| 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. |
cloudkey
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.11.06 06:28:00 -
[31]
I train half a years for use T2 ammo,so now ccp said T2 ammo nerf?
its unfair for me.
if t2 ammo damage only little better than T1 in kali,can i ask ccp compensate for my $$$$?coz i have train half a year but i get almost noting better!!
|
xeom
Veto.
|
Posted - 2006.11.06 06:44:00 -
[32]
Awesome! Why spend months specing on t2 ships when t1 beats it everytime?!?!
F*** Spec'ing,better to fly every races with t1 because its all about the same yay \o/!
I really hope they fix this.I didn't spend 2 months training for a command ship some some 3 week old n00b can come in and hand my a** to me.
---
"Those nuclear missiles are for domestic heating." - Scagga
|
Mesasone
Gallente
Vogon Deconstruction Fleet
Ratel Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.06 07:11:00 -
[33]
Edited by: Mesasone on 06/11/2006 07:12:13
Originally by: Mallakk
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 ?
No, I guess I didn't read the whole thing  Drunk posting 4tw I guess
It's great not being Amarr, ain't it? |
Matrix Aran
Legio Immortalis
|
Posted - 2006.11.06 07:51:00 -
[34]
To sum things up, Tech 2 producers are all singing "Its the end of the world as we know it..." after seeing the kali changes. Anything that hurts T2 producers, more of it please :)
----
|
Peppy LePew
|
Posted - 2006.11.06 08:20:00 -
[35]
Originally by: xeom
Awesome! Why spend months specing on t2 ships when t1 beats it everytime?!?!
F*** Spec'ing,better to fly every races with t1 because its all about the same yay \o/!
I really hope they fix this.I didn't spend 2 months training for a command ship some some 3 week old n00b can come in and hand my a** to me.
What makes you think that any 3 week old character has a chance in hell of beating a command ship? Honestly. You won't even need t2 weapons AT ALL to stomp them flat, even with the HP boost.
And let me remind you what command ships were designed for: Fleet support. And they do a fantastic job of it, and will continue to do so after Kali. So some t1 ships might be on-par with it damage wise? OH NO. That won't make your ship any worse for the role it was designed for, and you will probably still tank better.
That being said, even I am not 100% in agreement with the nerf, but it is still quite plain as day that the gap between t1 and t2 is incredibly wide. CCP has made some very nice steps in the right direction with the recent T2 ships though and the "nerf" doesn't affect them much, ie: command ships and the race specific EWAR ships which are all very effective at fulfilling a specific role. Their potential damage output may become a bit lower but they will still excel with their unique bonuses and remain "better than t1" in that aspect. I hope to see more ships like these as they are great regardless of their DPS, and I'm sorry if you don't see it that way.
|
Theron Gyrow
Gradient
Namtz'aar k'in
|
Posted - 2006.11.06 11:25:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Benglada
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)
Did he screw up or was that a fair indication of the current situation?
--
NMTZ forum |
Lunanie
Final-Vendetta
|
Posted - 2006.11.06 11:36:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Matrix Aran
To sum things up, Tech 2 producers are all singing "Its the end of the world as we know it..." after seeing the kali changes. Anything that hurts T2 producers, more of it please :)
I think most of the people that posted on this topic are T2 users that paid a lot of isk and training time to use T2 ships and ammo.
My point is that the 'gab' between T1 and T2 is fine with me atm (except the t2 snipe ammo maybe in some cases)
T2 should be uber, T2 vet's should be able to wtfpwn T1 noobs otherwise the game would be over after a year.
And with some good expirence and suprising setups T1 cruisers can kill HAC's (look on the killboards what people can do with T1 ships)
|
Thayder
|
Posted - 2006.11.06 12:02:00 -
[38]
i just spent half of the last year training and 460m in fittings for my t2 battlecruiser. if a five month player can come in, spend 200m and have a ship that i cant pwn before my shields are gone then there is a problem. this game is a bunch of people sitting in a big black box with pretty little stars in it. there is no plot or storyline my character is invested in, just a bunch of people hanging out and interacting. when there is little difference between what i am today and what i can be afew months from now, then there is no reason for me to keep playing. id rather just go play wow or bf. t2 should be a great deal better then t1 simply because it costs many times more and takes far more skills. reducing the gap between old and young makes me paying for another nine months less appealing.
|
Xoduse
Beasts of Burden
Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2006.11.06 12:20:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Lunanie
T2 should be uber, T2 vet's should be able to wtfpwn T1 noobs otherwise the game would be over after a year.
Exactly. If the older players cannot seperate themselves from the new ones through training and the isk they spend then whats the point? We would al be on a level playing field using generic equipment with almost the same stats regardless of what was put into it.
---------------------
|
iqplayer
Caldari
Dragon's Rage
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.11.06 15:57:00 -
[40]
You cannot compare apples to oranges and get a realistic idea of how things will work when applied in real situations. IE, comparing HP to resists only tells half of the story. The problem that I've always seen with using increased resists to lengthen battles is that it also increases repair abilities. HP boosts don't (or, if you get really picky, they do a bit by perhaps allowing an extra activation of a rep/booster).
Giving T1 ships a 50% HP boost to the 25% T2 boost does narrow the gap between the 2 ships. But arguing that it makes T2 ships the same as T1? I think you're taking an unrealistically narrow view of the situation. Some T2 ships get much better resists - some don't. Those that don't though, typically get bonus's that make them very useful in other ways - ECM for example? Again, very hard to compare the T1 to T2 here just based on HP.
Finally, how can you compare the a larger T1 ship with a smaller class T2? I mean, do we *really* want any T2 ship to pwn *any* T1, regardless of size? For some really interesting comparisons, how about a Deimos vs. a Thorax? 2 Deimos vs a T1 BC? 2 Deimos vs a T1 BC in contrast to 2 Thorax vs a T1 BC? Yes, I do think smaller ships *should* be able to take down larger ships, *but* they should have some trouble doing it. That might mean having to use 2 smaller ships to kill the larger ship.
Finally, using T2 prices to justify their abilities is an odd argument as well - since the prices of T2 ships have been created by players, via demand and willingness to pay those prices. Saying that they should have a certain ability just because someone is willing to pay the high price.......... interesting.
|
Dreamdancer
Minmatar
Ceryshen Strategic Analysis
Vanu Space Command
|
Posted - 2006.11.06 16:25:00 -
[41]
I heard they were denerfing some of the T2 ammo actually. Though that was a couple weeks back and could have been totally wrong.
I have had Hail S BPO for quite awhile and it has been worthless as no one in their right mind would ever use it. Has to be used in a T2 autocannon but has a 20% stackable velocity penalty? The poor little frig would never make it into range to fire before getting toasted. Been holding on to my token T2 BPO in hopes that one day it would be valueable.
Anyone seen what the stats on Hail S are on the test server?
We are recruiting! |
Rafein
Eye of God
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2006.11.06 16:50:00 -
[42]
As for ships, T2 ships should only be as powerful as the next ship class above them, while maintaining the bonuses of the their current class. This means T2 cruisers should be on par with T1 BC's. AF's should be on par with Cruisers (Destroyers, if CCP would ever make them a viable class  ) and Intercepters do about the damage of T1 frigs (their bonus is speed/agility)
As for why are they nerfing T2 ammo, it's because a lot of people would be up in arms if they removed it, which is what they should do.
|
Vampire Lord
|
Posted - 2006.11.06 17:42:00 -
[43]
Edited by: Vampire Lord on 06/11/2006 17:46:42
I just want to cuss like a salor. How about I play for 3 years an my T2 gear hits only just a little bit harder then the new guys. Why nurf. It's not about helping out the 2month old guy feel better about be 2 months old. I thought this was the only game that really made a statment. A Vet is a Vet. Nerfing T2 guns Makes this game closer to WOW. How about I play a game for 2-3 weeks an get lvl 60. Plz Don't take away what people have worked hard to get by taking our power to destroy those thay have not been playing that long fast. What's the point of training so many skills an giving so much time to become t2 so it can be nurfed. Not to add all the extra hitpoint everybody is getting. It's a real big nerf to T2 guns when you really think about it. I like that fact that I could WTF own BS's in 30-45s becuase they just are not T2 fitted. An 2-3Min fights with the vets. Less if they aren't tanked.
An to the Next. T2 ships need to get a bonus to Hitpoint also to even out the increase of T1 ships. Man why play for so long if I'm really not gona get much bonus for it. An on top of it the only thing that maid me feel ok about flying minmatar is being taken away. The DPS.. An your double nurfing the ammo. It's bad enough with the ammo killing speed. which kills minmatar ability to move fast an do dps. Now we just move slow an not so much with the dps. Plz don't screw minmatar again. I mean if we don't have DPS what do we have.. A shield boost 
|
Daelin Blackleaf
|
Posted - 2006.11.06 18:23:00 -
[44]
Many people will train a skill to level five for just a 2% advantage in a particular facet of combat or industry. It matters not if t2 is 200% better than t1 or 10% better so long as it is better it is worth training for.
Experience counts for almost nothing and regardless of SP it comes down to who's willing to risk the most isk. This and the huge imbalance between the two allows the "vets" to rely on killing t1 fitted players to keep the kill/death ratios in their favour.
I feel a talented (not skilled) player in a well fitted t1 ship should be able to defeat an ebayer who just bought an account with a command ship and t2 fittings. Sadly for the most part this is not the case the older character will almost always out-damage and out-tank even a skilled t1 fitted player.
Price is no justification for t2 being "uber" the best equipment always costs a fortune regardless of how much better than the standard kit it is. Supply and demand.
(please note that all of the above comments apply to evenly matched numbers on both sides sides, outnumbering your opponents is an entirely different kettle of fish)
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |