Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Lunanie
Final-Vendetta
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 14:24:00 -
[1]
I don't like how they nerf the T2 ships and ammo on Kali but am I the only one ?
T2 ships almost have the same HP as the T1 version and some T2 ammo had already a bad penalty and on Kali it's even worse.
I think T2 should be booster (or stay the same) because you need to train a lot of skills for it and that should be worth training for.
For example a HAC is around 30x as expensive as the T1 version so why not make it at least worth the isk ?
Please let me know what you think of it or if you know why CCP does it.
(sorry if my english isn't perfect)
|
Kazaam
Section XIII Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 14:50:00 -
[2]
The thing I don't really get is why they double-nerf a fight's length. I mean :
- T2 Ammo nerf : 1st Longer fight - HP Boost : 2nd Longer fight
And if that wasn't enough, HP boost brings in a bunch of hidden nerfs too.
Longer fight = - more ammo for those who don't use cap to fire - more cap for those who does, Shield Boosters/Armor Repairers becoming 1/3 less efficient - Support ships getting also worthless imo. Inties are already getting popped fast and i think in Kali it wil become even worse due to the increased length they'll have to scramble a target until it blows up.
I'd say, leave the HP as it is, just readjust T2 ammo and it'll be fine enough. _________________________________________
|
Paigan
Amarr Katsu Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 14:54:00 -
[3]
At least the T2 ammo nerf was needed badly.
Reason: Normal T2 Variations look like this: T1 = cheap but still useful T2 = better but expensive
But with T2 Sniper ammo, the differences in the TURRETS are: T2 = normal T1 = total "stay home" crap, because you can't fight back
In other words: T2 sniper ammo is not some 20-40% better than T1, but 200% or more. And that is not good. -- This game is still in beta stage |
Lunanie
Final-Vendetta
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 15:07:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Paigan At least the T2 ammo nerf was needed badly.
Reason: Normal T2 Variations look like this: T1 = cheap but still useful T2 = better but expensive
But with T2 Sniper ammo, the differences in the TURRETS are: T2 = normal T1 = total "stay home" crap, because you can't fight back
In other words: T2 sniper ammo is not some 20-40% better than T1, but 200% or more. And that is not good.
Okay I can understand T2 snipe ammo but they also nerf T2 close range ammo.
And I dont get why T2 ships only get a 25% HP boost and dont think it's fun to fly ceptor anymore because you never have the time to stay alive long enough to kill / scramble something bigger (even with the 50% hp boost)
|
Mallakk
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 15:17:00 -
[5]
People whine since so long about T2 is the OMFGBBQ ships and are an insane price.
Now T1 ship have 50% more hp, giving them nearly the same as their T2 counterpart.
This mean, but the bonii and resists, the T1 ships are becoming of some use AGAIN.
So people cry because T2 is too expensive, but still they cry because T1 is overpowered Consider your long skill training worth the bonus of you T2 ship.
|
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 15:24:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Lunanie
Originally by: Paigan At least the T2 ammo nerf was needed badly.
Reason: Normal T2 Variations look like this: T1 = cheap but still useful T2 = better but expensive
But with T2 Sniper ammo, the differences in the TURRETS are: T2 = normal T1 = total "stay home" crap, because you can't fight back
In other words: T2 sniper ammo is not some 20-40% better than T1, but 200% or more. And that is not good.
Okay I can understand T2 snipe ammo but they also nerf T2 close range ammo.
And I dont get why T2 ships only get a 25% HP boost and dont think it's fun to fly ceptor anymore because you never have the time to stay alive long enough to kill / scramble something bigger (even with the 50% hp boost)
Why a 25% HP boost? Because they have higher resistances- higher resistances means that the 25% boost is worth more than the equivalent on T1. In theory, a T2 ship has about 25% better resistances than their T1 counterparts, making the 25% boost the same (roughly) as the 50% boost.
In theory. -----------------------------------------------
|
Mesasone
Gallente Vogon Deconstruction Fleet Ratel Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 15:28:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Mallakk People whine since so long about T2 is the OMFGBBQ ships and are an insane price.
Now T1 ship have 50% more hp, giving them nearly the same as their T2 counterpart.
This mean, but the bonii and resists, the T1 ships are becoming of some use AGAIN.
So people cry because T2 is too expensive, but still they cry because T1 is overpowered Consider your long skill training worth the bonus of you T2 ship.
Did you even read the thread? It's not about t2 ships, it's about t2 ammo. Hurrah.
And, while we're on the subject, I too am vert displeased with the changes to the tech 2 ammos, particularly the blaster ammos. The nerf to null tracking is assinine, and the nerf to the range on Void is over the top. -50% optimal and -50% falloff is way too much, blasters are already incredibly short range. Perhaps -50% optimal and -25% falloff, but not straight halving the already point blank range of blasters...
And why, for the love of god, would you nerf the tracking on null? I do not understand this at all.
It's great not being Amarr, ain't it? |
Mallakk
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 15:41:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Mallakk on 05/11/2006 15:43:06
did you even read the OP post ?
Quote: T2 ships almost have the same HP as the T1 version and some T2 ammo had already a bad penalty and on Kali it's even worse.
...
For example a HAC is around 30x as expensive as the T1 version so why not make it at least worth the isk ?
|
Paigan
Amarr Katsu Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 16:05:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Patch86 Why a 25% HP boost? Because they have higher resistances- higher resistances means that the 25% boost is worth more than the equivalent on T1. In theory, a T2 ship has about 25% better resistances than their T1 counterparts, making the 25% boost the same (roughly) as the 50% boost. In theory.
This is wrong maths.
Say you have a T1 Cruiser and a T2 Cruiser.
T1 with 1000 HP and 0% resistances (=1000 effective HP) T2 with 1500 HP and 50% resis (=3000 eff. HP = 3 times T1))
now if T1 get 50% HP boost (=1500HP eff. HP) then the T2 has to get the same 50% HP bonus to keep its ratio compared to the T1 (1500HP x 150% = 2250HP + 50% resis = 4500 eff. HP = same 3 times patched T1 HP)
Having only 25% boost would mean only 2.5 times effective HP instead of 3 times effective HP as it is before the patch.
So: The resistances do NOT mean that the T2 need less HP boost. If this is really the (un)logic of the devs behind it, then they once again showed that they can't do the maths pretty well (wouldn't be the first time).
But in this case, i don't think they made this error. I think it's more like a T2 HP nerf. -- This game is still in beta stage |
Lunanie
Final-Vendetta
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 16:17:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Patch86
Why a 25% HP boost? Because they have higher resistances- higher resistances means that the 25% boost is worth more than the equivalent on T1. In theory, a T2 ship has about 25% better resistances than their T1 counterparts, making the 25% boost the same (roughly) as the 50% boost.
In theory.
1. Not all T2 ships have extra resistances or the same resistances boost as an AF, HAC or Command (ceptor, cover ops, recon, etc) 2. T2 ships get 2x 25% HP boost and they never have 2x better resistances except maybe some T2 ships with extra resistance bonus. (T2 ships have around 50% extra resistance if you count all damage types)
|
|
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 19:44:00 -
[11]
I stand corrected, then.
Still, you do have to take the extra resistances into account when we're talking about HP increases. With higher resistances, each individual HP is worth more than with lower resisatnces. Even if T2 ships are getting nerfed here, its certainly not by as much as the 25% that it at first seems. -----------------------------------------------
|
Ruato
Gallente Gurgleblaster Industries
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 21:09:00 -
[12]
I think introducing T2 was bad mistake in the first place.
Thats because ive always hated games with equipment grinds. And when they introduce new and more powerful equipment in EVE, its starting to look more and more like WoW (pure item grind where equipment > skill every single time).
With tech2, you are free to toast every single enemy out there who is using T1 ships and equipment.
Sure, veterans who can use full T2 fitted ships whine when they are nerfed, but if you think about game balance even a bit, you suddenly notice that nerfing T2 is good for the game. --- Get rid of those *bleep*ing secure containers. *bleep*! |
Liru Okami
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 21:36:00 -
[13]
I realy dislike the idea of breaking T2 turrets and ammo for the simple reason that it's what makes smaller ships viable aginst larger classes. without my t2 missles and rails the stealth bomber I have been useing becomes even more ineffective aginst anything other than a frigate.
the "reach out and touch someone" aspect keeps more fragile ships out of reach of their targets. Secondly the proposed t2 changes make no sence what so ever, you meen to tell me that we cant have a t2 ammo that at least fires at 100% of the turret's range?
The point is that T2 is better because it took people months to train and millions pur turret. not to mention the per modual fitting costs are higher. meening more slots have to be sacraficed to power or cpu upgrades that cost even more money. I can remember when eve ships had no problem fitting every turret slot they were designed with as well as other helpfull mods. Imagine the shock of returning to a game ans NONE of the ships you own (still with their fittings loaded on the) are flyable.
|
Cpt Abestos
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 21:41:00 -
[14]
Why is it that the harbringer has more armour than the abso? It's great being Amarr ain't it?
|
Ruato
Gallente Gurgleblaster Industries
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 21:43:00 -
[15]
Quote: The point is that T2 is better because it took people months to train and millions pur turret.
This is exactly the argument that usually shoots game balance to hell.
My character is older than you, so i should be able to blast you to hell and back without any effort.
Sadly devs seem to be willing to break their own game by hopping into this nber equipment bandwagon. --- Get rid of those *bleep*ing secure containers. *bleep*! |
Cpt Abestos
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 21:50:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Ruato
Quote: The point is that T2 is better because it took people months to train and millions pur turret.
This is exactly the argument that usually shoots game balance to hell.
My character is older than you, so i should be able to blast you to hell and back without any effort.
Sadly devs seem to be willing to break their own game by hopping into this nber equipment bandwagon.
So wait someone spends time training and making the isk to use t2 ships/mods and because you think you should have just as easy as a time with 1/3 the sp and t1 gear the game is unbalenced?
If you want to keep people playing you have to keep making things that keep them playing, if the game "ended" at 10mil sp alot of people would leave.
You would be hardpressed to find a game where vets don't have an advantage in one way or the other. It's great being Amarr ain't it?
|
Ruato
Gallente Gurgleblaster Industries
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 22:00:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Cpt Abestos So wait someone spends time training and making the isk to use t2 ships/mods and because you think you should have just as easy as a time with 1/3 the sp and t1 gear the game is unbalenced?
If you want to keep people playing you have to keep making things that keep them playing, if the game "ended" at 10mil sp alot of people would leave.
You would be hardpressed to find a game where vets don't have an advantage in one way or the other.
There are other ways to make T2 equipment worth getting than taking the easy way and making it Absolutely _Ber(tm) compared to T1.
Make it different (think unique abilities), little bit better, etc. Making it simply A LOT better than T1 just breaks the game.
Noobs have hard enough time as it is with their crappy SP numbers. Game does not need IWIN buttons (T2 equipment and ships). --- Get rid of those *bleep*ing secure containers. *bleep*! |
Cpt Abestos
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 22:07:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Ruato Edited by: Ruato on 05/11/2006 22:04:10
Originally by: Cpt Abestos So wait someone spends time training and making the isk to use t2 ships/mods and because you think you should have just as easy as a time with 1/3 the sp and t1 gear the game is unbalenced?
If you want to keep people playing you have to keep making things that keep them playing, if the game "ended" at 10mil sp alot of people would leave.
You would be hardpressed to find a game where vets don't have an advantage in one way or the other.
There are other ways to make T2 equipment worth getting than taking the easy way and making it Absolutely _Ber(tm) compared to T1.
Make it different (think unique abilities), little bit better, etc. Making it simply A LOT better than T1 just breaks the game.
Noobs have hard enough time as it is with their crappy SP numbers. Game does not need IWIN buttons (T2 equipment and ships as they are currently implemented).
The only t2 ship that comes across as an "i win" button is the vaga and that pops easily if the pilot doesnt fly it carefully, and maybe the standard missile crow but that only shines with faction gear and still pops easily if you lose speed/trasverse for one second. It's great being Amarr ain't it?
|
Ruato
Gallente Gurgleblaster Industries
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 22:18:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Ruato on 05/11/2006 22:19:13
Originally by: Cpt Abestos he only t2 ship that comes across as an "i win" button is the vaga and that pops easily if the pilot doesnt fly it carefully, and maybe the standard missile crow but that only shines with faction gear and still pops easily if you lose speed/trasverse for one second.
Really?
Anyone ever made calculations how much performance difference there is between full T2 fitted ship (T2 ship+equipment+ammo) and full T1 fitted ship? Meaning damage done and damage taken. --- Get rid of those *bleep*ing secure containers. *bleep*! |
Zarch AlDain
Friends of Everyone
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 22:49:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Paigan
Originally by: Patch86 Why a 25% HP boost? Because they have higher resistances- higher resistances means that the 25% boost is worth more than the equivalent on T1. In theory, a T2 ship has about 25% better resistances than their T1 counterparts, making the 25% boost the same (roughly) as the 50% boost. In theory.
This is wrong maths.
Say you have a T1 Cruiser and a T2 Cruiser.
T1 with 1000 HP and 0% resistances (=1000 effective HP) T2 with 1500 HP and 50% resis (=3000 eff. HP = 3 times T1))
now if T1 get 50% HP boost (=1500HP eff. HP) then the T2 has to get the same 50% HP bonus to keep its ratio compared to the T1 (1500HP x 150% = 2250HP + 50% resis = 4500 eff. HP = same 3 times patched T1 HP)
Having only 25% boost would mean only 2.5 times effective HP instead of 3 times effective HP as it is before the patch.
So: The resistances do NOT mean that the T2 need less HP boost. If this is really the (un)logic of the devs behind it, then they once again showed that they can't do the maths pretty well (wouldn't be the first time).
But in this case, i don't think they made this error. I think it's more like a T2 HP nerf.
But you are making an assumption here - maybe the devs have decided that all cruisers need a 1000hp boost - not a 50% hp boost.
But some cruisers are more powerful in combat than others so they don't want to reduce that difference - they work out that a 50% hp boost gives all cruisers about 1000hp.
They then look at T2 cruisers. They inately have both more hp and more resists. As a result a 25% boost gives around the 1000 extra hp they had in mind.
All numbers pulled out of a hat at random to illustrate the point as I haven't tried to work out the math on it.
Option 2 could just be that they decided to reduce the T2 advantage...
Zarch AlDain
|
|
Cpt Abestos
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 23:14:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Ruato Edited by: Ruato on 05/11/2006 22:19:13
Originally by: Cpt Abestos he only t2 ship that comes across as an "i win" button is the vaga and that pops easily if the pilot doesnt fly it carefully, and maybe the standard missile crow but that only shines with faction gear and still pops easily if you lose speed/trasverse for one second.
Really?
Anyone ever made calculations how much performance difference there is between full T2 fitted ship (T2 ship+equipment+ammo) and full T1 fitted ship? Meaning damage done and damage taken.
First off the skills reuqired to fly the two are completely different and the cost gap is huge, besides you can make t1 fitted ships very competive by just using a couple t2 mods such at t2 reps/boosters or t2 dmg mods which arent that skill intensive or expensive.
I don't see where your whine is coming from I made an alt back in march that now can fly a fully t2 fitted vaga very well, it's called specalization if you want to make the most out of your sps you have to be focused.
I think the majority of players would agree that aside from a few t2 ammos(mainly long range sniper ammo and jav torps both of which are getting the nerf bat anyways) the balence is fine. It's great being Amarr ain't it?
|
Ruato
Gallente Gurgleblaster Industries
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 23:22:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Cpt Abestos First off the skills reuqired to fly the two are completely different and the cost gap is huge, besides you can make t1 fitted ships very competive by just using a couple t2 mods such at t2 reps/boosters or t2 dmg mods which arent that skill intensive or expensive.
Thanks for missing the point. I'm saying that T2 is bit over the top and you instantly start recommending T2 mods as a solution :)
Originally by: Cpt Abestos I don't see where your whine is coming from I made an alt back in march that now can fly a fully t2 fitted vaga very well, it's called specalization if you want to make the most out of your sps you have to be focused.
I'm whining?
I thought i was just stating my optinion about the subject. If you disagree and want to keep your iwin buttons, that does not make me whiner does it? --- Get rid of those *bleep*ing secure containers. *bleep*! |
Benglada
Finite Horizon The Red Skull
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 23:24:00 -
[23]
all the t2 ships got +25$ hp, all t1 got 50% and bc's and destroyers got more then 50%
I fought a deimos yesterday in my hurricane, i had zero nos and i killed him before he broke my shield (and i had a duel rep armor tank) ---------------------------
Originally by: Arkanor
0.0 is the Final Frontier. Bring money and friends.
|
Cpt Abestos
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 23:43:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Ruato
Originally by: Cpt Abestos First off the skills reuqired to fly the two are completely different and the cost gap is huge, besides you can make t1 fitted ships very competive by just using a couple t2 mods such at t2 reps/boosters or t2 dmg mods which arent that skill intensive or expensive.
Thanks for missing the point. I'm saying that T2 is bit over the top and you instantly start recommending T2 mods as a solution :)
Originally by: Cpt Abestos I don't see where your whine is coming from I made an alt back in march that now can fly a fully t2 fitted vaga very well, it's called specalization if you want to make the most out of your sps you have to be focused.
I'm whining?
I thought i was just stating my optinion about the subject. If you disagree and want to keep your iwin buttons, that does not make me whiner does it?
Where are these t2 "I win buttons" what next nerf faction and officer gear because it's too much better than t1?
The so called "I win" buttons that have been around as of late that I can see are Nos, ecm, stabs, t2 sniper ammo and jav torps and the ecm, javs, sniper ammo, stabs have been nerfed and nos is t1(execpt for med nos IIs). It's great being Amarr ain't it?
|
Ferocious FeAr
Sha Kharn Corp Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.11.06 00:03:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Ferocious FeAr on 06/11/2006 00:04:12 Spending months to train for a t2 ship only to have it equally or in most cases overmatched by the new battlecruisers is a failed attempt at trying to improve the longevity of battles.
Kali is catered to the 2 month old players, I guess those type of players is what makes most of their revenue. Why satisfy those who have stuck with the game for years. __________________________________ Don't hate me, learn to love me. |
Sarrena
Amarr
|
Posted - 2006.11.06 03:41:00 -
[26]
Those of you who "think" T2 is the "I WIN". Please note the named T1 gear that not only matches the stats in MOST cases, but is FAR easier to fit. Your fools if you think T2 is a game breaker.
As stated above, what is next? Lets nerf faction! God forbide any variaty in options and configurations! Creativity? Nay! Power to the SHEEPLE! We need not three different turrent types, lets just name them all "gun"!
As for the new stuff, hard to tell until we see what the devs actually keep and put on tranq. Test server and all that suggesting they're... I don't know.. Testing or something.
Fire the flame cannons! They aren't nerfed yet!
|
Tetovo
Caldari Art of War Anarchy Empire
|
Posted - 2006.11.06 04:12:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Ruato
Originally by: Cpt Abestos First off the skills reuqired to fly the two are completely different and the cost gap is huge, besides you can make t1 fitted ships very competive by just using a couple t2 mods such at t2 reps/boosters or t2 dmg mods which arent that skill intensive or expensive.
Thanks for missing the point. I'm saying that T2 is bit over the top and you instantly start recommending T2 mods as a solution :)
T2 isn't over the top. You calling T2 ships "I win Buttons" is over the top. A HAC can kill T1 cruisers and Frigs and can dish out serious DPS against a BC/BS but can't outtank them. That to me, is good balance and gives the hac a clearly defined role, a DPS machine that can kill lower ships. I don't see that hac being an I win button. A T2 Gun is actually just as good as a best named T1 gun. Pilots spent the extra SP for better ammos, a lot of which are now completely useless. Okay maybe we need to close the gap between T1 and T2, that sounds like a reasonable idea but completely eliminate it? Hell no.
If I spent more time training for my mods and ship, yes they should be better than your ship and mods. But if I'm a crappy pilot I will lose to you no matter how much time I trained. Skill can overcome mods. If the pilot is better skilled and has better mods, you should be SOL no matter what.
|
Ruato
Gallente Gurgleblaster Industries
|
Posted - 2006.11.06 04:18:00 -
[28]
Quote: Okay maybe we need to close the gap between T1 and T2, that sounds like a reasonable idea but completely eliminate it? Hell no.
I wasnt saying that T2 should be completely gutted. I was saying that theres other ways to make T2 interesting than making it simply better. --- Get rid of those *bleep*ing secure containers. *bleep*! |
Xoduse
Beasts of Burden Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2006.11.06 05:06:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Xoduse on 06/11/2006 05:06:45
Originally by: Ruato Edited by: Ruato on 05/11/2006 22:04:10
Originally by: Cpt Abestos So wait someone spends time training and making the isk to use t2 ships/mods and because you think you should have just as easy as a time with 1/3 the sp and t1 gear the game is unbalenced?
If you want to keep people playing you have to keep making things that keep them playing, if the game "ended" at 10mil sp alot of people would leave.
You would be hardpressed to find a game where vets don't have an advantage in one way or the other.
There are other ways to make T2 equipment worth getting than taking the easy way and making it Absolutely _Ber(tm) compared to T1.
Make it different (think unique abilities), little bit better, etc. Making it simply A LOT better than T1 just breaks the game.
Noobs have hard enough time as it is with their crappy SP numbers. Game does not need IWIN buttons (T2 equipment and ships as they are currently implemented).
Just because a player is new does not mean that his equipment should be almost as good as T2 just so its fair. If the player has low SP and crappy equipment that prevents him from doing decent damage he can fill another role like tackling/support and leave the damage to the older player who can afford the powerful equipment and has the skillpoints to use it. Then later on down the road he will have the skills to move to the damage role and the new players of his time will fill his former role. Bringing t2 closer to t1 in performance would make for even less diversity.
I dont see how the game would be fun without the major befefits of T2 items. Making all t2 equipment "a little bit better" than t1 would make every skillpoint spent training for t2 less valuable. In any game the players who have been playing the longest will have better equipment and more skilled in using it. ---------------------
|
Thud
Caldari Mad-Warping-Maniacs
|
Posted - 2006.11.06 05:21:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Thud on 06/11/2006 05:25:40
Originally by: Paigan At least the T2 ammo nerf was needed badly.
Reason: Normal T2 Variations look like this: T1 = cheap but still useful T2 = better but expensive
But with T2 Sniper ammo, the differences in the TURRETS are: T2 = normal T1 = total "stay home" crap, because you can't fight back
In other words: T2 sniper ammo is not some 20-40% better than T1, but 200% or more. And that is not good.
True. Same for the close range ammo. ATM T2 ammo is a must have,t1 users have no chance. Only fair that the t2 gets nerfed. The difference T1 turrets <-> t2 turrets is big enough. No need to make it so big that t1 users can stay docked cause they have no chance anyhow. Taktik and know how should still count more than your equipment. ____ ____ My english is bad. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |