Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 28 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 27 post(s) |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1670
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 00:57:27 -
[301] - Quote
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:Dev Blog wrote:the bar to killing capitals is limited to what a single Force Auxiliary in Triage can tank. If you can kill that, eventually you can kill the entire capital fleet...assuming you can stay alive and keep them tackled Um, what changes, if I have N+1 Force Auxiliary ships in my fleet? Still N+1 gameplay, not that this is a bad thing. Many battles start with assumption that the other side has less, only later to discover that the other side has more friends. The difference I would imagine is that each +1 doesn't scale both offensive and defensive capabilities in a substantial way. If both are in the same package it boils down to number alone over balanced fleet composition. |
Manes Avatarr
Frontier Adventurers
125
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 01:05:26 -
[302] - Quote
I dont like a way how citadel is being deployed. Throw it out of cargoold and then it "lights itself in and out", cmon.. its childish. At least deployment should have some stages: 1. throw out from cargohold 2. basis is being build by tiny drones 3. structurals put in place, platings added.. 4. alot of zip zaps of electricity etc 5. other stuff added 6. lights put on eventually and structure is anchored
Something like this. Its not a hangar array, you know? Its hucking enormous structure, put some immersion in it, even in deployment process.
And YES.. i love all proposed changes to capitals, citadels etc. Look exciting and all. Keep up a great work!
FRONTIER ADVENTURERS Corp. | To explore, build & fight! | recruitment topic
|
Imagined Self
The-Ultraviolet-Realm
0
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 01:15:15 -
[303] - Quote
some changes are cool, most are not and i feel cheated out... and no one is gonna care not even sure why i post anymore. |
Circumstantial Evidence
232
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 01:16:49 -
[304] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Circumstantial Evidence wrote:Dev Blog wrote:the bar to killing capitals is limited to what a single Force Auxiliary in Triage can tank. If you can kill that, eventually you can kill the entire capital fleet...assuming you can stay alive and keep them tackled Um, what changes, if I have N+1 Force Auxiliary ships in my fleet? Still N+1 gameplay, not that this is a bad thing. Many battles start with assumption that the other side has less, only later to discover that the other side has more friends. The difference I would imagine is that each +1 doesn't scale both offensive and defensive capabilities in a substantial way. If both are in the same package it boils down to number alone over balanced fleet composition. Good point, thanks. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2794
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 01:20:34 -
[305] - Quote
So glad I can finally suitcase my nag.
Just not entirely sure what to do with thissuper-alt I trained now...hmmm. |
UnholyGreed
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 02:12:05 -
[306] - Quote
60k active player - You guys need to adapt 50k active player - You guys need to adapt 40k active player - You guys need to adapt 20k active player - You guys need to adapt 1k active player - can we borrow some money we need to pay this light bill
wtf is science |
Darkwalker Star
Steel Fleet Phoenix Company Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 02:20:38 -
[307] - Quote
I have a suggestion. A doomsday deflector module that can link to a friendly doomsday weapon, but only 1 at a time. By reflecting the energy back onto itself can reduce or prevent damage from that doomsday. This allows friendlies to stay on field and tackle hostiles. By taking up a module slot, causes some loss to offense but gains an offensive advantage being on field. What do you think?
DW
|
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers Goonswarm Federation
256
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 02:22:20 -
[308] - Quote
UnholyGreed wrote:60k active player - You guys need to adapt 50k active player - You guys need to adapt 40k active player - You guys need to adapt 20k active player - You guys need to adapt 1k active player - can we borrow some money we need to pay this light bill
wtf is science
Don't forget the Larrikin asking Grath if he's poor! Because alliances won't foolishly throw assets around. That just shows how much the devs are drifting from the player base once they leave and join CCP. Let's see how well all these chnagea + the recruiting of aria to bring in money will change their minds. While I am not against the changes, I do think the devs have drifted far from remembering how eve is played. If there is nothing to risk, no reason to fight. Currently why risk capitals in other distant parts of space when our alts can fill the wallets in areas outside of null. Our flags are planted and our wallets fill from more lucrative areas. All this does is make tactics change and things more interesting, it has yet given any reason to risk then. Citadels will not be the reason either. |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
306
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 03:10:53 -
[309] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:A few questions (edit: ok, more than a few) that come up as I go through the devblog (ALL DEM WERDS):
Fleet and Ship Hangars - - Are you anticipating that the existing hangar sizes be adjusted for caps which already feature these? - Will dreads get the same hangar space as carriers? - Did you/would you consider splitting away the hangars to another specialised class of ships ("Fleet Transporters?") as you are doing with the remote rep abilities? We already have the Bowhead, but something with a jump drive and fitting options/EHP in line with the rest of the cap fleet?
Remote Repair - - Will carriers be completely barred from capital remote rep usage, or will it remain as a less powerful choice through adjustments/removal of base stats and bonuses? The idea of a 'ghetto slowcat' fleet of carriers with unbonused/nerfed repping power akin to a remote-rep battleship fleet could still be interesting without being nearly as broken as the current status quo.
E-war Immunity - - Will immunity be one statline or vary according to the ewar being used? It could be interesting thematically if, say, Minmatar supercaps had greater vulnerability (or perhaps greater resistance?) to Amarr e-war types, and that's something you could implement if the immunities/resistances were split out. You're already talking of web resistance as a separate stat so taking that further seems logical. - Energy Warfare resistance? Just throwing that out there.
Total EHP - - Will the massive variations between armour and shield hitpoints on supercaps be bought back in line? It always felt weird that post-Dominion the relative hitpoints of each defence layer varied so wildly on supercaps whilst on smaller classes the two hitpoint totals were much closer together.
Capital Warp Disruptors and Scramblers - You state that Officer points and scrams are capital modules, but at the present time they can be fitted to a battleship without much trouble - its rarely a great idea, but is certainly possible. Does this mean we can expect changes to be made to the fitting and effects of these modules?
Fighters - - Are the hitpoints going away completely, or just moving 'behind the scenes'? If my fighter status is 'damaged' is that from a hitpoint reduction or a diceroll outcome? Does a damaged fighter have reduced abilities? - Can fighter squadrons actually be targeted and attacked by our ship weapons, or only by other fighters? - If a squadron flies into a smartbomb activation or other AoE effect is every fighter hit individually or is the hit resolved against the squadron as a whole? - Will there still be the racial variants of each fighter type with their own characteristics? Will we be able to launch mixed squadrons? Will there be more faction fighters (Wraith and Spectre!)? - Are fighter squadrons limited to the 250km range cap of our ship targetting? What happens if a fighter squadron crosses a grid boundary? - Can fighter squadrons decloak ships?
Superweapons - - Are the new doomsdays replacing the existing ones or are they alternative options? - Are they still limited to 1 per ship? - Will subcap ships rendered immobile (such as those with active cyno fields or in Bastion mode) be affected by Hand of God?
85% of what you asked was taped by TMC.com in either tha announcement or the roundtables
Watching one of the streams or you tube uploads will provide you quite a bit of insight |
Silverbackyererse
The Church of Awesome
166
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 03:51:42 -
[310] - Quote
What are CCP's plans / thought's on new or complimentary skills for these changes?
Specifically, two or three come to mind..
- Prereqs for T2 capital weapons/modules.
- The E-War 'resistance' ability. Any thought / plans to introduce skills to compliment / enhance inherent ship stats?
Also, agree with the many previous posts on the high angle dread weapons. Seems to me to be a relatively pointless introduction - too low a DPS and they won't be used. Too high and they become O/P. Why even bother?
|
|
Sarrian Calda
Perkone Caldari State
15
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 03:52:05 -
[311] - Quote
16 pages at the time of beginning this post, so I'm not gonna sift through every post before me. Pardon me if I have repeated an existing idea.
So, allow me to add on to existing or suggest some other potentially interesting Super-Weapon-class stuffs.
Overall impression about beam weapons All beam-type doomsday weapons should have an insanely long range, but with a catch. The weapons should deal maximum damage within its optimal. The damage output would degrade as it extends beyond its optimal and reaches its maximum falloff. The damage would drop drastically to negligible amounts (e.g. 0.000001%) beyond its maximum falloff, until the beam completely dissipates. Chance to hit is always 100% so long as you're in the beam's path.
All crafts and structures would receive damage accordingly as long as they are in the path of the beam. I believe this would add an immense sense of awe like in the old days where Doomsdays were system-wide weapons. And, I think the energy output of such weapons is so immense that you can't really expect them to just dissipate after several kilometres. In deep space, free energy goes a long way unless interrupted.
Doomsday: Sickle How will the damage be applied here? Looking at this, this just reminds me of beam weapons of Gundams (think Buster Rifle) or that from Freespace 2 or Homeworld. Traditionally, the longer a sustained beam strikes a target (e.g. another Titan along its length from bow to stern), the more damage the target would receive.
It doesn't make sense to strike a target for longer than other targets and the former targets still receive just "1 tick" of damage as the rest.
So, assuming that the Sickle would cause multiple waves of damage as it strikes a target over multiple ticks, you'll have a lot of balancing work to do to ensure that:
- It allows tactical manipulating of the beam path so as to land the most effective damage on the intended targets.
- It doesn't unnecessarily over-power other super-weapons, such as the Pike.
Suppose that the beam will always take 10 seconds to cross any length in space (perhaps may need to limit the arc of firing and add visuals to inform the user of the maximum arc he can swing that beam).
Point 1 should allow the user to instead only move the beam over a smaller arc and allow longer sustained beam strike on his intended target, such as another titan or a massive citadel. This would concentrate the beam's damage onto the intended targets and anything unlucky enough to get in the path of this focused, sustained beam.
Point 2 should keep Point 1 in check so as to prevent over-powered gameplay from using Point 1 to generate a beam that is akin to Pike but with a higher damage output due to it dealing sustained damage to a single large target over 10 seconds of DPS. A simple formula may be something like: 1m raw damage / 10 s = 100k DPS for each second something gets hit by the beam, where the 1m raw damage is the maximum output of both Sickle and Pike, so if a player decides to wield the Sickle like the Pike, the final damage output would be similar.
The width of the Sickle beam should be smaller than that of Pike's, which I believe is already mentioned in the Dev Blog.
Doomsday: Pike Target, locked on.
Doomsday: Hand of God Another way of doing this is perhaps to trigger an emergency warp of the affected ships which uses their remaining capacitor. Meaning, the more capacitor they have, the further they'll warp away to a random point in the system. This is a serious force-dispersal version compared to the mere jumping-away version as stated in the Dev Blog, because ships like Battleships will be warped far, far away and they'll take a looooong time to get back to the battlefield, therefore effectively serving as a more crippling version than the "jump" version.
If in the future the "jump" version did not have the desired impact, perhaps could try the "warp" version.
On a serious note, would bubbles and warp scrambling (from scramblers and focused interdiction) effects stop ships from getting jumped away by this super-weapon? If they do, then that would be an interesting counter to this weapon by bubbling yourself in the face of this weapon.
To be continued... |
Ravaging Lust
Bound And Determined
15
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 04:09:37 -
[312] - Quote
Anth9rax wrote:Am I ever going to be able to Dock my Nyx, what a waste of a character, just sitting in it.
Obviously you havn't payed attention to past blogs. They specifically stated that you can dock them in the upcoming citadels. Not sure how you missed it |
Grorious Reader
Mongorian Horde
40
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 04:09:57 -
[313] - Quote
Delt0r Garsk wrote:...It will be hard to get anything bigger than a medium in C4s and down, since you will need to build them in your WH...
You have a source for that? Don't think I've seen any numbers for the packaged volume of citadels. |
Sarrian Calda
Perkone Caldari State
15
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 04:11:47 -
[314] - Quote
...continued from previous post.
New Doomsday: Stasis Why slow down ships when you can actually stop them in time? Recall the time-freezing field used by Athena in Tomorrowland when she first encountered and saved Casey from the automatons at around 44th minute into the film.
The Titan generates a massive stasis field that freezes all objects within the AOE radius. How this stasis bubble is projected will affect its gameplay. If the AOE is only around the Titan itself, then it sort of becomes a defensive weapon, freezing the Titan itself and its surrounding. If the stasis field can be projected like the Hand of God, then it will become a flexible, tactical weapon for both offense and defense.
Upon projection of the stasis field, all objects, including missiles and drones, become frozen in time. All ships from outside will break their lock on the affected objects as their systems cannot interact with them. The ships within simply just "pause". Their target locks, shield amount, module cycle timer, and even their weapon timer and jump fatigue gets frozen for as long as the stasis field is active.
Any object that ventures into the stasis field becomes frozen as well, unable to extract itself until the field collapses.
This field does not affect structures unless it covers the entire structure. This means, you could potentially freeze part of a structure if its service module is caught entirely in the stasis field but would probably never be able to freeze the entire station.
Ships undocking into the stasis field will be caught immediately, and still retain the invulnerability timer after the field collapses. Ships warping past or landing in the stasis field will be caught immediately and stopped in their track. However, they'll continue their warp once the field collapses.
And yes, cloaked ships do not get decloaked when in stasis unless normal cause for decloaking is present. Otherwise, for example, a cloaked Falcon which got caught in the stasis field while warping past it will not get decloaked, and will continue its warp as it were once the field collapses. Technically, nobody would know that the Falcon was ever there because it's still cloaked.
However, because the cloaking system is frozen in time, you can actually see a shimmering effect from the cloaking field, as if we caught the bent light through a polarized lens. Those with keen eyes will notice these if they're observing the stasis field manually, but they cannot lock them or whatsoever as they are technically still cloaked.
Doomsday: M.A.D. Your forces are decimated by the enemy, and you are the last blue Titan on the field, and you're getting grounded into dust by the opposition. What would you do?
Would you just sit there and tank til your inevitable death? Or would you bring down as many ships as you can in your death throes?
Why not go super-nova? *wink*
This is a module that is practically a "safety override" against the failsafe mechanism of the Titan's systems. Upon activating this module, this module would initiate a self-destruct that will spell certain doom to those who are near it. While spooling up, the Titan's modules will cease to work as all energy are diverted into the capacitors. The shields will no longer recharge and will drain slowly towards the capacitor. All modules will stop functioning after its current cycle.
Within seconds, the Titan will explode in a devastating nova that will assure the destruction of sub-capital ships and serious damage to capital ships that are on grid. Even ejected pods of destroyed ships are destroyed due to the massive wave of destruction generated.
Mutually Assured Destruction. |
GeeBee
Paragon Fury Tactical Narcotics Team
91
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 04:28:38 -
[315] - Quote
Dear CCP,
This should have happened last year instead of the game crippling phoebe patch that has turned many players away. While there are a lot major changes trying to make up for its lateness please keep in mind that too much nerf isn't going to go over well and too much shiny buffs is going to lead to poor gameplay.
Things I dislike
1) Removal of Combat Refitting; This is a core gameplay component of capital gameplay, the argument that this causes massive imbalances in balancing isn't valid as you're changing other mechanics that effectively balance it. 2) Spider tanking / Force Auxiliary Capitals; While the logic is solid to split the logistics and combat roles of the carrier it effectively makes the new ships complete tombstones to shoot every time with relative ease. Specialized logistics hulls work for subcapitals due to their speed, but having a specific set of ships that will always repair and get shot at seems poor. I propose using rigs or subsystems to define a carriers role's and abilities, obviously not able to refit in combat. While spider tanking needs a nerf i don't believe it needs to be completely removed and placed on a ship that can only effectively repair in triage. 3) Squadrons - the concept of taking a fighter apart cutting it into bits and calling it a squadron for the purpose of not being able to repair the fighter is a bit dull. You're not only removing the repair ability of the ship to repair the fighters you're removing the ability to repair them in general? I'm not opposed to the new abilities but the squadrons thing I'm not sold on. 4) Nerfing hitpoints on supers / titans while also nerfing repair ability severely. 5) High Angle Weapon Batteries, the current advertised stats of these are laughable and it seems their entire purpose is a poor excuse to nerf the current ability of blap dreads. 6) Removal of carrier regular drones
Things I Like 1) New Modules, Except hitpoint and *high aspect* guns 2) New Fighter GUI and Functionality 3) Fleet hangars and ship hangars for dreads.
Things I'm Conflicted about 1) New Doomsday's and balance issues for when they're implemented. 2) New E-war for supercarriers 3) E-war Immunity and resistance. When I initially read the thing about E-war Immunity being removed I was happy thinking about how it will be possible to kill low sec supers that cant be bubbled. Then this dev blog was like 20-50 points resistance and remote ewar and I got kind of sad. Somehow I feel supers / titans shouldn't be promoted for usage in lowsec, with the force projection nerfs they've gained a lot more super activity in low sec, If bubbles cannot be used in low sec to catch these then many of the combat abilities of them should also be restricted in lowsec such as Current/Future Doomsdays, Remote ECM bursts, and FIghterbombers. |
Miner Hottie
Haywire. Haywire Collective
176
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 04:34:50 -
[316] - Quote
xttz wrote:Now would also be a good time to review the blanket ban on non-ammo/charge cargo within ship maintenance bays.
This was added to prevent loophole that is no longer remotely feasible thanks to the jump drive nerfs. All that's left is an arbitrary rule that heavily hinders the utility of SMAs; spare ships can't carry all sorts of useful gear from ozone and stront, to alternative fittings, to deployables like mobile depots and anchorable bubbles. Having a ship hangar in a supporting role rewards prior preparation, and this game mechanic becomes far more valuable when fully equipped ships can be supplied at a crucial moment.
The two most obvious solutions I see for this are: a) Allow any cargo except for containers, preventing further nested contents. and/or b) Allow cargo up to the ships' base cargobay size before skill, module and rig bonuses. Ships can bring their typical essentials, like stront for entosising or alternative mods, but still can't be used for bulk transport.
This.
Not being able to load a ship into an SMA because it has a module on board is stupid, frustrating and outdated.
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
Shade Alidiana
PROSPERO Corporation MinTek Conglomerate
99
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 05:24:52 -
[317] - Quote
After sleeping with it. I'd actually prefer each individual fighter to have its own HP, like fighters in homeworld do: we choose squad, target squad, and they all end up shooting one of the hostile squad, but they can choose a different one and so multiple fighters can take damage at a time. Also, AOE. And yeah, cost.
P. S. and yeah, I think it actually looks better now when you allowed refitting to everyone, than to remove it completely. Caps still get killed, just leave it as is. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2795
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 05:34:26 -
[318] - Quote
Grorious Reader wrote:Delt0r Garsk wrote:...It will be hard to get anything bigger than a medium in C4s and down, since you will need to build them in your WH... You have a source for that? Don't think I've seen any numbers for the packaged volume of citadels. Other than fitting in a freighter, no specifics. I don't know how the lower holes spawn in size. |
Asuka Solo
Instant Annihilation The Bastards.
3002
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 05:42:44 -
[319] - Quote
On the HAW tracking:
I believe it should be closer to cruiser level ish tracking speeds.... battleships (or even tier 3 battlecruisers) are not renowned for shooting frigates on the move...
Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2795
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 06:01:48 -
[320] - Quote
Asuka Solo wrote:On the HAW tracking:
I believe it should be closer to cruiser level ish tracking speeds.... battleships (or even tier 3 battlecruisers) are not renowned for shooting frigates on the move... I didn't realize frigates were the intended target. |
|
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
458
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 06:12:29 -
[321] - Quote
Asuka Solo wrote:On the HAW tracking:
I believe it should be closer to cruiser level ish tracking speeds.... battleships (or even tier 3 battlecruisers) are not renowned for shooting frigates on the move... I think the idea is that dreads even at their best also can't track and shoot frigates without support.
AKA the scientist.
Death and Glory!
Well fun is also good.
|
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
458
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 06:37:53 -
[322] - Quote
Grorious Reader wrote:Delt0r Garsk wrote:...It will be hard to get anything bigger than a medium in C4s and down, since you will need to build them in your WH... You have a source for that? Don't think I've seen any numbers for the packaged volume of citadels. It was answer to a question asked in the stream. They specifically stated that Large and XLs need a freighter to deploy. ie larger than 60000m3
AKA the scientist.
Death and Glory!
Well fun is also good.
|
William M Blazkowicz
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 06:42:26 -
[323] - Quote
Everything in this update sounds good and all - I just don't agree with the HP reduction part. |
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
458
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 06:43:05 -
[324] - Quote
Shade Alidiana wrote:After sleeping with it. I'd actually prefer each individual fighter to have its own HP, like fighters in homeworld do: we choose squad, target squad, and they all end up shooting one of the hostile squad, but they can choose a different one and so multiple fighters can take damage at a time. Also, AOE. And yeah, cost.
P. S. and yeah, I think it actually looks better now when you allowed refitting to everyone, than to remove it completely. Caps still get killed, just leave it as is. If you haven't worked it out yet, probably 90% of the reason to group fighters into squads and have the server treat them as a single entity is TiDi. It is 5-12 times less drones to track. Hence you may even have a large cap fight without tidi even.
Of course there is the bubbles that still tidi things a bit.
AKA the scientist.
Death and Glory!
Well fun is also good.
|
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
458
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 06:50:14 -
[325] - Quote
Fishymonster wrote:CCP Masterplan wrote:Fishymonster wrote:...You are also removing fighter-bombers from the game, im sure the people that trained fighters up to level 5 just for the ability to use fighter-bombers will greatly appreciate that. No, Fighter bombers aren't going away. They'll probably come under the Heavy Fighter category. We're actually adding new types of fighter, rather than removing any. So now if a carrier pilot wants to do DPS to anything other than frigates/drones/other fighter squadrons they will have to train a 3million SP skill up to 5 before they're allowed. Great design. Or train for a fraction of the time to level 4 for only a 10% or is it 20% damage output hit. Yea lvl 5 skills are really overrated.
AKA the scientist.
Death and Glory!
Well fun is also good.
|
Rawthorm
D.M.T inc Circle-Of-Two
80
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 06:56:05 -
[326] - Quote
Great changes, long overdue! I was wondering however if any thought had been given to the use of Gecko drones and carriers? At the moment the carrier is the only ship with enough bandwidth to use a fair number of these. I highly doubt any consideration will be given to whats basically a limited item, but will the new Faux carriers provide sufficient bandwidth for these, and if not are there any plans to change the Gecko into a special fighter unit? |
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
458
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 06:59:49 -
[327] - Quote
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:Dev Blog wrote:the bar to killing capitals is limited to what a single Force Auxiliary in Triage can tank. If you can kill that, eventually you can kill the entire capital fleet...assuming you can stay alive and keep them tackled Um, what changes, if I have N+1 Force Auxiliary ships in my fleet? Still N+1 gameplay, not that this is a bad thing. Many battles start with assumption that the other side has less, only later to discover that the other side has more friends. Err no. If the only way to rep is with triage and you can't receive reps. Then no amount of FAX ships can increase your reaping power above what you get with local reps. So you start shooting FAX ships out of the gate unless your stupid.
AKA the scientist.
Death and Glory!
Well fun is also good.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2304
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 08:04:05 -
[328] - Quote
Delt0r Garsk wrote:Fishymonster wrote:CCP Masterplan wrote:Fishymonster wrote:...You are also removing fighter-bombers from the game, im sure the people that trained fighters up to level 5 just for the ability to use fighter-bombers will greatly appreciate that. No, Fighter bombers aren't going away. They'll probably come under the Heavy Fighter category. We're actually adding new types of fighter, rather than removing any. So now if a carrier pilot wants to do DPS to anything other than frigates/drones/other fighter squadrons they will have to train a 3million SP skill up to 5 before they're allowed. Great design. Or train for a fraction of the time to level 4 for only a 10% or is it 20% damage output hit. Yea lvl 5 skills are really overrated.
I think he was moaning about fighter bombers potentially becoming needed for carrier pilots...at least that is the best I can make of it.
And if that were the case that is a bit of a PITA for a lot of people. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6901
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 08:28:35 -
[329] - Quote
CCP Masterplan wrote:A question for (all of) you: Do you think that being able to deploy with a guarantee that you won't lose anything is healthy/good for the game? Not even high-sec makes that promise. True, but then there never was that guarantee. The only thing that guaranteed that was that other player won't engage beyond a certain point (especially following B-R). It seems that this is more about making capitals less flexible (nice sandbox bro) at the same time as reducing their ability to hold their own. All it's likely to do is reduce their use even further and increase mass subcap blobs. At the end of the day, players are risk averse so they will take the option that offers the lowest chance and value of loss. Making their ships terrible won't fix that.
By the way, what genius came up with "let's bring back AOE doomsdays but let's make it more like WoW bosses"?
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Monster Dude
Raging Angels Mordus Angels
29
|
Posted - 2015.10.26 08:55:36 -
[330] - Quote
CCP Phantom wrote: Please remember: These are not finished designs and may change!
It is trully interesting that big changes for capitals are going to come. New classes and modules probably will bring more variations, setups.
However with an critical eye I want to note something. 1) In my opinion it is not good idea when "50 rifters can tackle titan"... In modern EVE there are no problems to tackle supers, we have special ships for that! Which means if you want to tackle one - you have to have devotion, be ready for it!!! Scenario like kitchen sink gang roaming here and there accidently crosses their way with super and tackling it only makes me rather sad. Because modern eve is no like that roaming will be fighting with it alone... those "50 rifters" will shout out loud to relevant people and then whole pack of killer whales will come on scene. So my vote is for devotion! You want things like that - bother for proper ships for that. And lets still keep supers warp engines immune to ordinary points.
2) Nearly same applies to supers ehp/buffer/.. They all are killable right now, and taking into account how many of them in game, nerfing them might just lead to when supers fleets are clashing they will die just as fast as rifters are dying (aka no fun). - You may say that too few supers are duying withing a month... - I would answer reason for it not EHP at all. Long ago CCP taken away drones usage from supers... If supers could use drones - they would be used lot more (aka ratting) - and that would cause them to die lot lot more. Of course some adgustments are still would be needed e.g. if you are recieving remote reps - you can not control your drones/fighters...
3) Removing some ewar immunity is good though. E.g. if you could jamm supers - sounds good, but then again not with griffins please... Could it be made so that the bigger originator of jamms - the higher chance for it to work on super? E.g. dummy example of modificators for ewar towards supers: - frigate class: 0.5 - cruiser class: 1 - BS class: 2 - Capital: 3 when supers sensors level is still very high so that chances for cruisers for success are pretty low. This approach would again bring more devotion and lead to more usage e.g. BlackOps's as ewar ships for such scenarios, or even capitals which is totally unexpected (aka LOL) |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 28 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |