EVE Search - Sticky:[March] Damage Control Tiericide

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

Sticky:[March] Damage Control Tiericide

» 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 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 51 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 7 post(s)
baltec1 Bat Country Pandemic Legion 17486	Posted - 2016.02.28 20:08:24 - [1291] - Quote elitatwo wrote: Lugh Crow-Slave wrote: ...What worries me about freighters getting this is it may make the gal line to strong they already carry the second most and have the best tank for low isk after this change I'm worried the amarr line will no longer have a strong reason to be flown.. Me too! I have a solution to remidy that, let CCP just remove 3 lowslots, 450 powergrid and 200 cpu from all gallente ships and all will be okay. Oh you!
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode ISD Community Communications Liaisons 6985	Posted - 2016.02.28 20:51:00 - [1292] - Quote Removed some off topic posts. ISD Dorrim Barstorlode Vice Admiral Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7367	Posted - 2016.02.29 00:12:11 - [1293] - Quote baltec1 wrote: What ships? I went over all the ships you fly and all of them are worse off without the DCU. No you didn't, you went over doctrine ships for fleet based combat, most of which are fit in the same was. This is exactly what I've been saying, that you are consider fits only from a limited viewpoint. Consider that not everyone fits in the same ways or for the same reasons and people put different amounts of preference on different stats. Being able to keep some of the defense while improving another area guarantees that at least some people will use it. Again though, make a suggestion if you want to improve it. Just saying it's wrong is pointless. baltec1 wrote: Why do you fit them now? Because right now they give a small amount more defense than they will, so right now removing them drops the ship below what would be considered an acceptable level. Afterwards it won't. baltec1 wrote: Name them. No, because all you'd do is decide that you have a different preference for the stats and claim you;d fit it another way. How you would fit a ship isn't relevant when talking about how everyone else will fit their ships, so I have no intention of turning this into an EFT warrior discussion. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Teckos Pech The Executives Executive Outcomes 4774	Posted - 2016.02.29 04:37:02 - [1294] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: baltec1 wrote: What ships? I went over all the ships you fly and all of them are worse off without the DCU. No you didn't, you went over doctrine ships for fleet based combat, most of which are fit in the same was. This is exactly what I've been saying, that you are consider fits only from a limited viewpoint. Consider that not everyone fits in the same ways or for the same reasons and people put different amounts of preference on different stats. Being able to keep some of the defense while improving another area guarantees that at least some people will use it. Again though, make a suggestion if you want to improve it. Just saying it's wrong is pointless. baltec1 wrote: Why do you fit them now? Because right now they give a small amount more defense than they will, so right now removing them drops the ship below what would be considered an acceptable level. Afterwards it won't. baltec1 wrote: Name them. No, because all you'd do is decide that you have a different preference for the stats and claim you;d fit it another way. How you would fit a ship isn't relevant when talking about how everyone else will fit their ships, so I have no intention of turning this into an EFT warrior discussion. Please. You can't even answer questions straight up. Will doctrine ships not fit a DC? No. The one's that use them will still use them. Are there other ships that might have used them, but no longer will...you hide be the usual hand waving and total Bravo Sierra. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
FT Cold FUITA Dead Terrorists 53	Posted - 2016.02.29 06:11:58 - [1295] - Quote Teckos Pech wrote: baltec1 wrote: Lucas Kell wrote: I guarantee you are wrong, since I know for a fact I won;t have it on some ships. What ships? I went over all the ships you fly and all of them are worse off without the DCU. Lucas Kell wrote: I know you would then pull out EFT and say "you can get more defense with X" but since defense isn't the only relevant stat, that's meaningless. Why do you fit them now? Lucas Kell wrote: Some fits you can remove the DC, take less of a defense hit than you used to and add to other attributes. Name them. Yeah, I'm dying to see one of these fits myself. I doubt we will. I get what Lucas is saying, but with a DC II in the lows you get a pretty big boost to hull EHP as well as more modest increases to armor and shields. The nice thing about the DC II is that it buffs all aspects of defense. The added DPS on the other hand is much more limited. So with a DC II you get almost 2.5x in hull EHP plus the increase in armor EHP plus the increase in shield EHP....much like you do today. Without a DC II post patch you'll simply get a 1.5 increase in hull EHP and no added EHP in shields or armor. Adding a DC II to a typhoon increases the EHP almost by 50%. Post patch it will be only slightly less. Removing the DCII will mean a 25% drop in EHP. Adding another damage mod will have a tough time compensating. I think you're a lot more likely to see them dropped on anything that fits less than two damage mods currently. I'd expect to see it most on t1 frigates and destroyers for short fights. For something like a buffer frigate that's already fairly tanky, like the merlin, trading a DC for a magstab make sense for fights against a SAAR or single MASB fits and is a pretty viable trade. Even a small amount of DPS makes a big difference in a fight vs an active tank ship once you've broken their active tank. Otherwise, I think that the change will mostly benefit anti tackle cruisers and maybe a few other kiting ships. If flown right, ships like the cookie cutter nomen or RLML SFI are only ever really dealing with drone DPS. For them, I don't think you'll see extra damage mods fit. In the case of the nomen, it makes fitting a second nano a little more viable and given the nerf this playstyle took from the hictor buff it's not going to break the game. In terms of the balance between the gained DPS vs lost EHP, pretty much any scenario from the above examples would result in proportionately more EHP being lost than DPS gained, but that isn't really a bad thing. For most frigates, not fitting a DCU and gaining the new base resist to structure is enough new buffer to tank one more volley. I think that's the kind of balancing that's good for keeping high risk, high reward gameplay in check. Time will tell, but I don't think this change is going to result in a big disturbance to the current metagame, just a little tweaking in specific corners of it. As for this thread, as usual, it's devolved again into a couple of parties engaged in a pointless struggle to win unwinnable arguments. To an outsider, both sides look absolutely insane and could probably benefit from a little stint in the time-out corner.
DeLaBu Digital Origami Evictus. 31	Posted - 2016.02.29 06:20:22 - [1296] - Quote Kenneth Feld wrote: [quote=BoneyTooth Thompkins ISK-Chip] --snip-- You can continue the arguments...... I honestly don't care, we will have N+1 when we gank, so it won't matter Sounds like one of the more sensible people here. A freighter on AP carrying 10bil through high-sec will still be very worth it to gank after this. These changes may reduce some of the lol-lets-gank-an-empty-tanked-freighter silliness going around though. IMO this was getting a bit too much and a freighter buff was needed. Apart from buffing freighters, I like it that DCUs will become a bit more optional now.
Barrogh Habalu Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 1099	Posted - 2016.02.29 08:09:33 - [1297] - Quote Gentlemen, what makes you think that freighters will in the end receive structure EHP buff if stated reason is to counteract DC changes, which freighters can't fit? Sure, exception is possible. Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7367	Posted - 2016.02.29 08:17:12 - [1298] - Quote Teckos Pech wrote: Will doctrine ships not fit a DC? No. The one's that use them will still use them. I didn't say they wouldn't, If you actually read, what I was stating is that I don;t only fly doctrine ships, so baltec claiming to have looked at every ship I fly is horseshit, as usual. FT Cold wrote: Time will tell, but I don't think this change is going to result in a big disturbance to the current metagame, just a little tweaking in specific corners of it. As for this thread, as usual, it's devolved again into a couple of parties engaged in a pointless struggle to win unwinnable arguments. To an outsider, both sides look absolutely insane and could probably benefit from a little stint in the time-out corner. I don't expect it to be a big disturbance, what I'm disputing is baltecs ridiculous claim that zero ships will remove the DC. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Teckos Pech The Executives Executive Outcomes 4777	Posted - 2016.02.29 08:36:19 - [1299] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: Will doctrine ships not fit a DC? No. The one's that use them will still use them. I didn't say they wouldn't, If you actually read, what I was stating is that I don;t only fly doctrine ships, so baltec claiming to have looked at every ship I fly is horseshit, as usual. FT Cold wrote: Time will tell, but I don't think this change is going to result in a big disturbance to the current metagame, just a little tweaking in specific corners of it. As for this thread, as usual, it's devolved again into a couple of parties engaged in a pointless struggle to win unwinnable arguments. To an outsider, both sides look absolutely insane and could probably benefit from a little stint in the time-out corner. I don't expect it to be a big disturbance, what I'm disputing is baltecs ridiculous claim that zero ships will remove the DC. Okay, so you can't post a current fit that does have a DC, but post patch won't. Whatever. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
baltec1 Bat Country Pandemic Legion 17487	Posted - 2016.02.29 17:25:28 - [1300] - Quote I would like to point out that I went over every ship Lucas has flown this year and not just the imperium doctrines. All of them were worse off without the DCU. His favourite ship this month will be worse off to the tune of having 1/3 less ehp. The reason why Lucas won't post any fits to back himself up is simple, he can't.

Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 2636	Posted - 2016.02.29 17:46:34 - [1301] - Quote baltec1 wrote: I would like to point out that I went over every ship Lucas has flown this year and not just the imperium doctrines. All of them were worse off without the DCU. His favourite ship this month will be worse off to the tune of having 1/3 less ehp. The reason why Lucas won't post any fits to back himself up is simple, he can't. What that mean to me is that ships have too much structure HP when a single mod can be that valuable...
baltec1 Bat Country Pandemic Legion 17488	Posted - 2016.02.29 19:16:00 - [1302] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: baltec1 wrote: I would like to point out that I went over every ship Lucas has flown this year and not just the imperium doctrines. All of them were worse off without the DCU. His favourite ship this month will be worse off to the tune of having 1/3 less ehp. The reason why Lucas won't post any fits to back himself up is simple, he can't. What that mean to me is that ships have too much structure HP when a single mod can be that valuable... The 12.5% to shields and 15% to armour both help greatly so its not just the 40% to structure.
Ima Wreckyou The Conference Elite CODE. 2303	Posted - 2016.02.29 19:27:18 - [1303] - Quote Barrogh Habalu wrote: Gentlemen, what makes you think that freighters will in the end receive structure EHP buff if stated reason is to counteract DC changes, which freighters can't fit? Sure, exception is possible. The OP, where it is stated that the Freighters get the same bonus and it is an intended nerf to ganking. the Code ALWAYS wins Elite PvPer, #74 in 2014
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7386	Posted - 2016.02.29 20:50:34 - [1304] - Quote Teckos Pech wrote: Okay, so you can't post a current fit that does have a DC, but post patch won't. Whatever. It's not that I can't, it's that I won't. I'm not turning this it an EFt war over how you guys would fit your ships. Yes, By keeping the DC, it gains a heap of defense, but when defense isn't the only thing you care about, the loss of less defense following this change when removing the DC will encourage at least some people to not choose the DC. Saying that it makes zero difference is a lie, and to be quite honest I'm surprised that you of all people are letting him slide with that one. baltec1 wrote: I would like to point out that I went over every ship Lucas has flown this year and not just the imperium doctrines. All of them were worse off without the DCU. His favourite ship this month will be worse off to the tune of having 1/3 less ehp. The reason why Lucas won't post any fits to back himself up is simple, he can't. No you haven't, at most you've gone over every ship I've been killed in. Mainly because having 16 accounts I find it very doubtful that you even know half the ships and fits I fly. Yet another complete and utter fabrication from yourself. Also, EHP isn't everything I'll sacrifice 1/3 EHP on some of my ships quite happily for a boost in other areas, but perhaps removing the DC as it stands would be too far. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Mag's Azn Empire 21342	Posted - 2016.02.29 23:03:14 - [1305] - Quote It's not that I didn't do my homework, it's that the dog ate it. True story. Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
baltec1 Bat Country Pandemic Legion 17489	Posted - 2016.03.01 00:48:08 - [1306] - Quote Mag's wrote: It's not that I didn't do my homework, it's that the dog ate it. True story. Not sure what's better, that he thinks losing 1/3 of his ehp isn't going to cripple him or that he thinks "eft warroring" isn't required in a thread asking for feedback on a ship mod change.
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7386	Posted - 2016.03.01 08:10:14 - [1307] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Not sure what's better, that he thinks losing 1/3 of his ehp It's not, and this shows how incredibly dishonest you are being. Ah well, i you don;t want to make valid points, I'm not going to force you. Enjoy the buff! The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
baltec1 Bat Country Pandemic Legion 17490	Posted - 2016.03.01 10:45:46 - [1308] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: baltec1 wrote: Not sure what's better, that he thinks losing 1/3 of his ehp isn't going to cripple him It's not, and this shows how incredibly dishonest you are being. Ah well, i you don;t want to make valid points, I'm not going to force you. Enjoy the buff! You will have 1/3 less ehp than everyone else, you will die first every time.
Khan Wrenth Ore Oppression Prevention and Salvation 486	Posted - 2016.03.01 12:19:21 - [1309] - Quote baltec1 wrote: You will have 1/3 less ehp than everyone else, you will die first every time. Seinfeld wrote: Not that there's anything wrong with that Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
Teckos Pech The Executives Executive Outcomes 4777	Posted - 2016.03.01 15:07:01 - [1310] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: Okay, so you can't post a current fit that does have a DC, but post patch won't. Whatever. It's not that I can't, it's that I won't. I'm not turning this it an EFt war over how you guys would fit your ships. Yes, By keeping the DC, it gains a heap of defense, but when defense isn't the only thing you care about, the loss of less defense following this change when removing the DC will encourage at least some people to not choose the DC. Saying that it makes zero difference is a lie, and to be quite honest I'm surprised that you of all people are letting him slide with that one. Well, in a strict sense you are right. Taking a DC off of a ship post patch won't "hurt" as much as it would pre-patch. However, from my stand point and in a functional sense you are wrong. For me if a ship had a DC before the patch it will still have one after the patch. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7386	Posted - 2016.03.01 16:09:30 - [1311] - Quote baltec1 wrote: You will have 1/3 less ehp than everyone else, you will die first every time. Once again, only if you are talking about a fleet of ships, the same ship in fact. A battleship without a DC isn't going to have 1/3 less EHP than a frigate. Again you are only thinking about a small subset of ship fits and uses. Teckos Pech wrote: Well, in a strict sense you are right. Taking a DC off of a ship post patch won't "hurt" as much as it would pre-patch. However, from my stand point and in a functional sense you are wrong. For me if a ship had a DC before the patch it will still have one after the patch. And for me not all of them will. I'm not at all disputing that CCP could make the DC less important than they currently have planned and not even disputing that it would be a good thing for them to do so (though depending on how they did it, ships that can fit a DC but don't already would be seriously buffed or seriously nerfed), I'm simply disputing the idea that the change will have zero uptake, which baltec is claiming. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
baltec1 Bat Country Pandemic Legion 17494	Posted - 2016.03.01 16:57:18 - [1312] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Once again, only if you are talking about a fleet of ships, the same ship in fact. A battleship without a DC isn't going to have 1/3 less EHP than a frigate. Again you are only thinking about a small subset of ship fits and uses. Ok battleships it is. Solo armageddon loses 23.5% in EHP Baltec fleet mega loses 15.6% in EHP Imperium Mach fit loses 14.7% in EHP Raven loses 22.7% in EHP Solo rattle loses 17.4% in EHP Of note, shield ships would suffer the most it seems if they forgo the DCU with armour ships not able to match the ehp with any other mod and any damage or tracking increase is far below the advantage given by the DCU.
Masao Kurata Perkone Caldari State 415	Posted - 2016.03.01 17:23:18 - [1313] - Quote Well, it's been pushed to sisi now and it seems that Fozzie's response to the controversy is... ...to make the unwarranted buff a tiny bit bigger, at exactly 34% hull resistances.
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7386	Posted - 2016.03.01 17:31:54 - [1314] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Ok battleships it is. Solo armageddon loses 23.5% in EHP Baltec fleet mega loses 15.6% in EHP Imperium Mach fit loses 14.7% in EHP Raven loses 22.7% in EHP Solo rattle loses 17.4% in EHP Of note, shield ships would suffer the most it seems if they forgo the DCU with armour ships not able to match the ehp with any other mod and any damage or tracking increase is far below the advantage given by the DCU. And your point is what? We all know that defense decreases when you remove a defensive module, yet people still forego defensive modules for other modules. Again, you are only ever coming from a point of view where the only thing that matters is raw EHP, which is not the only thing players look for. That's no possible way you still don't get this, so stop trolling. Masao Kurata wrote: Well, it's been pushed to sisi now and it seems that Fozzie's response to the controversy is... ...to make the completely warranted buff a tiny bit bigger, at exactly 34% hull resistances. That's good news, thanks. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
baltec1 Bat Country Pandemic Legion 17494	Posted - 2016.03.01 17:42:20 - [1315] - Quote Ok so I'm getting 13% to shields, 15% to armour and 40% to structure on the DCU II. Combined with the buff to the hull its nets me 61% structure resists. CCP buffed the DCU, its more of a must have mod now than ever.
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 756	Posted - 2016.03.01 18:22:33 - [1316] - Quote Masao Kurata wrote: Well, it's been pushed to sisi now and it seems that Fozzie's response to the controversy is... ...to make the unwarranted buff a tiny bit bigger, at exactly 34% hull resistances. 1% difference, everyone break out the pitchforks! rabble, rabble, grrr CCP, grr freighters /s this thread... priceless Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
baltec1 Bat Country Pandemic Legion 17495	Posted - 2016.03.01 18:24:07 - [1317] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: 1% difference, everyone break out the pitchforks! rabble, rabble, grrr CCP, grr freighters /s this thread... priceless The goal is to make it less of a must have mod, making it better than before to fit one does not exactly help to meet that goal.
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 756	Posted - 2016.03.01 18:44:58 - [1318] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Stitch Kaneland wrote: 1% difference, everyone break out the pitchforks! rabble, rabble, grrr CCP, grr freighters /s this thread... priceless The goal is to make it less of a must have mod, making it better than before to fit one does not exactly help to meet that goal. There are a few ships i don't put DCU's on, this doesn't really change that. A kiting vagabond is a great example of this. If you're brawling, almost every fit is going to have a DCU. Kiting fits that use a DCU before may not use them after (even with the enormous 1% hull resist gain), as they mainly use a DCU to have some kind of hull resist to not bleed structure, or to supplement shield/armor resistances. Now they put in an eanm or another armor resist mod in since they have 33% base hull buffer to work with instead of 0%. They may find now with the 33% base resist, that they would like to add a TE, more damage/resist etc instead of the DCU. I don't see how this makes it a "must have" mod when what the DCU change is providing already gives some room to adjust fits as needed. Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
baltec1 Bat Country Pandemic Legion 17495	Posted - 2016.03.01 18:51:52 - [1319] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: There are a few ships i don't put DCU's on, this doesn't really change that. A kiting vagabond is a great example of this. If you're brawling, almost every fit is going to have a DCU. Kiting fits that use a DCU before may not use them after (even with the enormous 1% hull resist gain), as they mainly use a DCU to have some kind of hull resist to not bleed structure, or to supplement shield/armor resistances. Now they put in an eanm or another armor resist mod in since they have 33% base hull buffer to work with instead of 0%. They may find now with the 33% base resist, that they would like to add a TE, more damage/resist etc instead of the DCU. I don't see how this makes it a "must have" mod when what the DCU change is providing already gives some room to adjust fits as needed. DCU adds more to a ships tank than any other mod you can fit. The same reasons we all fit it now still apply.
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7386	Posted - 2016.03.01 19:53:34 - [1320] - Quote baltec1 wrote: The goal is to make it less of a must have mod, making it better than before to fit one does not exactly help to meet that goal. It is, since the module does less. How are you still not getting that? baltec1 wrote: DCU adds more to a ships tank than any other mod you can fit. The same reasons we all fit it now still apply. The same reason you fit it still applies, because apparently you don't care if your ships moves at 3m/s, can't target or damage for **** as long as it's EHP is really high. People who don't only care about EHP now have more choice with slightly less crippling repercussions. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 51 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

Copyright © 2006-2024, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,77s, ref 20241126/1813
EVE-Online™ and Eve imagery © CCP.

bitcoin: 1CHRiBBArqpw5Yz7x5KS2RRtN5ubEn5gF

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.