EVE Search - Band of Bloggers #42, Tuxford's This and That

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Band of Bloggers #42, Tuxford's This and That

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 9 post(s)
Tessle Aesis	Posted - 2006.11.24 13:58:00 - [181] Edited by: Tessle Aesis on 24/11/2006 13:58:56 Originally by: Lucian Corvinus Originally by: Tessle Aesis where did you see T2 Battleships? You are confusing Tier-3 Battlships. Acutally not... Tech 2 battleships, cruisers and frigates get 12.5% increase But I'm sure tux was just abit quick on the trigger there I think he did copy and past of T1 line, updated the % amount of HP for T2 ships (Cruiser/Frigates) and forgot to cut Battleship from the line.
Tessle Aesis	Posted - 2006.11.24 14:01:00 - [182] Originally by: Pottsey ôIf you cut the Passive Tank feature of Caldari what remains?ö Caldari shouldnÆt be passive tanking anyway itÆs a Gallente thing. Caldari should be active tanking. I miss the good old days (pre BC) where only Gallente passive tanked. Long live Gallente. When the next war comes you Caldari better watch out. i have no intention to join an OT discussion about Passive Tanking, yes can use a Dominix for Passive Tanking but that's all... Caldari have ships really specialized in that, with bonus on shield resistances, also with a good amount of mid slots.
Hebachica	Posted - 2006.11.24 14:03:00 - [183] Let the energy draining fest begin :D
FireFoxx80 Caldari E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2006.11.24 14:49:00 - [184] Edited by: FireFoxx80 on 24/11/2006 14:49:45 Originally by: Tuxford Originally by: Hakera 4) Sentry/Concord/Faction police damage - boosted inline with HP changes? No we haven't done that. Sentries aren't really that hard to tank and Concord will still take you down, just takes a bit longer. So 0.4 will just become more of a gankers paradise? Don't get me wrong, I am happy that there is less-secure space out there. But at the moment there is no difference between 0.4 and 0.1, so people just get ganked in 0.4's. With more and more people flying T2 ships and more and more hitpoints in a HP buff, I think the problem is only going to get worse. Could we perhaps see a boost to sentry guns in 0.4, and say a nerf to those in 0.1? Edit: been spending all my life, living in a gankers paradise heh. What I do the rest of the time - Vote for a Jita bypass!
Tessle Aesis	Posted - 2006.11.24 16:22:00 - [185] Originally by: FireFoxx80 Could we perhaps see a boost to sentry guns in 0.4, and say a nerf to those in 0.1? This is a very nice and good idea. Not only increase number of police / patrolling forces but also strength while raising the security level.
Pottsey Gallente Acme Shipping Inc	Posted - 2006.11.24 17:01:00 - [186] ôyes can use a Dominix for Passive Tanking but that's all... Caldari have ships really specialized in that, with bonus on shield resistances, also with a good amount of mid slots.ö Well originally passive tanking was based around low slots not mid slots and itÆs not just the Dominix but pretty much all Gallente ships can be passive tanked even the Stealth Bomber. Caldari are not better at it they donÆt even hold any of the records the reason being they dont have enough low slots. A lot of Caldari pilots like they think they are the only ones that can do it but they are wrong and forgot which race they copied off. They copied our railguns and they copied our tanking method. Passive shield tanking guide click here
Kelhund	Posted - 2006.11.24 17:29:00 - [187] and yet ya'all are still mad when we beat you with your own tactics...... :P Aside from the banter, I'd like to see what new passive tank setups you come up with after the release of Kali with the module and HP changes
Serapis Aote TBC	Posted - 2006.11.24 17:47:00 - [188] Didnt read the whole thread. But i read the blog. No mention of all the discussions about roles for the new BS and the apparent lack of any for all the BS except the Rockh. I was just curious if you guys had any opinions on the subject
Kunming Amarr adeptus gattacus Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.24 19:33:00 - [189] I'd like to know about 4 things: - Blasters (concept is to kill before unsustainable tank fails, this is even harder now with longer battles) - Deimos (just check out the thread.. it can neither tank nor gank, sucky MWD bonus, needs 4th med to fit "now" mandatory cap booster) - Hyperion (Tux says its fine and then reduces stats even more, it was already slightly underpowered now its closing to become useless) - Cap consupmtion (cap consuming weapons "hybrids/lasers" dont have much advantage over non-cap consuming weapons "missiles/projectiles/drones", neutralizer will be standart issue on non-cap conusmers to WTFPWN the cap consumers, longer combat duration makes this gap even bigger) Well if I'm forced to train for another race.. I'm outta here! Quote: READ THIS NEXT PART CAREFULLY AS IT IS VERY IMPORTANT AND POSTING A REPLY WITHOUT READING IT MAY RESULT IN YOU LOOKING STUPID.
Lucian Corvinus Gallente Expert Systems	Posted - 2006.11.24 20:46:00 - [190] Originally by: Pottsey Well originally passive tanking was based around low slots not mid slots and itÆs not just the Dominix but pretty much all Gallente ships can be passive tanked even the Stealth Bomber. Caldari are not better at it they donÆt even hold any of the records the reason being they dont have enough low slots. A lot of Caldari pilots like they think they are the only ones that can do it but they are wrong and forgot which race they copied off. They copied our railguns and they copied our tanking method. Blasters used to be gallente while railguns used to be caldari, so actually gallente copied caldari rails. I'm not sure where you got that gallente used to be a shield tanking race though?
Pottsey Gallente Enheduanni Foundation	Posted - 2006.11.24 20:59:00 - [191] ôI'm not sure where you got that gallente used to be a shield tanking race though?ö Sorry I didnÆt mean to sound like Gallente are a shield tanking race they are a low slot tanking race either active tanking or passive shield or passive plates. Back before BCÆs came out pretty much the only passive shield tanks around where Gallente based on shield recharge. It was only after about 4 or 5 different boosts to shield extenders and after battlecruisers came out that you started seeing Caldari ships passive tanked. One of the things I miss is no one seems use T1 or T2 shield rechargeÆs anymore as the boosts to extenders made them obsolete. ThatÆs why I donÆt like seeing Gallente shouldnÆt/cannot passive shield tank. They where doing it something like a year before Caldari pilots starting doing it. I forget the precise timing of all the extender changes and BCÆs coming out. Might have been longer or less then 1 year. ôBlasters used to be gallente while railguns used to be caldari, so actually gallente copied caldari rails.ö Did they? I thought Gallente had bonus to railguns since day one of the game going live. Or did the bonus to hybrid turrets get changed at some point from blasters to hybrid? I donÆt recall any Caldari ships having railgun bonus either back in the past but I wasnÆt around at the very start of Eve and when I did start I only looked at Gallente ships. Guess I was wrong but now you got me curious. What where the old ships and which supported which weapon systems? Passive shield tanking guide click here
Audri Fisher Caldari The Keep THE R0CK	Posted - 2006.11.25 00:25:00 - [192] Originally by: Pottsey ôI'm not sure where you got that gallente used to be a shield tanking race though?ö Sorry I didnÆt mean to sound like Gallente are a shield tanking race they are a low slot tanking race either active tanking or passive shield or passive plates. Back before BCÆs came out pretty much the only passive shield tanks around where Gallente based on shield recharge. It was only after about 4 or 5 different boosts to shield extenders and after battlecruisers came out that you started seeing Caldari ships passive tanked. One of the things I miss is no one seems use T1 or T2 shield rechargeÆs anymore as the boosts to extenders made them obsolete. ThatÆs why I donÆt like seeing Gallente shouldnÆt/cannot passive shield tank. They where doing it something like a year before Caldari pilots starting doing it. I forget the precise timing of all the extender changes and BCÆs coming out. Might have been longer or less then 1 year. ôBlasters used to be gallente while railguns used to be caldari, so actually gallente copied caldari rails.ö Did they? I thought Gallente had bonus to railguns since day one of the game going live. Or did the bonus to hybrid turrets get changed at some point from blasters to hybrid? I donÆt recall any Caldari ships having railgun bonus either back in the past but I wasnÆt around at the very start of Eve and when I did start I only looked at Gallente ships. Guess I was wrong but now you got me curious. What where the old ships and which supported which weapon systems? I know scorps used to be railships.
Carnye Dubro Caldari Shock and Awe	Posted - 2006.11.25 02:57:00 - [193] Edited by: Carnye Dubro on 25/11/2006 03:06:46 I'm sorry if this has been asked before (or somewhere else...) If all ships have a shield recharge time increase of 25%, but T2 frigates and cruisers only get a 12.5% HP increase... isn't that a nerf to their shield recharge rate? Is there just another element to the equation that balances things out that hasn't been mentioned? (I don't consider better resists ANY kind of balance IMHO)
Shin Ra BURN EDEN	Posted - 2006.11.25 06:18:00 - [194] Originally by: Tuxford Originally by: Shin Ra I'm afraid now that hitpoints have increased, but dmg has increased by more than 25% with the addition of rigs. Once again, having cake and eating it. That is not true. While it is true that you can fit two rate of fire rigs or a damage rig and a rate of fire rig, these rigs are stacking nerfed with modules so if you have damage mod or two,.. three the rigs aren't really adding that much. Furthermore these rigs are adding to the grid need of your guns so putting two will likely force you to either downgrade your guns or force you to change a damage mod for a rcu or pds. So my "missle tracking computer and enhancer" will stack with my missle exp radius/velocity rigs. ****. Oh well at least cruise are so difficult to fit on a raven that the CPU thing matters. Oh wait? p.s Fix Javelin torps
Peter Stuyvesant Amarr	Posted - 2006.11.25 10:18:00 - [195] Originally by: Chode Rizoum why a cyclone have to have same hp as my sleipnir ? Would like to know this too. What is the logic in making T2 ships have less HP than their T1 counterparts? It really doesn't make sense to me.
rodgerd Gallente ClanKillers Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2006.11.25 11:14:00 - [196] Originally by: Peter Stuyvesant Originally by: Chode Rizoum why a cyclone have to have same hp as my sleipnir ? Would like to know this too. What is the logic in making T2 ships have less HP than their T1 counterparts? It really doesn't make sense to me. Well, putting my if-I-was-a-dev hat on: 1/ Tech 2 HP are worth more than Tech 1 HP thanks to the massive resists. 2/ Tech 2 ships are specialised upgrades, not better-under-all-circumstances variants. -- Not the opinions of my corp or my alliance.
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2006.11.25 12:21:00 - [197] http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/0611/javelin_ffs.png Im temped to say bad things, but I trust Tux or someone else will fix this before it gets to Tranquility. --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
Peter Stuyvesant Amarr	Posted - 2006.11.25 12:40:00 - [198] Originally by: rodgerd Originally by: Peter Stuyvesant Originally by: Chode Rizoum why a cyclone have to have same hp as my sleipnir ? Would like to know this too. What is the logic in making T2 ships have less HP than their T1 counterparts? It really doesn't make sense to me. Well, putting my if-I-was-a-dev hat on: 1/ Tech 2 HP are worth more than Tech 1 HP thanks to the massive resists. 2/ Tech 2 ships are specialised upgrades, not better-under-all-circumstances variants. Fair comments, but at least give them the same HP. Having more on T1 is still weird imo
Weirda Minmatar Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2006.11.25 17:11:00 - [199] Originally by: Jim McGregor http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/0611/javelin_ffs.png Im temped to say bad things, but I trust Tux or someone else will fix this before it gets to Tranquility. thank god it got it 7th launcher back too... way to bend over and you can justify hurricane not having 7th launcher now HOW? been a long time since say this - but TBH, Weirda is completely disgusted. __ Weirda Join QotSA
Naughty Boy	Posted - 2006.11.25 17:16:00 - [200] Originally by: Weirda Weirda is completely disgusted. /me starts the "disgusted grunts society" and welcomes Weirda NB. In Rust We Trust
Weirda Minmatar Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2006.11.25 17:36:00 - [201] Originally by: Naughty Boy Originally by: Weirda Weirda is completely disgusted. /me starts the "disgusted grunts society" and welcomes Weirda NB. Minmater (Character Creation Screen): - Are you SURE you want to play minmatar? (added to character creation process) - You will keep nerfs that are TOO MUCH for Caldari (hardpoint reduction) - You will get bonus that are NOT GOOD ENOUGH for Caldir (active shield boost) *Weirda sends larger objects for CCP Hammer to throw around during balance discussion sessions All in all, am very excited for Kali, these slap in face are getting a bit old though. __ Weirda Join QotSA
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2006.11.25 18:18:00 - [202] This is just some silly joke. The devs are just having some fun. Right? --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
Tara'Quoya Rax Black-Sun	Posted - 2006.11.25 20:02:00 - [203] Tuxford, will existing faction ships be looked upon as well? Many faction ships are still lacking changes that the normal ships received in the past. Take the Cynabal for instance. It is still missing the grid boost some cruisers (including the Rupture) received a long time ago. They really need to be brought up to date with the stats of the current shiplines.
Kunming Amarr adeptus gattacus Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.25 20:22:00 - [204] Originally by: Jim McGregor This is just some silly joke. The devs are just having some fun. Right? They should slow down abit, I still couldnt catch my breath from the blaster joke! As I said many many many times before, the devs dont have the balls to nerf caldari in the way it needs to be nerfed especially considering the number of caldari pilots is more than both minmatar and gallente together. Quote: READ THIS NEXT PART CAREFULLY AS IT IS VERY IMPORTANT AND POSTING A REPLY WITHOUT READING IT MAY RESULT IN YOU LOOKING STUPID.
marioman Caldari Eye of God Axiom Empire	Posted - 2006.11.25 20:57:00 - [205] Tux, I would just like to say a couple of things about the hp. I don't know if this is even an issue but shield boosters and armor reps just dont match up to the HP increases. An XL C5-L with t1 boost amp hardly moved the Rokhs shield a fraction of an inch on the display. Also in referencing to the drake's dmg output, you say you shouldnt go out with nothing but kinetic missiles, but thats the only dmg type the bonus applies to. Why are u guys so hard set on "kinetic only" dmg bonuses for caldari ships. I mean you dont limit the bonus of gallente ships to only thermal for hybrids, or you dont limit the damage bonus to only apply to Antimatter ammo. Why cant caldari have a generic missile damage bonus? Remember when you guys changed drones and were gonna do the gallente ships as bonuses only to thermal drones? Then you changed your minds. How about rethinking over Caldari kinetic missile bonuses. As it stands now those caldari ships only get 1/4th of a bonus vs turret ships. Disclaimer: I specialize in caldari gunboats and gallente ships, I very rarely use missiles and usually only for ratting. I generally prefer guns in pvp, tho these bonuses are probably why.
Verizana Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.11.25 21:17:00 - [206] Originally by: Eldo Davip Word of the day: contemplating. actually it was mollify.
HankMurphy Pelennor Swarm Eternal Rangers of Terror	Posted - 2006.11.26 01:48:00 - [207] Edited by: HankMurphy on 26/11/2006 01:48:45 Originally by: Weirda Originally by: Jim McGregor http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/0611/javelin_ffs.png Im temped to say bad things, but I trust Tux or someone else will fix this before it gets to Tranquility. thank god it got it 7th launcher back too... way to bend over and you can justify hurricane not having 7th launcher now HOW? been a long time since say this - but TBH, Weirda is completely disgusted. yeah, thats a nice looking graph there. So, why is it dev's dont release graphs and such when they release these ships. You know, the whole 'supporting an argument w/ facts' rubbish? Instead of saying: "well this pwns, nothing touches it" and "you can fly that if you like, but i can kill you in this" I'm sure most ppl would agree, the proof is in the pudding. Show the numbers CCP. If the drake does or doesn't need the launcher, back it up! If the hurricane would be too much above the others w/ its turret back, SHOW US! Now i know you guys at CCP bust your asses to keep us happy and paying our monthly fee. I'm not going to make rash suggestions that you design ships by putting 7 monkeys in a locked room w/ crayons, paper and jug of liquid lsd. But you obviously have your reasons for making these changes, cant we have it backed up w/ numbers and graphs?
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2006.11.26 10:30:00 - [208] Originally by: HankMurphy So, why is it dev's dont release graphs and such when they release these ships. Well, graphs dont tell the whole story. Then the lowest dps ships would always suck, and they of course dont.. many factors come into this, like tanking, speed and slot layouts. But when you are talking about the super tank Drake, and see that kind of damage, you KNOW its very unbalanced. Its obvious. Why would you fly a turret ship when you can hit twice as hard at medium range, and tank much, much better than a turret ship at the same time? Not to mention missiles give just as good damage if the target is going 0 m/s or 200 m/s, and the transversal is low or high. Doesnt matter. --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
Gentzen Amarr	Posted - 2006.11.26 12:43:00 - [209] thx Roemy. I understood the assumtion is reasonable. (the essential assumption is drain of cap is constant and no cap bosster) In reality, drain of capacity or cap booster is not constant but discrete, so if capacitor has increased capacitance (and same peek regeneration), its operatable time is sligtly longer than boost of capacitance, especially around drain of capacity ~= peek regeneration. I run rough simulation. -- Gentzen http://eve.wmemo.net/index.php?Gentzen
infraX Caldari Finite Horizon The Red Skull	Posted - 2006.11.26 17:01:00 - [210] Edited by: infraX on 26/11/2006 17:01:49 Well I give up. Just took my Hyperion up against another Hyperion. I had 8 Ion Blaster II and 2 damage rigs and I still couldn't break his tank. The result? He spend 10 minutes tanking my damage until I was out of boosters and he had NOS'd me for long enough to kill me with his drones. Lame. ps. I doubt even capless weapons could out DPS that setup so they wouldn't stand a chance of breaking his tank and killing him either. NOS needs a big nerf because it's currently more powerful than fitting guns in a perfect 1v1. Anyone who can't see that is a tard. Rest in peace solo pvp. Please look at the uberness of NOS tux. That is all.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 :: 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.