't let us down.
Xordus
|
Lygos
ISS Navy Task Force
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 02:53:00 -
[213]
Hey, looks like my geddon will now be armored by lag.
--- Private Investment should preceed Public Investment |
Kalixa Hihro
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 03:30:00 -
[214]
can I have your children?
no seriously this is all great news. Gallente will have a viable hac now I can fit stuff in the empty midslots on my helios and no more stababonds/stabathrons Warp core disruptors/scramblers will actually do something against combat ships now
This is as good as winning lotto. I could cry tears of joy right now. More fighting, less running.
-Kal /*----------------------------------------------------------------------------------*/ My opinion in no way represents that of my corp or anyone I am associated with, and is probably entirely wrong. |
Fred 104
New Justice
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 03:33:00 -
[215]
Originally by: Randay
Originally by: Illuminaty No game more advanced than tic-tac-toe has ever been 100% balanced.
Tic-tac-toe is not 100% balanced. Nerf the center square.
I disagree, it's not the center square, it's X getting to go first. Nerf X!!
|
Murukan
Minmatar The Priory Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 03:48:00 -
[216]
Hey everyone start training drones or missles cause anything else is going to be completely ****** after this patch.
In rust we trust!!!
Right here Tux ,,|,, |
Tyler Lowe
Minmatar DROW Org Sylph Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 04:10:00 -
[217]
Edited by: Tyler Lowe on 20/10/2006 04:10:53 Tuxford,
The changes look pretty good, although the HP increase gives me some concerns about Minmatar ships. There are two areas that I'm seeing trouble with. One has been pointed out repeatedly already, and that is artillery.
The other is the shield boost bonus. The Cyclone and it's command ship counterparts currently have a max 37.5% shield boost ship bonus, which you well know. My understanding is that the bonus was made 7.5% per level because the amplification bonus was weaker than a straight 5% per level resistance bonus. As a practical matter, the larger the buffer is, the better that resistance bonus becomes. This concern also applies to Gallante battlecruisers and command ships with their repair amount bonus.
My questions are:
Is artillery being looked at in terms of a DPS increase through rate of fire and/or clip size increase?
Has the relationship between boost bonus and reistance bonus been re-evaluated in light of the planned HP increase?
I'm guessing you're pretty busy at the moment with the expansion looming large, just hoping these items are not being overlooked.
Thanks. J.A.F.O.
|
Kristoffer
Amarr Blackguard Brigade
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 04:23:00 -
[218]
Originally by: Mitchman Edited by: Mitchman on 19/10/2006 22:02:37 Some fundamental problems with the HP increase, as I mentioned in the dev chat:
- Cap intensive weapon, such as lasers and hybrids, will be at a disadvantage as it will take much longer to kill a target and cap will be a problem. This is particulary a problem in small gang combat or 1 vs 1. - Cap charges (which btw has been used in PvP since 2003-2004 and is not a new thing) will last nowhere near enough, particulary if you're using hybrid or lasers. - The agression timers would need to be modified upwards as it would be even easier to tank and dock or tank and jump now.
Proposed solution:
- Reduce cap use on hybrid and lasers by atleast 50%. - Reduce the volume on cap charges by 50%. - Increase the agression timers by atleast 50%. - Ammo volume needs to be reduced by atleast 50%.
I love the WCS nerf. Finally.
|
Murukan
Minmatar The Priory Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 04:35:00 -
[219]
Originally by: Tyler Lowe Edited by: Tyler Lowe on 20/10/2006 04:10:53 Tuxford,
The changes look pretty good, although the HP increase gives me some concerns about Minmatar ships. There are two areas that I'm seeing trouble with. One has been pointed out repeatedly already, and that is artillery.
The other is the shield boost bonus. The Cyclone and it's command ship counterparts currently have a max 37.5% shield boost ship bonus, which you well know. My understanding is that the bonus was made 7.5% per level because the amplification bonus was weaker than a straight 5% per level resistance bonus. As a practical matter, the larger the buffer is, the better that resistance bonus becomes. This concern also applies to Gallante battlecruisers and command ships with their repair amount bonus.
My questions are:
Is artillery being looked at in terms of a DPS increase through rate of fire and/or clip size increase?
Has the relationship between boost bonus and reistance bonus been re-evaluated in light of the planned HP increase?
I'm guessing you're pretty busy at the moment with the expansion looming large, just hoping these items are not being overlooked.
Thanks.
in the irc chat Tux basically said **** off to artillery users with some retarded logic behind his statements saying that they were fine with the hp boost.
In rust we trust!!!
Right here Tux ,,|,, |
Raid
Caldari Tyrell Corp Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 05:06:00 -
[220]
on the plus side t2 1400's will go down in price...
At the very least there should be a clip size increase on Arty because its going to take 50% more ammo to get the job done!
|
|
Kaylana Syi
Minmatar The Nest Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 06:18:00 -
[221]
If you want more HP why can't you rework resistances of T1 ships balance out for faction warfare instead of giving raw HP? Or maybe bringing out viable structure tanking and fixed HP based hull platings instead of crap % based ones.
I'd really like to see what you have instore for Artillery uniqueness because all you are doing is setting yourself up for doubling the arty blob #s and/or mass subscription cancellations.
Maybe its about time you make some racial gang modules that affect guns to further seperate them. Then work those gang modules into the new 'squad' system for gangs to make them futher enhance the weapon systems.
Arty doesn't look too good with these changes. I will sit back and watch but it don't look so hot.
Team Minmatar Carriers need Clone Vats
|
Serj Darek
Minmatar Mentally Unstable Enterprises
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 06:24:00 -
[222]
I must say that I'm going to wait and see what the patchnotes will say. But atm I feel very dissapointed. Being Minmatar specialized and playing since 2003, I have seen gimping and nerfing to the left and right of the Matari. But this takes the prize. This is the first time that I feel dissapointed to the extent of feeling like not logging in at all. Except for perhaps skillchange. But like I said, I want to see patchnotes before making any decisions.
Dissapointed.
Sig removed, lacks Eve-related content - Cortes It contains my ingame name and corp ticker - Serj
|
TerrorWOLF
J.H.E.N.R Pure.
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 07:02:00 -
[223]
Edited by: TerrorWOLF on 20/10/2006 07:07:43 50% more HP (mixed feeling about it, but bad is wining) lasers vs 2xEAN II + DC tank even worse now. If you could kill your target before you run out of cap before forget it now if you happen to be so unlucky to find a shield tank just eject, waste of time even trying. End of Amarr. Minmatar weapons aren't on the wining side ether. It is so good that i can fly Amarr and Minmatar
Edit: One question. Why are there gate guns in low sec ?? Its to easy to tank them as it is. Will make travel in low sec impassible if you not in a insta warp ship with instas.
May Your Death Be Slow And Painful
|
franny
Phoenix Knights
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 07:06:00 -
[224]
as a domi pilot(gall bs 5, hvy drones 5, etc)....
the 50% HP buff without retweaking half the weapon systems is just wrong
so with the buff, I just tank(what the domi does anyway), and nos them till they run out of cap, stick my drones on em, then hit go afk for 10 minutes?, come back to see my killmail.... sounds like fun
for the most part, everything but the HP changes look good and WCS nerf!!!! about f'n time
|
d'hofren
Queens of the Stone Age Black Reign Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 07:09:00 -
[225]
Originally by: TerrorWOLF 50% more HP (mixed feeling about it, but bad is wining) laseres vs 2xEAN II + DC tank even worse now. If you could kill your target befor runing out of cap before forget it now if you happan to be so unlucky to fint a shield tank just ejact, waste of time even trying. End of Amarr. Minmatar weapond arent on the wining side eather. It is so good that i can fly Amarr and Minmatar
<DevilsEnigma> <Bek> Question: Are you happy with the current state of Amarrian ships and weapons? Do you feel they're balanced in relationship to the other races in Eve today?
<Oveur> Oh, I forgot earlier, system wide belts could be a realization as part of this change
<tuxford> I'm typing not ignoring you
<Oveur> tuxford is still typing, he's not ignoring you
<tuxford> Ah yes the Amarrians. Now bear with me apparantly I don't play Amarr or have ever heard of them, I read it on the forums. The problem is that there are some problems with Amarr but aren't really fixed by changing Amarr.
<tuxford> One problem is damage types and eanm. The problem isn't fixed by boosting laser damage but changing EANM. How has yet to be decided on.
<tuxford> Another problem is how hard it is to fit beams but tbh other races have that as well like Minmatar
<tuxford> The third is that Amarr is missing something extra special, some flavor.
<tuxford> we do indeed talk about these things but in general I think certain people tend to overexaggerate the problem
|
Doxs Roxs
White Wolves Defence league The OSS
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 07:24:00 -
[226]
Did anyone consider what this WCS nerf will do to new players trying to run lvl3 and lvl4 missions?
I can tell you that any new player trying out certain lvl3 or 4 missions will be dead meat unless he has stabs fitted. A t1 tank and semi good support skills will not cut it.
Imagine if you were a newb and tried to do a mission with perhaps 10-15km targeting range on a Ferox?
When I was new I relied on using 1 or 2 stabs on most missions since I had no hope what so ever of tanking everything if I got aggro from the entire stage. I also did not stand a chance of killing the small frigs in time with my drones since I simply did not have enough SP invested in them.
The alternative after a nerf such as this one is that you enter a mission with a seriously gimped targeting range. And no, wasting slots on sensor boosters is not an alternative when you are new and can barely tank anyway.
Just something to consider perhaps? Becouse I foresee alot of new players having a hard time with even the easier missions.
Regards
/Doxs
After almost half a year, why is my face just a '!' ? And please fix the Javelin T2 rail ammunition... |
keepiru
Supernova Security Systems
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 07:33:00 -
[227]
Originally by: Doxs Roxs I can tell you that any new player trying out certain lvl3 or 4 missions will be dead meat unless he has stabs fitted. A t1 tank and semi good support skills will not cut it.
Someone doing lvl3/4 with a T1 tank *DESERVES* to die. ----------------
Please fix BC Sig/Agility! |
Pesadel0
Vagabundos
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 07:49:00 -
[228]
Originally by: keepiru
Originally by: Doxs Roxs I can tell you that any new player trying out certain lvl3 or 4 missions will be dead meat unless he has stabs fitted. A t1 tank and semi good support skills will not cut it.
Someone doing lvl3/4 with a T1 tank *DESERVES* to die.
I do missions level 3 in a rupture with t1 tank and guns and i do them just fine .
|
DeadDuck
Amarr DAB RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 09:09:00 -
[229]
Edited by: DeadDuck on 20/10/2006 09:12:39 What if with the HP boost comes a Tec2 Ammo damage increase ?
That would solve all the issues, am I correct ?
I'm betting that with the HP boost we will see a reduce in the weapons range and a increase in Damage output. Guess we will have to wait for tuxford blog to see that.
Anyway CCP seems to be betting on longer engagments, wich I find great.
|
Securion Wolfheart
Caldari Semper Fidelis Industries
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 09:10:00 -
[230]
Edited by: Securion Wolfheart on 20/10/2006 09:12:03
Originally by: Tuxford I've been replying to the forums today. I'm just gonna list some of the smaller tweaks and changes here.
LOL! "smaller"?!? Are you insane?
Quote: Agility of battlecruisers and command ships boosted by 20%
Yes! Finally.
Quote: Ship hitpoint increase, about 50% for tech 1 and about 25% on tech 2. A bit more on battlecruises/command ships and destroyers/interdictors
LOL! I cant wait to tell the news to our local gatecampers! Muahaha!
Quote: I didn't really check it but I'll probably increase shield recharge rate by about 50% as well just to be on the safe side
"Probably"? Wtf... you dont know? Your just changing "a little" here and there and...?! Omg... I thought you devs was calculating every god damn %...? I know i am.
Quote: Inertia stabilizers give decrease in mass as well as agility and give a penalty to signature radius
They decrease mass, and give a larger sig? Im very tired, so im sure im missing something here? Wheres the logic in that?
Quote: Warp Core Stabilizers now give penalty to targeting range and scan resolution, about 50% for tech 1
Fair enough; those who wanna run can still run and the rest will still be sitting at the gates. ;)
Quote: Shield extenders and plates increased by 50%
Longer battles. VERY nice. Also more survivability against those retarded 12-yearolds that gatecamp.
Quote: ECM changes - I'm blogging about that one, hopefully comes later today
Yes ofcourse. I just bought a Blackbird. I should have seen it coming. :P
Quote: I think this all of the stuff that is not big enought to deserve its own post.
........... "not big enough"? O M G.
Quote: Btw I did mess a bit with tech 2 ammo, I'll post a bit about that later.
Well maybe you have just removed all T2 ammo from the game? or made it 500% more powerful? Another "small" change noone will notice, right? :)
You seems to be on top of things... ;)
I like it. I love it. It will completely f**kup my setups, but im not an idiot. I can analyze, adapt, and survive. Lets see if the gatecampers can. "Buhuuu, i cant kill indys in one shot, buhuuu". STFU. I wonder what Charles Darwin would have said.
Some small problems though; Amarr cap? Im Caldari, so i dont care, but it seems like Amarr gets even worse now and they were bad from the start...
EVE is Evolving. Evolve or die out. -----====-----
"When you come slam bang up against trouble, it never looks half as bad if you face up to it." - John Wayne |
|
Donmadefy
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 09:14:00 -
[231]
If hull repairers are removed, and the cost of repairing it increased at stations, you've got a decent isk sink
|
Mogubu
League of Gentlemen O X I D E
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 09:20:00 -
[232]
Originally by: keepiru
Someone doing lvl3/4 with a T1 tank *DESERVES* to die.
They do not.
Well, yeah, if they try to run lvl4s in a t1 without knowing what they are doing, they deserve it indeed. Lvl3s, however, shouldnt need wcs ever, and if you feel that you need one, maybe it is time to get some more skills.
And oh my god Im happy I dont fly Amarr ships. That would suck so bad its not even funny. Devs, can you really not see that you are killing lasers as a viable weaponsystem? ---
Buy mjolnir javelins or rage infernos? Eve-mail me! |
Gabriel Karade
Office linebackers Blood of the Innocents
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 09:26:00 -
[233]
My suggestion:
Don't boost the HP's on T2 ships at all.
T2 shouldn't mean better in every way, for example T2 varient has superior armour/shield technology (i.e. higher resistances - better tanking) but because of XYZ (mass considerations? or add background fluff here regarding shields) cannot physically mount as much armour/ have as large a shield. ----------
- Office Linebacker -
|
LaCoHa
Caldari Deep Space Navy Caldari Deep Space Industral
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 09:26:00 -
[234]
wow. I generally like changes, but 50% hp increase - man.
Now in response to having to maintain cap, engaments will last FOREVER. No one will be willing to go straight gank, as it will no longer make sense to.
I envision an increase in half nos - half AC ships out there.
I guess we'll just have to see how it plays out.
|
LaCoHa
Caldari Deep Space Navy Caldari Deep Space Industral
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 09:27:00 -
[235]
furthermore, will drone HP's also be boosted?
|
LaCoHa
Caldari Deep Space Navy Caldari Deep Space Industral
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 09:30:00 -
[236]
And Gabriel - thanks for the link to 'office linbacker' propably the best commercial ever. made my morning. :)
|
Gwennec
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 09:38:00 -
[237]
Edited by: Gwennec on 20/10/2006 09:41:51 Firstly why in the hell everyone suddenly wants DPS increas on minmatar they didnt do most dps before and hell definetly not gonna do after the kali. All they need to is lower rof and increase one hit damage for so much talked alpha strike. Secondly all the whining of cap and ammo tux already said somewhere(cant remember) that hes looking the ammo size and cap issues, but in my opinion he should leave them as they are. It would only affect how you fit your ships more diversity on fitting. Great boosts tux keep them coming!
|
Testy Mctest
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 09:42:00 -
[238]
Originally by: Gwennec Fristly why in the hell everyone suddenly wants DPS increas on minmatar they didnt do most dps before and hell definetly not gonna do after the kali.
Minmatar DPS is *not changing* with Kali. That's not the problem. The problem is that low DPS is more and more of a problem as you increase the length of combat.
Originally by: RUNYOUFOOLS
wrong on so many levels you could only be more wrong if you were tuxford.
[/center] |
Pottsey
Gallente Acme Shipping Inc
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 10:04:00 -
[239]
Edited by: Pottsey on 20/10/2006 10:08:55 Edited by: Pottsey on 20/10/2006 10:05:13 I understand the reason behind recharge change but its a shame. I was hoping rigs will let me break 37 seconds recharge. Just please donĘt boost command ship HP by 30% and recharge by 50%. ThatĘs a nerf thatĘs not needed.
Still over all it should be a fun change. Only problem now is shield rechargers are pointless. Extenders are always better.
EDIT: Shield recharge modules are now pretty much useless/pointless, you are always better off fitting extenders over recharges.
Do drones get more HP?
Passive shield tanking guide click here |
Mysterlee
Gallente 5punkorp Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.10.20 10:17:00 -
[240]
Edited by: Mysterlee on 20/10/2006 10:18:39 I was testing out how much hp you would end up with fitting a 1600mm plate on cruisers after the changes. The thorax for example would end up with ((1313*1.5)*1.25)+((3360x1.5)*1.25) = 8761 armour hp... This seems a bit much dont you think? It already takes a while to kill 1600mm plated cruisers and this will make it take even longer.
If you still plan on going with the 50% ship hp increase I think you should leave the plate and shield extender hp as they are to avoid forcing everyone to fill their ships full of plates or extenders.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |