EVE Search - WHERE ARE YOU GOING WITH EVE TUXY TELL ME!!!!!!!! /us

All Channels

Ships and Modules

WHERE ARE YOU GOING WITH EVE TUXY TELL ME!!!!!!!! /us

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 4 post(s)
Ituralde Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2006.11.14 20:53:00 - [61] Edited by: Ituralde on 14/11/2006 20:58:09 To adress a few points. Re: the Gallente. Yes, they are already win-button level badass but frankly, their turret boats are gonna need some cap love with the HP boost. The Ammar just need a bigger one. I would not be adverse to something of a cap boost to the hybrid-oriented Caldari boats either such as the Moa and Ferox type ships, but really the Moa needs a lot more of a change than just a cap boost. Realistically though most of the Caldari vessels fall into a more EW role or Missile role. All in all, if you target the cap boost towards cap-using turret boats (I.E require cap to run their turrets)then I think it will be worthwhile. Else it will just be pointless if its given all around due to the tanking benifits. Here is my shortlist of ships I think should get it. Ill update it with stuff I miss and other ships people might bring up. Frigates Punisher Executioner Atron Incursus Tristan Merlin Assault Frigates Vengeance Retribution Enyo Harpy Interceptors (minor boost if any) Crusader Malediction Taranis Raptor Destroyers Coercer Catalyst Cormorant Interdictors (minor boost if any) Heretic Eris Flycatcher Cruisers Omen Maller Thorax Moa Heavy Assault Cruisers Zealot Sacrelidge Deimos Eagle Battlecruisers Prophecy Harbinger Brutix Ferox Command Ships **ation Absolution Astarte Vulture Battleships** Armageddon Apocalypse Abbadon Megathron Hyperion Rokh A couple notes: 1. I did not include capitals because if POS are getting the HP bonus too than CCP must be certifiably mad and I don't honestly know enough about capital-to-capital combat to really say if this would be necessary. Perhaps a valuable discussion point. 2. I think the cap increase should be done proportionately based on cap draw of potentially fitted turrets. F.Ex a ship with 5 hybrid turret hardpoints (say, the Ferox)should get a significantly smaller cap boost than a ship with 7 laser turret hardpoints (say, the Harbinger). Thus, the boost is aimed specifically at the ability to keep firing guns throughout an engagement and is not just a flat boost that overpowers the tank on vessels that draw less cap for their guns. 3. As an addendum to 2, I would lean towards calculating Caldari cap bonuses based on the cap draw for railguns, as that is the gun the ships are more designed around. 4. As to someone who said missiles are useless for PVP, seriously you need to get out more, and you really have no call to whinge given the Rokh and Heavy assault missiles coming in Kali 1. 5. I intentionally did not include the EW-oriented vessels as I don't think they need a boost aimed at sustainable damage. Frankly in my experience EW boats have been quite capable of maintaining the cap to operate well. There is my two cents on the cap raising issue. Obviously entirely open to debate. Discuss. Fear is the mind-killer.
Deva Blackfire DAB RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2006.11.14 20:53:00 - [62] Its not only AC pest/Bthron problem. Any decent laserboat setup which fights in heavy nosf range should (and prolly will) use injectors.
Grimpak Gallente Celestial Horizon Corp. Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.11.14 20:58:00 - [63] the issue here is that CCP is trying to follow each racial core concept, which is good idea, IF such concepts were not as outdated as they are. core concepts for each races need to be re-defined or enhanced, but NOT uniformized. ------- Originally by: Tiuwaz for caldari perception weapons that hit up to 100km are short range weapons
Deva Blackfire DAB RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2006.11.14 21:07:00 - [64] Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 14/11/2006 21:07:29 So true. Atm (except for gun systems and shield/armor tanks on some ships) all ships look the same. It doesnt matter if you are amarr or caldari - cap/s in battleship class or cruiser class will be very similiar (+-10%). What i would like to see is having more diversity. Give amarr VERY good cap + cap recharge (even double caldari ones) - so actually cap rechargers and CPRs might become useful for sustainable tanks. On the other hand gallente could still run on boosters (just reduce their sizes to be on par with HP improvement). Minimi already have some unique stuff - namely speed. Caldari have uber passive shieldtanks. EDIT: ofc this is just general idea. But - diversity is GOOD, unification - bad.
Captain Raynor Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.14 21:16:00 - [65] Originally by: Tuxford Originally by: Jim McGregor Originally by: Joshua Foiritain Originally by: Jim McGregor The only change is the hitpoint boost. Any consequences of it should be easy for you to figure out. It ruins the balance? Id like to know the big picture as well tbh. The balance before the change was questionable for everyone except caldari and gallente. Now after the change, some minmatar ships become better than the gallente ones in the same class. The Amarr ships will suffer the same problems as gallente with struggling for cap, while minmatar got good and caldari went from good to best (not best for solo though, they never will be). The only real problem I see with hitpoint change is the cap issue. Easy fix is really, boost the total capacity of all ships and the recharge time maintaining the same peak cap/sec but giving you more total capacitor (cap batteries as well). I sent a mail way back about doing this when we did the hp change and we had a discussion and decided not to do it. We've pretty much restarted the whole discussion but now I fear that that the decisions were all based on misunderstanding, people thinking that I wanted to boost the peak charge instead of just more cap, longer recharge time. We're also looking into volume of cap charges. Normally I would say **it its fine that people could potentially run out of charges, cap booster shouldn't really end all worries on cap but in reality it just makes nosferatu more powerful, which isn't really what we're going for. I was also a bit lazy when increasing the shield recharge time on battlecruisers and command ships so I might have accidentally boosted passive shield tanks a bit too much. The problem is when you mess with capacitors you are opening up a pandoras box of sorts. I honestly think that tanks were not designed to last forever, but boosting capacitors might open that window and we will start seeing perma-autorepeat tanks which might not be fun to deal with in small fights. So that means you have to go back and rebalance shield boosters and armor reps.. which wouldn't be fun. You should really reevaluate nosferatu and neuts in general.. they are pretty much a -must fit- "weapon". They take no skills to use and fit, they are immensely powerful, more so than the actually turrets and launchers we fit on our ships really when you think about it. With the HP increase EVE is more of either a battle of capacitors (in which nos rules) or just flat out ganking (where cap doesnt matter much). Personally I've found the whole NOS/NEUT issue to be one of the weaker aspects of PvP in EVE. I'd much rather see ships with guns and secondary missile weapons than ships with guns and nos, ect. And yes you boosted passive tanks on battlecruisers too much, they have many times the shield of cruisers but the same recharge so either a) cruiser recharge is underpowered or b) battlecruiser recharge is overpowered, your call. Quote:** Daniel Jackson > a harbinger cant be a raven cause its not caldari Daniel Jackson > and its not a missle ship Jim Raynor > thank you for that expert analysis DJ
Miri Tirzan Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.11.14 21:18:00 - [66] Originally by: Siakel Originally by: Miri Tirzan yada yada yada I agree here. Giving all that extra cap keeps cap-intensive ships like Blasterboats and Laserships more in line with how they are now, but it gives a lot of extra cap to the ships that don't use cap on their weapons. By the way, a 20% recharge/level bonus would mean infinite cap at level 5, so it's not really an option, and even if they changed it to just give stupidly fast recharge, all it would lead to would be an increase in Hybrid/Projectile setups with quadruple reps or something similarly silly. May be I said it wrong but what I ment was at level 5 for the cap recharge time to be 1/2 of what it is at 0 skill level. So if it started at 750 seconds with no skills, at level 5 of the ship skill it would be 375 seconds. I think this with a 10% vs 5% reduction for controlled bursts would be better. svetlana - "whining gets you stuff. that is why humans got to the top of the food chain and all the other animals got nerfed."
Alpha Prime Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.11.14 21:38:00 - [67] Down the drain judging by his current course. Having Tux fixing the blasterships is like having a blind man teaching you how to drive. Just wont work.
Crellion Art of War Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2006.11.14 21:38:00 - [68] Ok my completely insignificant opinion on how to boost cap is this: (a) Definitions: Using exclusively = thatswhere your bonus and most highslots go to. Using mostly = thats where your highslots go to mostly + no bonus. Using some = some of the slots no bonus can use other weapon system with bonus. (b) Cap redistribution: - Ships using exclusively hybrids and energy weapons > 100% cap increase - Ships using mostly hubrids and energy weapons > 80% cap increase - Ships using some hybrids and energy weapons > 70% cap increase - Ships using drones exclusively > 60% - Ships using missles + projectiles exclusively > 50% cap increase - Ships using missles + projectiles exclusively + have adequate grid and midslots for passive shield tanks + dont have active shield tank bonuses > 45% cap increase. (c) Declaration: I provide this opinion though I use ships belonging in all of the above categories often on my 2 characters and also bearing in mind my duty to promote best possible gameplay for all irrespective of race. I might be wrong oc but I am not prejudiced I believe. Arguably my opinions represent to an extent the opinions of my alliance and in particular circumstances give rise to a valid "casus belli" claim.
Shindalin	Posted - 2006.11.14 23:30:00 - [69] Edited by: Shindalin on 14/11/2006 23:36:33 Hello all. With a hp boost of 50% ofc cap hungry fireering ships must have a cap boost. And I also think that drones should have some hp bonus or the droneships have their cargo for more spares increased. Now clearly from this thread at least Tux havent even thought about these issues. Makes me wonder if CCP now are run by laymans and happy amateures! I mean I am a layman and now this for crying out loud. Tbh i dont think CCP had thought no longer then "lets get fighting longer" and how "More hp". No thinking about the consequence at all. My suggestion is: Move back the Kali patch and think this one through and give the whole thing time to be tested propperly. After that launch the patch.
Phelan Lore Sniggerdly	Posted - 2006.11.14 23:33:00 - [70] Originally by: Crellion Ok my completely insignificant opinion on how to boost cap is this: (a) Definitions: Using exclusively = thatswhere your bonus and most highslots go to. Using mostly = thats where your highslots go to mostly + no bonus. Using some = some of the slots no bonus can use other weapon system with bonus. (b) Cap redistribution: - Ships using exclusively hybrids and energy weapons > 100% cap increase - Ships using mostly hubrids and energy weapons > 80% cap increase - Ships using some hybrids and energy weapons > 70% cap increase - Ships using drones exclusively > 60% - Ships using missles + projectiles exclusively > 50% cap increase - Ships using missles + projectiles exclusively + have adequate grid and midslots for passive shield tanks + dont have active shield tank bonuses > 45% cap increase. (c) Declaration: I provide this opinion though I use ships belonging in all of the above categories often on my 2 characters and also bearing in mind my duty to promote best possible gameplay for all irrespective of race. I might be wrong oc but I am not prejudiced I believe. No because minmatar ships already have the least cap.
Old Geeza The Retirement Home	Posted - 2006.11.14 23:43:00 - [71] Originally by: Tuxford As for were I'm going with this game then I'm flattered and all but I'm just one of the team tugging at the rope. Too many cooks? _______________________________________ Sign the petition against jump queues!
Ihar Enda Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.14 23:48:00 - [72] Fixing the cap problem should be done mostly by changing the controlled bursts skill to a much higher bonus, as just boosting cap / injectors may lead to some unbreakable tanks...
Old Geeza The Retirement Home	Posted - 2006.11.15 00:03:00 - [73] Originally by: Ihar Enda Fixing the cap problem should be done mostly by changing the controlled bursts skill to a much higher bonus, as just boosting cap / injectors may lead to some unbreakable tanks... sigh Unbreakable tanks would only occur if the cap recharge were to stay the same. By increasing the cap recharge by the same amount as the capacitor itself, you would still regen exactly the same cap per second. It astonishes me that people still can't grasp this simple fact. _______________________________________ Sign the petition against jump queues!
Yamaeda	Posted - 2006.11.15 00:05:00 - [74] Originally by: Hayabusa Fury Ok to the no cap weapons issue=Caldari If you want to participate in PvP as Caldari and you actually want a kill, you need to use hybrids. Hybrids use cap and get a nerf like all the other races. Missles don't really have a big place in PvP and that is what everyone is in a huff about. PvP!!! And to range and missle: Missles hit at any range yes, but when you use speed to make them miss, they miss at any range too. Every race can dictate the range and speed of the engagement agaist Caldari so you orbiting me at your optimal while using enough speed to lower my missle DPS mean you win against my missle ships. If I use Hybrids then I have the same issues as gallente except without the damage bonus and speed factor. On paper Caldari look really overpowered but in reality they are on par with Gallente and Minmatar. Sorry Ammar Because a slow caldari missle boat can't catch anything, how does it kill anything? If your prey can run when it wants too then that is a useless weapon in a fight. Ravens and Drakes look big and scary and on paper they have great damage potential. But again in game is a different story. It is not the suxor. but it doesn't own either and doesn't need a nerf. As all ships will have 50% more hp, and thus take 50% longer to kill, missiles will also have 50% more time to take effect. Thus the +hp is a boost to missiles. They only have 1 drawback, they cant gank-snipe. If you set up camp at 30-50 km that horrible "non direct damage" is rather moot. Thus Caldari are getting booster two-fold by +hp, they still have capless weapons, and they get more time to use their weapons. As i see it, even with increased cap sizes (good idea tux), it's still a extremely big bonus to have capless weapons, and i forsee that missiles will be more common in pvp. (Speaking of cap usage, projs and missiles should really be using cap like the other two weapon systems. Unless cap is useless infinate damage/cap is overpowered.) /Y ---------- It's great being Amarr, ain't it?
Udyr Vulpayne Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2006.11.15 00:23:00 - [75] Originally by: Phelan Lore No because minmatar ships already have the least cap. please remind me: what was the name of those cap-intensive weapons minmatar ships use? the idea by crellion may not yet be perfect as far as the actual numbers are concernd but cap should most definately not increased in the same way across the board. - all ships need cap to tank. - only laser+hybrid users need cap to use their weapons. - with the hp boost ships with capless weapons need more cap to tank - ships with lasers or hybrids need more cap to tank and they also need more cap to fire their guns -> ships using cap to fire should get a higher capboost.
JustBlaze	Posted - 2006.11.15 01:45:00 - [76] Originally by: Tuxford Originally by: Jim McGregor Originally by: Joshua Foiritain Originally by: Jim McGregor The only change is the hitpoint boost. Any consequences of it should be easy for you to figure out. It ruins the balance? Id like to know the big picture as well tbh. The balance before the change was questionable for everyone except caldari and gallente. Now after the change, some minmatar ships become better than the gallente ones in the same class. The Amarr ships will suffer the same problems as gallente with struggling for cap, while minmatar got good and caldari went from good to best (not best for solo though, they never will be). The only real problem I see with hitpoint change is the cap issue. Easy fix is really, boost the total capacity of all ships and the recharge time maintaining the same peak cap/sec but giving you more total capacitor (cap batteries as well). I sent a mail way back about doing this when we did the hp change and we had a discussion and decided not to do it. We've pretty much restarted the whole discussion but now I fear that that the decisions were all based on misunderstanding, people thinking that I wanted to boost the peak charge instead of just more cap, longer recharge time. We're also looking into volume of cap charges. Normally I would say ****it its fine that people could potentially run out of charges, cap booster shouldn't really end all worries on cap but in reality it just makes nosferatu more powerful, which isn't really what we're going for. I was also a bit lazy when increasing the shield recharge time on battlecruisers and command ships so I might have accidentally boosted passive shield tanks a bit too much. that pretty much answers it ^^ ty for sayin ur bit tuxy and yeah i the cap batterys do need a huge boost =D and i was wondering if you could decrease the mass of the deimos by 20k or 200k or what ever
Attak Trioptimum FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2006.11.15 02:45:00 - [77] I think raising cap by %50 is a semi solution that will bork a few other areas. But a sort of compromise might be achieved between universal cap increase, and the ships that really need it for firing their weapons. Maybe %25 to all ships cap, with tweaking to keep peak recharge, and the controlled bursts skil improved to %10 per level?
Max Teranous Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2006.11.15 06:23:00 - [78] Originally by: Tuxford Originally by: Jasai Kameron Thanks, mate. That's very good to hear. Boosting maximum cap to compensate makes sense to me. Its the easiest thing to do to keep the status quo and just make fights longer. The reason for us making the fights longer is something that Oveur talked about at the fanfest in his speech. As for were I'm going with this game then I'm flattered and all but I'm just one of the team tugging at the rope. Total cap also affects how far you can warp in 1 go. If you increase total cap by 50%, best look at the cap use/AU equation also. Max --------------------
infraX Caldari Finite Horizon The Red Skull	Posted - 2006.11.15 10:14:00 - [79] I'm relieved to read Tuxford's comments regarding capacitor and Kali. It's nice to know that they are at least aware of a potential problem with NOS becoming stupidly overpowered and becoming preferable to guns and that cap using weapons need some sort of boost, whether it means changing the ships capacitor or the weapons themselves. I was really worried that Gallente would suffer a big hit in Kali and that Amarr would be nerfed to the stoneage, because let's face it, Amarr are probably the most nerfed race at the moment already. I just hope they come up with something to make hybrids and lasers a viable choice before they roll out Kali, because in its current state, both weapons kinda suck. Tuxford, may I also suggest that you think about drones. With longer fights, people will have more time to kill off drones, rendering ships like the dominix a bit helpless once all the drones are gone. Rather than a straight up boost to drone hp, what about a bonus to the remote armour reps? I mean the range, cycle time and repair amount could be tweaked so that remotely tanking your drones is a viable option.
LukaG	Posted - 2006.11.15 11:28:00 - [80] Originally by: Mikelio Raijan Originally by: Tuxford The only real problem I see with hitpoint change is the cap issue. Easy fix is really, boost the total capacity of all ships and the recharge time maintaining the same peak cap/sec but giving you more total capacitor We're also looking into volume of cap charges. Normally I would say **it its fine that people could potentially run out of charges Sorry to take snippets from your post but I need to talk from the perspective of someone who almost exclusivly uses blaster boats.. The cap problem niggling at myself and other cap ***s I know would not be fixed by a general cap ammount increase, (without an increase in cap/s in close range ships) ill put it to you this way, fit a duel repper electron setup... activate both reppers and the MWD for a couple of cycles, then turn off the mwd and activate all the guns (+ a nos on your target). It utterly rapes your cap, infact the only thing keeping the ship going is the sheer cap/s from the injects, so once you run out of injects its not just a disadvantge, its a matter of seconds before your guns force you to totally cap out, so adding +50% hp and the possibility of more jam cycles against you (which can effectivly reset the fight from the enemies perspective) is a huge blow! I know you didn't factor the rather essential injector into the megas cpu tweak and your statement on the devchat about being happy about ships running out of cap charges during a fight does worry me that you havn't played with ACpests and B-trhons much, please do, they are amazingly fun solo fighting machines... enjoy them.. dont kill them! Please, please at minimum decrease the size of cap charges and then work from there, the logisics of having to 'refuel' after every decent fight is brutal enough, let alone loosing a fight in your suicide boat under ideal conditions. (I'm not even going to go into the rather odd changes to gallente close range ammo and the fears that people will still be using the chance based ecm on many, many ships here) I'm sorry if it sounds rather aggressive but your doing so many changes at once, there is so little time to test them and so little communication on the forums about them. (still no word on the warp to 0km??!!!!) ..that was alot of text from me.. I think I need to lie down now. /signed about twelvty million times. Tux I know there is a huge amount of work to do but please just take a second to read this. Increasing HP favours weapon systems that aren't cap intensive. If you introduce an across the board cap increase that means that ships/systems that don't suffer from this problem simply get more cap for their tanking and we are back to square one with cap intensive weapons/ships being shafted. Please tux just get into a blaster boat for a little while and look at the practicalities of what your proposing.
twit brent Dark Centuri Inc. Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2006.11.15 12:46:00 - [81] Any indication of whats happening to the craptastic stealthbombers?
FraXy Caldari E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2006.11.15 12:55:00 - [82] Originally by: Radioactive Babe Originally by: FraXy Any chance to look over gallente efficiency bonus? The Eos tank and **ation tank doesn`t even come close to matching and the Eos can`t fit a plate without going either single-rep or 2 hardeners and both alternatives will gimp overall tankability. Eos gets faster cap recharge time, and with shield stats like this: 3000 with 0, 60, 85, 60 as opposed to 2625 with 0, 90, 70, 20 on the d amnation you could nearly shield tank also more drone space and decent command ship bonuses (5% damage and 7.5% armour repair amount per level) as opposed to 10% less cap use for medium turrets and 5% armour resists (which makes NO difference when ship is active tanked) Basically you want higher resists to make your much better ship a solopwnmobile On topic: dont give more cap to caldari missle boats or minnie ships, they would remain overpowered as they would tank longer so the gallente and amarr ships will still run out of cap. Try to fly a Blaster-Eos. 7x Blasters, Mwd, 20k and 2 reppers eats a ton of cap. Resists are so-so and reppers are decent, but the Eos tank compared to a ation tank is not even close. I`m not saying Eos should tank just as well, but atm i think ation got a tanking efficiency around 100% on the Eos. And **ation tanks Hybrid guns better The smaller ships, especially blasterboats will be running short with increase HP = increased fighting time which leads to ships that rely on cap sticks (pretty much every cruiser/BC needs them to run tank along with scrambling, AB/Mwd and webber) running short on ammo and cap sticks. This is my lazy attempt to make an uber-signature, please go away!
Valadeya uthanaras	Posted - 2006.11.15 13:48:00 - [83] Thx for the news (gods of eve thx(repeated infinitly...thx) wont fix all the issue but will surely help(imo minies and caldari should not receive capacitor bonus....will balance the thing just right.....because they don't use cap to fire) I really want to know like a lot of ppl what you will do about: 1. stealth bomber........they really need a tune up....longuest training for a t2 frig.....worst than all other with the new hull boost......they were "a possible choice" for pvp......now they wont be anything but "flashy" frig 2. more info about laser cap use.........amarr platform use minmatarr guns....while they have bonus to amarr guns..... thx a lot for the overall cap boost.....will make amarr(gallente already were imo ) a "possible" choice for pvp/pve /sticky/ ---And I always tought the more dps for amarr guns was because of their crappy dmg type---
Trefnis Solidline Enterprise Kith of Venal	Posted - 2006.11.15 14:28:00 - [84] The other problem is that if you just increase hp and then buff cap, then the only thing you do is to increase the gap betwean high dps (blasters) and low dps weapons (autos). Not sure about others but I have never lost to a mega becouse I run out of cap. Blasters just break tanks and I will just die with more cap. On the other hand if I have to wait 5 mins just for someone to run out of cap before I can break decent tank is silly. I dont fly gallente and wont pretend I know anything about guns using cap :)
Jouno Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2006.11.15 15:10:00 - [85] Edited by: Jouno on 15/11/2006 15:17:12 Originally by: Tuxford Originally by: Jim McGregor Originally by: Joshua Foiritain Originally by: Jim McGregor The only change is the hitpoint boost. Any consequences of it should be easy for you to figure out. It ruins the balance? Id like to know the big picture as well tbh. The balance before the change was questionable for everyone except caldari and gallente. Now after the change, some minmatar ships become better than the gallente ones in the same class. The Amarr ships will suffer the same problems as gallente with struggling for cap, while minmatar got good and caldari went from good to best (not best for solo though, they never will be). The only real problem I see with hitpoint change is the cap issue. Easy fix is really, boost the total capacity of all ships and the recharge time maintaining the same peak cap/sec but giving you more total capacitor (cap batteries as well). I sent a mail way back about doing this when we did the hp change and we had a discussion and decided not to do it. We've pretty much restarted the whole discussion but now I fear that that the decisions were all based on misunderstanding, people thinking that I wanted to boost the peak charge instead of just more cap, longer recharge time. We're also looking into volume of cap charges. Normally I would say ****it its fine that people could potentially run out of charges, cap booster shouldn't really end all worries on cap but in reality it just makes nosferatu more powerful, which isn't really what we're going for. I was also a bit lazy when increasing the shield recharge time on battlecruisers and command ships so I might have accidentally boosted passive shield tanks a bit too much. What about solo pvp, from what i tested on the test server its nearly impossible to have 1on1 fights anymore, either the blasterboats and amarr ships run out of cap/cap boosters and minnie out of ammo or you cant even brake the tanks of the bs and bc's anymore. If ccp dosent care about solo pvp anymore ill shutup and stop solo pvping alltoghether, but if you still want it to be a part of eve you might have to rethink the hp boost a little or else you will kill any solo pvp in anything smaller then a bs, if that.
Serapis Aote TBC	Posted - 2006.11.15 15:34:00 - [86] Originally by: Old Geeza I wish people would stop trying to change the EANM modules so they don't give an EM boost - they are very useful on T2 ships when you have patched your resistance hole(s). The problem is that Amarr do far too much EM damage and too little thermal damage. Time for a T2 close-range 75% Thermal 25% EM crystal. While you're at it, give Minmatar those missing T2 EM/Thermal (50/50 please) ammos too. I like this idea. Helps the amarr, by giving them options And puts back into play the minmatar bonus of damage across all damage types.
Zixxa	Posted - 2006.11.15 16:28:00 - [87] a) DO NOT INCREASE HP. It will damage balance. b) If not a) than fix cap use using controlled burts skill(10% instead of 5%) It is shame to increase capacitors just to help hybrids and lasers.
Ihar Enda Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.15 23:34:00 - [88] Edited by: Ihar Enda on 15/11/2006 23:37:44 Edited by: Ihar Enda on 15/11/2006 23:35:54 Originally by: Old Geeza Originally by: Ihar Enda Fixing the cap problem should be done mostly by changing the controlled bursts skill to a much higher bonus, as just boosting cap / injectors may lead to some unbreakable tanks... sigh Unbreakable tanks would only occur if the cap recharge were to stay the same. By increasing the cap recharge by the same amount as the capacitor itself, you would still regen exactly the same cap per second. It astonishes me that people still can't grasp this simple fact. And then it doesn't help with the problem at hand. More cap means nothing. Cap has to recharge faster, or capacitor using weapons have to use less cap (hence the controlled bursts suggestion). edit: by more cap I mean base cap, not injector charges. If cap booster charges take less space, it will help also, but may create problem, as I already stated.
Monoklas	Posted - 2006.11.15 23:39:00 - [89] HP boost and effect on race "uberness" is: 1.Gallente 2.Minmatar 3.Caldari 4.Ammar This really is a Caldari nerf if you look at it. I still love the hp increase. Maybe people will live beyong the jump in lag and a real fight will happen. lol... Amarr yet again land on the bottom and you say its a... caldari nerf?
Synapse Archae Amarr Solarflare Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.11.16 00:01:00 - [90] Originally by: Miri Tirzan It is nice to see that Tux is looking at the cap issues, however, I think an across the board cap increase is the wrong way to go. It may be easy to do but there are alot of unintended impacts. Why does cap need increased? It is for the weapon systems. Shield tanking and armor tanking are fairly easy to sustain if your not using your cap for weapon systems. Now is the goal to increase the cap available for tanking or to keep weapon systems operating. If the goal is to increase the time that weapons can fire, then increase the bonus to controlled bursts from 5% to 10%. That way your not making the ships that do not use cap for weapons systems more uber. If you do the across the board cap increase, then those ships that use cap-less weapons will have much more cap to put into tanking. It would be unbalacing to have some ships get a tank boost while other just get enough to keep thier weapons going. In some cases the tank boost will off-set the weapons sustainability and we are right back where we started, out of cap for weapons before the battle is over. As a side note. Amarr has problems with cap and fitting for energy turrets. Can we get the cap use for energy turrets removed and a cap recharge bonus for the ship instead? It would be ok if amarr ships sucked cap like no tomorrow if, and this is a big if, the ships had an hugh bonus to recharge to help them sustain it. 20% recharge bonus per skill level works out to being about the same as a 10% per level cap reduction use of turrets. I tossed that in since Tux actually seems to be reading this thread. Big thanks to Tux for reading the thread. I think miri is really onto something here and should be listened to. --------------------------------------------- http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=349194&page=1Redo Fleets[/ur

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.