Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 59 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 20 post(s) |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
2527
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 23:50:51 -
[1621] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Skyler Hawk wrote:Disembodied Head wrote:Tried looking for the answer to the following question, sorry if it's already been hashed out:
What is happening with all the fleet/wing leadership skills? If they are no longer needed are we getting the SP back? Or is CCP just keeping those up to keep the massive time gate on boosting artificially high? After the patch, they will increase the size of the boost AoE; Leadership will increase the range of the effect by 6%/level, Wing Command by 5%/level, and Fleet Command by 4%/level. Judging by that poor excuse of a response - You don't fly much in fleets do you. I can see Devs not understanding fleet mechanics but Your alliance is quite well known for its fleet work (AT included). Yet your response shows no understanding of fleet mechanics and how they are used on a grid during a fight. I suppose every group has to have one, your Tuskers.
The question was "What is happening with the fleet/wing leadership skills?"
He accurately and completely stated what was happening with the leadership skills.
How does any of that have anything to do with flying in fleets?
It's like you're just arbitrarily raving at this point.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2560
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 03:17:37 -
[1622] - Quote
Just out of curiosity...
CCP, are the T2 command bursts on Sisi still supposed to only be as effective as the T1 command bursts? Are they supposed to be identifying themselves as 'Tech Level: 1'?
Just kinda wondering, since these are gonna be going live in 2 weeks. |
MAS0RAKSH
Black Serpent Technologies The-Culture
15
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 05:40:50 -
[1623] - Quote
any word if the command ships required training will change from requiring all the warfare skills to requiring only the bursts the ship specializes in?
|
Sgt Ocker
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1180
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 11:10:41 -
[1624] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote: Off grid links needed to be fixed - This is not so much "fixing" the problem - As it is nerfing small gang, small group game play..
Why design mechanics that would involve strategies and tactics - When you can just throw together something that ensures the largest groups benefit from it the most.
this is a huge boon to small group/solo play. no longer will a boosting alt be required not to mention ppl who actually wanted to play this role can... you know, play Seriously? Seems you have little to no understanding of why small gangs use links. This - "no longer will a boosting alt be required" - has got to be the most stupid thing I've ever seen you post. Small gangs use and rely on links because 99.9% of the time they are outnumbered - Removing their ability to use links, is the same as saying, Don't bother undocking for that roam, your only going to die because you don't have enough, DPS, Logi and Links to compete. They use links because 99.9% of the time so does the other guy True but then you have the quite common scenarios where your 10 man gang bumps into a larger gang, can fight can hold their own even when both sides have a booster. BUT come November, which of those two groups do you think will have boosts and therefore a huge advantage over their opposition.
Example of small gang, with boosts; A 10 man gang with boosts - has at most 7 dps, 2 logi, 1 booster. The larger gang, say a 15 man gang, 10 dps, 3 logi, 1 hard tackle, 1 booster. Won't make for very balanced small gang fighting, either side lose their booster, they lose the fight.
Realistically, Devs are making it so ONE ship in a small gang or fleet, will dictate who wins.
Then you have the situation where - Your small gang takes out small ships, what options do they have for "adequate" boosts. Command Destroyers just aren't designed to be on grid boosters, they are completely disposable, so it is T3's or nothing. T3's aren't a realistic choice due to low or no DPS and very limited tank having to use rig slots to fit links.
IMO, Devs have done a half reasonable job on boosting but failed to do a complete job by not introducing lines of ships designed for purpose. Command ships aren't an option for fleets using anything smaller than BC's or BS's (they are just too slow, in every way), T3's are just too limited with just a single link and T3D's, simply aren't designed to be boosters (as well as suffering the same drawback as T3's in fitting links)
Dev's have deliberately half done this job by not providing what is needed ships wise for the new boosting system. I know things can change, someone at CCP might see the error here (removing the small gang/fleet meta) but how long will it take to recognize it And how much longer to fix it. CCP isn't known for their speed in fixing problems in meta's (just look at the Svipul)
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
|
Sgt Ocker
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1180
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 11:31:06 -
[1625] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:Skyler Hawk wrote:Disembodied Head wrote:Tried looking for the answer to the following question, sorry if it's already been hashed out:
What is happening with all the fleet/wing leadership skills? If they are no longer needed are we getting the SP back? Or is CCP just keeping those up to keep the massive time gate on boosting artificially high? After the patch, they will increase the size of the boost AoE; Leadership will increase the range of the effect by 6%/level, Wing Command by 5%/level, and Fleet Command by 4%/level. Judging by that poor excuse of a response - You don't fly much in fleets do you. I can see Devs not understanding fleet mechanics but Your alliance is quite well known for its fleet work (AT included). Yet your response shows no understanding of fleet mechanics and how they are used on a grid during a fight. I suppose every group has to have one, your Tuskers. The question was "What is happening with the fleet/wing leadership skills?" He accurately and completely stated what was happening with the leadership skills. How does any of that have anything to do with flying in fleets? It's like you're just arbitrarily raving at this point. Anyone can quote the nonsense reasons Devs have given for the skills, that does not mean it is right. I'm not entirely sure that his response addressed the question at all. One question that has appeared over and over in this thread - What is happening to these skills - Others too see them as now redundant and want to know what Devs have in mind for those who never trained leadership skills to run links... On a personal note, I'd also like all the isk I've spent on implants reimbursed as they too are no longer relevant to my play style.
If you too had any understanding of fleet meta's, you would understand what i was trying to say. The skills involved aren't really worth having. With the new boosting mechanics, long range boosts become irrelevant. Why would a large fleet with numerous boosters spread out in it need long range boosts? Anyone with a boosting ship can run boosts (the larger the fleet, the more links you can have active). Now even if you fleet is spread out (good way to die fast), you just ensure you have one (or more) booster with each group.. No need for A boosting ship to have long range boosts, 20 or 30K is more than enough.
On that basis I believe CCP should reimburse the skills and leave it to individuals as to how they use the SP (put them back into leadership, or not). The skills have been made redundant.
I am curious to know how fleet, wing and squad warps will work - The skills for those have been reallocated.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
|
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
2533
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 15:47:04 -
[1626] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:
I am curious to know how fleet, wing and squad warps will work - The skills for those have been reallocated. (a nice stealth nerf to fleet movement)
Can't imagine why it would work any differently than it does now. They didn't say the concept of a fleet hierarchy was being removed, just the relationship between the hierarchy and boosts.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
Tristiana Egivand
Kapsle i Profity
0
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 20:27:48 -
[1627] - Quote
What will happen to the existing warfare links and blueprints? Will you remove them or convert to the corresponding command bursts? |
Sgt Ocker
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1181
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 05:15:11 -
[1628] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:
I am curious to know how fleet, wing and squad warps will work - The skills for those have been reallocated. (a nice stealth nerf to fleet movement)
Can't imagine why it would work any differently than it does now. They didn't say the concept of a fleet hierarchy was being removed, just the relationship between the hierarchy and boosts. The skills no longer correspond with fleet leadership and control as they were originally intended and trained for.
So if your right, then every fleet will need to have more members with max leadership skills, or risk losing control by having boosters in command positions as well as mixed into the fleet.. All seems a little redundant and not very well thought out to me..
Fleets can now have unlimited boosters active at any time yet control of the fleet relies on those boosters being in command positions - What a nice boon for large groups and a kick in the pants for smaller groups.
The idea behind this change was to remove the need for boosters to be in command positions to deliver boosts - But it doesn't.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
|
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
2541
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 06:43:51 -
[1629] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:
I am curious to know how fleet, wing and squad warps will work - The skills for those have been reallocated. (a nice stealth nerf to fleet movement)
Can't imagine why it would work any differently than it does now. They didn't say the concept of a fleet hierarchy was being removed, just the relationship between the hierarchy and boosts. The skills no longer correspond with fleet leadership and control as they were originally intended and trained for.
So what? Obviously what's going to happen is that the old max-skill fleet hierarchy will just become "stock".
Quote:So if your right, then every fleet will need to have more members with max leadership skills, or risk losing control by having boosters in command positions as well as mixed into the fleet.. All seems a little redundant and not very well thought out to me..
Huh? We just went over this. The only thing leadership skills will do is extend the range of boosts. That's it. There's no need to put them in a command position. There's no need for anyone who isn't actually running command bursts to have leadership skills at all.
The hierarchy is remaining. You won't need skills to fill out the hierarchy. Receiving boosts will not be contingent on the hierarchy. This is all really simple.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
14547
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 10:00:42 -
[1630] - Quote
Tristiana Egivand wrote:What will happen to the existing warfare links and blueprints? Will you remove them or convert to the corresponding command bursts?
The existing links and their blueprints will indeed be converted into the corresponding command bursts.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
|
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
14548
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 10:12:00 -
[1631] - Quote
Hey folks, have another update for you all with a few more changes to the plan.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, we have been giving some thought to the feedback we've received in this thread about the Evasive Maneuvers burst. We agree with the argument that signature radius is an extremely powerful bonus, however we think that converting the burst entirely into something else (like agility) would be a bit too much of a nerf.
So we're adjusting the Evasive Maneuvers burst to provide 6% bonuses to both signature radius and agility, rather than the previous 12% bonus to signature radius. We think this will help ensure that the Evasive Maneuvers burst remains powerful and thematic without being too overpowered.
We are also increasing the strength of the Leadership, Wing Command and Fleet Command range bonuses by 16.7%, 20% and 25% respectively (new values will be 7% per level for Leadership, 6% per level for WC and 5% per level for FC). This helps boost the value of these skills a fair bit while also extending the max possible burst range by 12.5%.
Finally, the burst strength on the Titans was making them a bit too much of a jack of all trades. We are leaving the ability to operate multiple bursts and the range bonus, but removing the burst strength bonus from titans so that we won't be pushing people towards all-titan fleets. Of course the Titans all have the ability to use their own unique Phenomena Generators (previously known as Titan Effect Generators) which give them their own special capability for influencing the battlefield.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
|
|
TheSmokingHertog
Julia's Interstellar Trade Emperium
435
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 10:17:10 -
[1632] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey folks, have another update for you all with a few more changes to the plan.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, we have been giving some thought to the feedback we've received in this thread about the Evasive Maneuvers burst. We agree with the argument that signature radius is an extremely powerful bonus, however we think that converting the burst entirely into something else (like agility) would be a bit too much of a nerf.
So we're adjusting the Evasive Maneuvers burst to provide 6% bonuses to both signature radius and agility, rather than the previous 12% bonus to signature radius. We think this will help ensure that the Evasive Maneuvers burst remains powerful and thematic without being too overpowered.
We are also increasing the strength of the Leadership, Wing Command and Fleet Command range bonuses by 16.7%, 20% and 25% respectively (new values will be 7% per level for Leadership, 6% per level for WC and 5% per level for FC). This helps boost the value of these skills a fair bit while also extending the max possible burst range by 12.5%.
Finally, the burst strength on the Titans was making them a bit too much of a jack of all trades. We are leaving the ability to operate multiple bursts and the range bonus, but removing the burst strength bonus from titans so that we won't be pushing people towards all-titan fleets. Of course the Titans all have the ability to use their own unique Phenomena Generators (previously known as Titan Effect Generators) which give them their own special capability for influencing the battlefield.
Any news on the bonus for mining equipment, in the thread some people made suggestions.
"Dogma is kind of like quantum physics, observing the dogma state will change it." ~ CCP Prism X
"Schrödinger's Missile. I dig it." ~ Makari Aeron
-= "Brain in a Box on Singularity" - April 2015 =-
|
Galinius Valgani
Albertross Mining Corp. Off The Reservation.
42
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 10:52:31 -
[1633] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:good stuff...
Any ETA when the last devblog for Command Ships will appear. New Skill requirements already on SiSi would be great to see your whole plan for Combat Boosting.
|
Penance Toralen
Compass Fox
24
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 10:56:09 -
[1634] - Quote
hello Fozzie
At the moment the burst module has a fixed cycle of 60sec. But the duration of the burst can be easily over 120sec. I potentially see this a source of frustration. Either it is automatic and wasteful of munitions or requires continuous manual cycling. Any thoughts about this? |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
14549
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 11:12:52 -
[1635] - Quote
Penance Toralen wrote:hello Fozzie
At the moment the burst module has a fixed cycle of 60sec. But the duration of the burst can be easily over 120sec. I potentially see this a source of frustration. Either it is automatic and wasteful of munitions or requires continuous manual cycling. Any thoughts about this?
The effect duration being longer than the module duration is intended, as it allows consistent boosts with some wiggle room. This is helpful both for the players being boosted (not having their stats bounce around too much) and for server load (it's more efficient to refresh an existing buff than to apply a new one).
The munitions are so cheap and small that we expect the optimal course to be simply keeping auto-repeat on and not bothering to micromanage, but for people who really want to the option of micromanaging it is available.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
|
|
JTK Fotheringham
Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers.
129
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 11:16:54 -
[1636] - Quote
Penance Toralen wrote:hello Fozzie
At the moment the burst module has a fixed cycle of 60sec. But the duration of the burst can be easily over 120sec. I potentially see this a source of frustration. Either it is automatic and wasteful of munitions or requires continuous manual cycling. Any thoughts about this?
+1 to this.
I hadn't noticed the disconnect between Burst effect duration and burst cycle time until testing links on the new Orca.
As there's a consumption item involved, I think a corresponding cycle time bonus is merited - so that cycle time and burst duration match.
/JTK |
Sylvia Kildare
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
16
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 11:30:05 -
[1637] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:Huh? We just went over this. The only thing leadership skills will do is extend the range of boosts. That's it. There's no need to put them in a command position. There's no need for anyone who isn't actually running command bursts to have leadership skills at all (which is not the case right now).
The hierarchy is remaining. You won't need skills to fill out the hierarchy, as those skills have been repurposed. Receiving boosts will not be contingent on the hierarchy. This is all really simple.
Well said.
Just to reiterate/restate/hopefully get through to people who aren't understanding it... from what I've seen/read:
Basically, the fleet structure will only have two purposes:
A) allowing FC/WC/SC to do fleet/wing/squad warps...
B) plain ol' organisation.
Interesting that he referred to the leadership/WC/FC skills as being needed for doing squad/wing/fleet warps... when all they were ever used for before was passing down boosts from one booster to one part of the fleet. That is the part that is going away, hence the skills only be used for booster range... this is apparently blowing (some) people's minds.
But yes, it would be nice if they'd just do a SP refund (at least on WC/FC... leadership is not such a big deal) for all the people who never intend to fit a command burst module in their EVE lives going forward (though you never know, once they see how fun on-grid boosting can be, perhaps they'll change their minds. ;D) |
Ded Akara
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
5
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 12:00:50 -
[1638] - Quote
JTK Fotheringham wrote:Penance Toralen wrote:hello Fozzie
At the moment the burst module has a fixed cycle of 60sec. But the duration of the burst can be easily over 120sec. I potentially see this a source of frustration. Either it is automatic and wasteful of munitions or requires continuous manual cycling. Any thoughts about this? +1 to this. I hadn't noticed the disconnect between Burst effect duration and burst cycle time until testing links on the new Orca. As there's a consumption item involved, I think a corresponding cycle time bonus is merited - so that cycle time and burst duration match. It just seems a bit of a perception disconnect - I mean, my blaster ROF might increase, so my DPS will increase, but so will my ammo consumption. Why can't Fleet boost bursts work the same way? /JTK
I don't see what there is to complain about, it's better this way. The burst ammo is so cheap it doesn't even matter. It's highly useful to have a burst duration that lasts for 2 minutes whilst being able to reapply the burst every 30 seconds (with specialist level 5).
|
Jasper Sinclair
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
44
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 12:48:27 -
[1639] - Quote
I neglected to look during yesterday's mass test - does the tool tip for the burst module show the effect duration as opposed to/in addition to the module cycle time? I believe the current effects applied to ownship icon that appears over the capacitor does say the duration of the applied effect, but that could be from someone else. I want to know the duration of MY burst, even if it is not the most powerful burst of its type currently active.
It would still be nice if the range of the burst were depicted as a sphere instead of a circle.
Referring back to a post I made here a while back, please consider updating the fleet window with new, useful capabilities now that the passive boosts hierarchy is obsolete. Some ideas I had include:
- allow FC to designate fleet members that are allowed to broadcast targets - allow FC to turn on/off the ability of Wing/Squad commanders to warp their unit - allow the ability to designate "secondary" unit commanders that will automatically be promoted if their unit commander leaves fleet - increase the size of the field that names the wings/squads - allow the ability to set entire wings/squads to accept/not accept fleet warps
Oh, and you can delete the "regroup" command. It's evil.
Former Blue CEO, admirer of Caracals (and Tristans)
|
Soleil Fournier
Black Serpent Technologies The-Culture
171
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 13:02:54 -
[1640] - Quote
The T2 module gives a nice bonus compared to the T1, but it doesn't affect duration. I think the max duration on the T2 module should be increased to 3 minutes. |
|
Demolishar
United Aggression
1171
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 13:10:41 -
[1641] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: Finally, the burst strength on the Titans was making them a bit too much of a jack of all trades. We are leaving the ability to operate multiple bursts and the range bonus, but removing the burst strength bonus from titans so that we won't be pushing people towards all-titan fleets. Of course the Titans all have the ability to use their own unique Phenomena Generators (previously known as Titan Effect Generators) which give them their own special capability for influencing the battlefield.
At least give the titans the same bonus as a supercarrier. They already have to give up either a gun, a DD, or an effect generator to be able to fit a burst module. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn Singularity Syndicate
2094
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 13:22:40 -
[1642] - Quote
I just read through this as I'm now interested in command ships and not sure if this was mentioned earlier: Shouldn't the dedicated command ships have the same role bonus as the force auxiliary, and carriers etc have the 100% bonus listed for Command ships? It would make more sense that the dedicated command vessels have a better bonus than combat vessels. |
HandelsPharmi
Pharmi on CharBazaar
1827
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 13:30:59 -
[1643] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: I just read through this as I'm now interested in command ships and not sure if this was mentioned earlier: Shouldn't the dedicated command ships have the same role bonus as the force auxiliary, and carriers etc have the 100% bonus listed for Command ships? It would make more sense that the dedicated command vessels have a better bonus than combat vessels.
The range is bigger, yes, but the effect STRENGTH is smaller compared to CS.
Command Ship Can fit two Command Burst modules +3% bonus to two racial types of Command Burst Effect Strength and Duration per skill level Role Bonus: +100% bonus to Command Burst Area of Effect Range
Carrier, Supercarrier and Force Auxiliary Can fit two Command Burst modules +1% bonus to two racial types of Command Burst Effect Strength and Duration per skill level Role Bonus: +200% bonus to Command Burst Area of Effect Range |
Skyler Hawk
The Tuskers The Tuskers Co.
89
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 13:34:39 -
[1644] - Quote
Gotta say, the change to the Evasive Maneuvers link seems very heavy-handed. All of the other boosts have remained close to their current strengths - for example, the current Shield Harmonizing/Passive Defence links increase resists by 25.9% if fielded on a max-skilled CS with the correct mindlink in, whereas the new Shield Harmonizing/Armor Energizing links increase resists by 21.6%. However, the Evasive Maneuvers link is going from -34.5% sig on a max-skilled CS (plus a 15% improvement to agility from the mindlink) to -16.7% (plus a 16.7% boost to agility). Sig reduction is certainly a powerful effect, but not necessarily more powerful than increasing resists or reducing rep cycle times, and certainly (IMO) not so much more powerful as to justify being whacked so much harder than the other tanking links. |
HandelsPharmi
Pharmi on CharBazaar
1827
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 14:21:38 -
[1645] - Quote
Signature radius bonus is less than before, I agree with you.
But you had a passive bonus of 15 % to shield or armor (slot 10 imp)
or a combined bonus of armor / shield with agility / targeting range Navy Mindlinks...
Now you will receive less resistance but more shield / armor HP (15 % vs. +21.56%)
|
Zetakya
Echelon Research Goonswarm Federation
16
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 14:51:51 -
[1646] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey folks, have another update for you all with a few more changes to the plan.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, we have been giving some thought to the feedback we've received in this thread about the Evasive Maneuvers burst. We agree with the argument that signature radius is an extremely powerful bonus, however we think that converting the burst entirely into something else (like agility) would be a bit too much of a nerf.
So we're adjusting the Evasive Maneuvers burst to provide 6% bonuses to both signature radius and agility, rather than the previous 12% bonus to signature radius. We think this will help ensure that the Evasive Maneuvers burst remains powerful and thematic without being too overpowered.
Can you add to Evasive Maneuvers as a compensating factor an effect that increases a ships Warp Speed to 3 AU/s if it is normally less than that? |
Arronicus
Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc.
1541
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 14:56:15 -
[1647] - Quote
TheSmokingHertog wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey folks, have another update for you all with a few more changes to the plan.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, we have been giving some thought to the feedback we've received in this thread about the Evasive Maneuvers burst. We agree with the argument that signature radius is an extremely powerful bonus, however we think that converting the burst entirely into something else (like agility) would be a bit too much of a nerf.
So we're adjusting the Evasive Maneuvers burst to provide 6% bonuses to both signature radius and agility, rather than the previous 12% bonus to signature radius. We think this will help ensure that the Evasive Maneuvers burst remains powerful and thematic without being too overpowered.
We are also increasing the strength of the Leadership, Wing Command and Fleet Command range bonuses by 16.7%, 20% and 25% respectively (new values will be 7% per level for Leadership, 6% per level for WC and 5% per level for FC). This helps boost the value of these skills a fair bit while also extending the max possible burst range by 12.5%.
Finally, the burst strength on the Titans was making them a bit too much of a jack of all trades. We are leaving the ability to operate multiple bursts and the range bonus, but removing the burst strength bonus from titans so that we won't be pushing people towards all-titan fleets. Of course the Titans all have the ability to use their own unique Phenomena Generators (previously known as Titan Effect Generators) which give them their own special capability for influencing the battlefield. Any news on the bonus for mining equipment, in the thread some people made suggestions.
People made suggestions, but the mining foreman boosts seem REALLY well balanced already as is. I'd take the lack of CCP making revisions to them to mean that they understand that the mining foreman bursts are in a good place despite the odd complaint. |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
2546
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 15:41:45 -
[1648] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: We are also increasing the strength of the Leadership, Wing Command and Fleet Command range bonuses by 16.7%, 20% and 25% respectively (new values will be 7% per level for Leadership, 6% per level for WC and 5% per level for FC). This helps boost the value of these skills a fair bit while also extending the max possible burst range by 12.5%.
That's cool, I guess. My main problem with that whole setup, though, is just the sheer volume of range-increasing skills. First of all, it's just boring. 3 consecutive skills that do the same exact thing, in the same exact way, with the only difference being the magnitude. There aren't many places this exist in the game without at least some small qualitative differentiation between them. Gunnery/Rapid firing and MLO/Rapid launch are all that come to mind. Other skills tend to differentiate on the breadth of their application.
The damage skills, for instance:
Surgical strike - damage bonus to all turrets. Medium Energy Turret - Applies only to medium sized lasers Medium pulse spec - Applies only to T2, medium-sized pulse lasers.
There is also an inherent diminishing level of value on further range increases, as most fleets are just never going to be -that- spread out. Another 12.5% maximum range is not necessarily another 12.5% of range-related "value". Sure, the skill makes a number bigger, but since the realized effect of that number is boolean (Close enough to receive bonus? True/false), and the previous ceiling was already "big enough" that in most cases, it's hard to care overly much about the increase. Mining fleets seem like the largest beneficiary, here.
Is there not something more interesting you could do with at least one of those skills? Maybe consolidate the range bonus down to using just two of them and do something else - anything else - with the third?
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
Irregessa
Obfuscation and Reflections
145
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 16:04:54 -
[1649] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: We are also increasing the strength of the Leadership, Wing Command and Fleet Command range bonuses by 16.7%, 20% and 25% respectively (new values will be 7% per level for Leadership, 6% per level for WC and 5% per level for FC). This helps boost the value of these skills a fair bit while also extending the max possible burst range by 12.5%.
That's cool, I guess. My main problem with that whole setup, though, is just the sheer volume of range-increasing skills. First of all, it's just boring. 3 consecutive skills that do the same exact thing, in the same exact way, with the only difference being the magnitude. There aren't many places this exist in the game without at least some small qualitative differentiation between them. Gunnery/Rapid firing and MLO/Rapid launch are all that come to mind. Other skills tend to differentiate on the breadth of their application.
I am already hearing experienced FCs talking about extracting FC 5 because it isn't worth the sp, and the sp could be better used elsewhere or just sold.
And there still isn't an effect with the mining boosts to compensate for the loss of the +15% to mining yield presently provided by Mining Foreman V + Mining Foreman Mindlink.
|
Oktura Ostus
Wicked Privateers Smile 'n' Wave
14
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 16:54:21 -
[1650] - Quote
JTK Fotheringham wrote:As there's a consumption item involved, I think a corresponding cycle time bonus is merited - so that cycle time and burst duration match.
It just seems a bit of a perception disconnect - I mean, my blaster ROF might increase, so my DPS will increase, but so will my ammo consumption. Why can't Fleet boost bursts work the same way?
/JTK
Please, don't. It's not like DPS on practice. There is only tiny moment when you apply bonuses to teammates, and if one of your teammate (or even you) failed to be in needed range at this moment, he will fly without bonuses next cycle. In quick kitting fights it happens a lot.
From this point of view I'd like to have booster cycle small enough so I could reapply bonuses to teammates as quick as possible if he missed previous cycle, and the duration of booster effect to be long enough so teammate could miss one-two cycles and still fly with bonuses
On practice on sisi now it works like this: - newbie command destroyer has cycle 1 minute and apply time 1 minute, so teammates have to catch every cycle to fly with boost. - skilled command destroyer has cycle 1 min and apply time ~2 mins, so teammates could miss one cycle but still fly with boost all time.
It's balanced I think ... |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 59 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |