Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
JC Mieyli
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
134
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 04:43:22 -
[361] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:JC Mieyli wrote:baltec1 wrote:JC Mieyli wrote:baltec1 wrote: Or we can fix the 4 ships that have been causing problems or outright invalidating some 60+ other ships for years.
maybe they used to years ago but not anymore meta changed a lot since those days Yea, its dominated by a handful of overpowered ships, this change goes a long way to fixing that. by removing even more ships from the meta and making the handful of ships worth flying even smaller id prefer to see things go the other way with more ships being viable rather than less that isnt power creep its equalization Buffing some 60+ ships to deal with 4 overpowered ships is very much power creep on a massive scale. nah its only power creep when the ships are buffed beyond the power levels already existing a long time ago there was the tiericide then along came pirate bs and marauder that is power creep now all the other ships need to be balanced against pirate bs and marauder |
BESTER bm
Omni Galactic Central Omni Galactic Group
23
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 05:26:46 -
[362] - Quote
Dior Ambraelle wrote:BESTER bm wrote:Separate Data/Relic is so last decade, we use Zeugma now.. :P .. Combo scanners only had one utility slot the last time I checked, yellow and red hacks often need more.
You use the board and no,I have never needed a second slot.
|
BESTER bm
Omni Galactic Central Omni Galactic Group
23
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 05:36:13 -
[363] - Quote
So the ships are on SiSi.. Thread can be closed as for some time now this means CCP is done and the changes are locked in.
Smart guys they are, the subsystems are not available so we can't start to see what can be saved from our investments and CCP won't have the 'burden' of being bombarded with negative comments.
And they cut off the nose from the Tengu.. I mean seriously. But hey, as the ship is likely to be useless now, having it defaced is only a minor issue I guess.. Quick, throw a few skins in there too to see if we can make some money off of those before ppl discover they are basically screwed.. |
Feka
Magellanic Itg Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 05:38:15 -
[364] - Quote
BESTER bm wrote: That is what will likely happen yes. While I can fit and use a Tengu to run these sites with acceptable risk, where the risk mostly consists of me being careless or greedy, Fitting any available exploration ship to have a chance will become a huge risk even in case of getting unlucky on a hack and triggering a defense. Let alone I will no longer have the option to use the site defense to actually protect myself.
Stratios is not even close to being able to run these sites and will need to leave at the first sign of an unlucky turn or mishap.
High-end sites should be high risk.
Never not post.
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
827
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 05:45:22 -
[365] - Quote
Feka wrote:BESTER bm wrote: That is what will likely happen yes. While I can fit and use a Tengu to run these sites with acceptable risk, where the risk mostly consists of me being careless or greedy, Fitting any available exploration ship to have a chance will become a huge risk even in case of getting unlucky on a hack and triggering a defense. Let alone I will no longer have the option to use the site defense to actually protect myself.
Stratios is not even close to being able to run these sites and will need to leave at the first sign of an unlucky turn or mishap.
High-end sites should be high risk. sure, but we need a viable hull to even start doing them. Merging analyzers bonus into covert cloak sub leave us no choice. We can't do them because of weak tank and we can't drop covert sub because of analyzers bonuses. Maybe move analzyers bonus into hull like probes fitting bonus? Nestor is not an option and exploration is solo activity.
"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville
|
BESTER bm
Omni Galactic Central Omni Galactic Group
23
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 06:11:43 -
[366] - Quote
So, tried building a suitable fit on SiSi but it's not possible.
Waste of skills and investment in a couple of ships soon to be worthless to me. Probably unsub two accounts and will be interesting to see how CCP is going to compensate for them moving the goalpost beyond where I can adjust.
Probably CCP won't care either way though.. |
Feka
Magellanic Itg Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 07:02:00 -
[367] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote: sure, but we need a viable hull to even start doing them. Merging analyzers bonus into covert cloak sub leave us no choice. We can't do them because of weak tank and we can't drop covert sub because of analyzers bonuses. Maybe move analzyers bonus into hull like probes fitting bonus? Nestor is not an option and exploration is solo activity.
Why should it be solo on all difficulty levels?
Never not post.
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
827
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 07:42:53 -
[368] - Quote
Feka wrote:Jeremiah Saken wrote: sure, but we need a viable hull to even start doing them. Merging analyzers bonus into covert cloak sub leave us no choice. We can't do them because of weak tank and we can't drop covert sub because of analyzers bonuses. Maybe move analzyers bonus into hull like probes fitting bonus? Nestor is not an option and exploration is solo activity.
Why should it be solo on all difficulty levels? Because those are rare so it's unpredictable when they'll spawn. Not to mention there is no such thing as group exploration.
"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville
|
Feka
Magellanic Itg Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 08:11:12 -
[369] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote: Because those are rare so it's unpredictable when they'll spawn. Not to mention there is no such thing as group exploration.
Yet.
Never not post.
|
BESTER bm
Omni Galactic Central Omni Galactic Group
23
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 08:13:25 -
[370] - Quote
Feka wrote:Why should it be solo on all difficulty levels?
Sleeper caches are solo sites, they are not designed to be run in teams and it would be pointless/make no difference if you do. Please know what you are commenting on before you do so. |
|
Nareyan De'ath
The Void Cartel
0
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 09:32:25 -
[371] - Quote
What horrifies me is that my once sleek disolution sequenced/Ab sub tengu now has been reshaped as the ecm/cloaky/nullified mismatched monstrosity... |
Dior Ambraelle
University of Caille Gallente Federation
84
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 11:12:54 -
[372] - Quote
The good news is we still have the hammerhead Proteus, and the drone subsystem finally has a drone bay. I thought the current electronics will become the core, the defense stays as it is, offensive and engineering subsystems will be merged or replaced and propulsion also stays. I also hoped that we may vote on which visuals should be kept or dropped.
I guess we have to deal with the fact that nothing is good enough for us.
If you want an intelligent argument, please do, I'm up for it!
But if you want a trolling contest, I will win it by simply not participating.
|
BESTER bm
Omni Galactic Central Omni Galactic Group
23
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 11:47:42 -
[373] - Quote
Dior Ambraelle wrote:I guess we have to deal with the fact that nothing is good enough for us.
That's not the issue here.. CCP has been fumbling and releasing half baked updates and patches for a while now. Most of what they do is not finished at release and it appears devs are pulled off and on to the next nerf/'improvement'/redesign instead of fleshing things out.
The fact that legacy code does hinder optimisations and performance improvements as well as coming competition (!) is not a good sign for CCP. Will be an interesting EVE Vegas (and I would not be surprised it to be the last CCP organised one), especially with DU on the laptop.. |
Sterling Blades
Windstalker Security Corp United Neopian Federation
35
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 13:52:46 -
[374] - Quote
Time for me to voice my first real complaint after fiddling a bit with the subsystems and Loki that I already had over on the test server. Why in the name of the gods above and below would you apply the old model for the Loki's emergent locus analyzer subsystem to the new immobility driver subsystem? Why not make it become the enhanced nuclear reactor model? Or even have it be the new look for the disolution sequencer?
Pardon me just venting steam and hoping that these visual changes will be worked out a bit more. I'm whining over something ultimately inconsequential, but I wish that the old locus analyzer model would be on something I'd fit to my ship more often if these end up being the final design choices.
The gods are out there. They watch us. They guide, they manipulate. We rally behind the ones we adore, and rain fire against those who rally behind the ones we hate. The question now is, to whom does your allegiance fall behind, dear Empyreans?
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
828
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 13:54:19 -
[375] - Quote
Tried Tengu on SiSi. It's worse than Stratios currently, far worse. No point of using it as exploration vessel at current state. For data/relics site in null ceptor exploration will be better and cheaper. For anything less - Stratios. I really don't care how much high slots I have on it. Tank is laughable, not enough utility slots, stupid amount of useless highslots ( for cloaky hunters sure, but othewise meh). It that is generalisation then good luck - useless overpriced hull. CCP has good idea to release them in summer when ppl are on vacations, s***storm will hit with far less damage.
"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville
|
caldari MJ
Inner Hell
10
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 14:19:42 -
[376] - Quote
SO what results of last changes (last year) with wh: 1) wh pvp - DEAD 2) wh pve - mostly DEAD 3) wh industry - will DEAD (we already see falling of t3 orders on market)
Armor t3 fleet againist null-sec carriers/supers was killed. Why we need fight on ****-tanked-fitted t3 with lose skill-point againist null sec. Wh-industry will be killed after this patch. Now we see drop of t3 market. We have nothing left to sit on talos/nagas and make trash pvp. Best regards to incompetent ccp and focus group.
|
Dior Ambraelle
University of Caille Gallente Federation
87
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 15:26:27 -
[377] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote:Where is iconic Tengu beak? The current obfuscation manifold? I always thought it looks dumb. And this is exactly why we were supposed to vote! Not a big deal really, show the pictures of the current art labeled with letters, then ask people to order them from favorite to least favorite. The one that most people dislikes gets dropped. Personally I'm more interested in the Proteus: why keep the capacitor regeneration matrix instead of the power core multiplier?
If you want an intelligent argument, please do, I'm up for it!
But if you want a trolling contest, I will win it by simply not participating.
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
828
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 16:00:28 -
[378] - Quote
Dior Ambraelle wrote:Jeremiah Saken wrote:Where is iconic Tengu beak? The current obfuscation manifold? I always thought it looks dumb. And this is exactly why we were supposed to vote! Not a big deal really, show the pictures of the current art labeled with letters, then ask people to order them from favorite to least favorite. The one that most people dislikes gets dropped. Personally I'm more interested in the Proteus: why keep the capacitor regeneration matrix instead of the power core multiplier? I don't like visual changes at all. The look should be decided by a player flying T3C not by arbitrary subsystem bonus. It would make sense from a hull personalization perspective.
"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville
|
Dior Ambraelle
University of Caille Gallente Federation
87
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 16:10:45 -
[379] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote:Dior Ambraelle wrote:Jeremiah Saken wrote:Where is iconic Tengu beak? The current obfuscation manifold? I always thought it looks dumb. And this is exactly why we were supposed to vote! Not a big deal really, show the pictures of the current art labeled with letters, then ask people to order them from favorite to least favorite. The one that most people dislikes gets dropped. Personally I'm more interested in the Proteus: why keep the capacitor regeneration matrix instead of the power core multiplier? I don't like visual changes at all. The look should be decided by a player flying T3C not by arbitrary subsystem bonus. It would make sense from a hull personalization perspective. It works like this because you have the right to know what ship the other player is flying. In any other cases you can see both on d-scan and on the overview the name of the ship, so you immediately know what you're against. But the name "Tengu" currently covers 1024 ships. You need to actually look at it to predict the possible abilities of the ship.
If you want an intelligent argument, please do, I'm up for it!
But if you want a trolling contest, I will win it by simply not participating.
|
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
1247
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 16:21:47 -
[380] - Quote
Just dropping in on account of curiosity, but how will the T3C's be handled from a visual standpoint? Since we're going to a 4-category system from a 5-category one, will they look the same as they do now or will they be visually reworked given that would essentially mean part of the cruiser hulls would be literally missing?
"Tomahawks?"
"----in' A, right?"
"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."
"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."
|
|
BESTER bm
Omni Galactic Central Omni Galactic Group
23
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 16:33:02 -
[381] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote:Edit: Visuals are bull**** btw. Where is iconic Tengu beak?
This very much yes!
It's a shame and so bad I have actually decided to with immediate effect stop using the Tengu and ignore any sites that may require it. I am extracting the skills and selling the ships now that hey are still worth something. I also am biomassing two toons alltogether as they have no more use for me since they were specifically trained and used to run Sleeper caches sold to me. If this means I need to further reduce my game accounts I will as I am at the point I will not spend any RL money to plex accounts.
The ship is just nerfed to the point it's not good for anything but pewpew and even then it's lackluster and has virtually no reason for existing anymore. A mentioned, it's now worse than the Stratios.
|
BESTER bm
Omni Galactic Central Omni Galactic Group
23
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 16:36:30 -
[382] - Quote
Sobaan Tali wrote: will they look the same as they do now or will they be visually reworked given that would essentially mean part of the cruiser hulls would be literally missing?
They will be reworkede to make it easier to apply skins which you can buy for plex only initially. It's all about the benjamins.. |
Dior Ambraelle
University of Caille Gallente Federation
87
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 18:01:22 -
[383] - Quote
BESTER bm wrote:Dior Ambraelle wrote:I guess we have to deal with the fact that nothing is good enough for us. That's not the issue here.. CCP has been fumbling and releasing half baked updates and patches for a while now. Most of what they do is not finished at release and it appears devs are pulled off and on to the next nerf/'improvement'/redesign instead of fleshing things out. The problem is that you seem to be correct. The citadel transition had a plan to replace the POS functions during a longer period. The tactical destroyers - ships that by function and mechanics are much more simple - took a year of conversation before testing it on SISI to fix.
But trying to fix the strategic cruisers in about 2 months? Even if they started earlier without the focus group, this time is really short. CCP seems to be... desperate here. "Quickly do something! Anything!"
Personally I would like to know how many drafts were about the subsystems before they announced it on the last event. They clearly take suggestion from the forums, like the separate cargo hold for subsystems for example. So why is this whole rework so rushed?
If you want an intelligent argument, please do, I'm up for it!
But if you want a trolling contest, I will win it by simply not participating.
|
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
1247
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 18:06:46 -
[384] - Quote
Not quite what I asked. I was asking about how will T3C's look since they would visually loose one of the subsystems' making up one-fifth of the hull, not whether they will be compatible with SKINs.
I'll rephrase. If the engineering and electronics subs are being combined into so-called core subs, how will that be handled considering those sub groups account for two separate sections of the hulls? Will changing the core sub change those same two sections? Will one of them be permanent regardless of what subs are mounted? Or does CCP plan to rebuild their looks to only have four visual segments rather than five like they do now. Don't really care that much about making them work with SKINs. It would be nice, but that's not what I was concerned with.
"Tomahawks?"
"----in' A, right?"
"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."
"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."
|
Moksa Elodie
Hijo de la Luna
26
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 19:16:46 -
[385] - Quote
It has taken so many years to get to a T3 rebalance and it feels like the devs suddenly thought one day "OMG we forgot about rebalancing T3s, quick lets do it in a few weeks before Seagull finds out."
I spent a short time looking at Proteus and Loki configurations and it is a mess. I feel the defensive subs should have PWG & CPU added, remove the subs giving the PWG & CPU and turn them into something useful.
With the Proteus I had issues with PWG even when using an 800m plate alongside the friction extension sub and with the Loki using a shield setup I had 500 PWG spare and 8 CPU after filling all slots except 1 utility high slot.
Slot layouts need looking at again and normalizing, so many high slots ...? ( just condense the turrets down 4 and bring sub bonuses up). As for mid & low slots have a base of 5 & 5, with adjustments altering from that like +1 mid -1 low depending on what the ship has as an intended tank, etc.
Having this affected by tank and core, not propulsion (because it should be a given that a ship will be fitted with a prop mod), would mean a more balanced slot layout with a maximum of 7/3 or 3/7.
As for the cloaking sub getting an extra high slot, just use the utility slot for the cloak. 6 fixed high slots(-1 for drone subs because you like to do that for whatever reason), 4 for turrets/launchers/RR with 2 utility.
Finally, the whole ship appearance fudgery, I think the focus group must really hate themselves to think that the sub appearances which have been proposed was a good idea. |
Dior Ambraelle
University of Caille Gallente Federation
88
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 19:40:43 -
[386] - Quote
Sobaan Tali wrote:Not quite what I asked. I was asking about how will T3C's look since they would visually loose one of the subsystems' making up one-fifth of the hull, not whether they will be compatible with SKINs.
I'll rephrase. If the engineering and electronics subs are being combined into so-called core subs, how will that be handled considering those sub groups account for two separate sections of the hulls? Will changing the core sub change those same two sections? Will one of them be permanent regardless of what subs are mounted? Or does CCP plan to rebuild their looks to only have four visual segments rather than five like they do now. Don't really care that much about making them work with SKINs. It would be nice, but that's not what I was concerned with. What I can see on SISI currently, the electronics and defense are merged to be the core, and the engineering becomes the new defense.
If you want an intelligent argument, please do, I'm up for it!
But if you want a trolling contest, I will win it by simply not participating.
|
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
1247
|
Posted - 2017.06.22 20:09:54 -
[387] - Quote
Dior Ambraelle wrote:What I can see on SISI currently, the electronics and defense are merged to be the core, and the engineering becomes the new defense.
Gotcha...thanks.
"Tomahawks?"
"----in' A, right?"
"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."
"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."
|
Dom Arkaral
The Conference Elite CODE.
1626
|
Posted - 2017.06.23 01:31:12 -
[388] - Quote
So, did some fiddling on SiSi, Bonuses don't apply correctly (or at all)
It was probably mentionned already, but I'm a tad too lazy to read through 20 pages
Other than that, I'm very excited to see how it will change the current meta all over the place
p.s. really loving the loki so far
Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester.
Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER
Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome
CCL Loyalist
|
Thomas Lot
Astrocomical Warped Intentions
152
|
Posted - 2017.06.23 02:06:37 -
[389] - Quote
So a Cloaky T3C will still be able to pass a 30-ship insta-lock gate camp untouched, drop a covert cyno, cloak back up, and laugh at how over-powered the mechanic still is.
Pathetic.
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
828
|
Posted - 2017.06.23 06:06:02 -
[390] - Quote
Thomas Lot wrote:So a Cloaky T3C will still be able to pass a 30-ship insta-lock gate camp untouched, drop a covert cyno, cloak back up, and laugh at how over-powered the mechanic still is.
Pathetic.
No they won't. They align like carriers.
Mergin analyzers bonus into covert sub was a mistake. Now we get same combo (covert+nulification) for two types of ships, recons and exploration hulls. They can't buff the tank here because it will cause overpowered recons but current tank is not sufficient for exploration needs.
Slots layouts are mess, tried to fit a loki and proteus for non combat exploration, there just simply not enough mids.
Creating pure exploration T2 is futile because we already have faction Stratios that is no go. Not to mention Nestor which is viable only for WHs repping and exploration bonuses are just SoE ships line flavour.
I think approach to slots distribution is another mistake, there should be strict slot layout changed by subsystem roles (-1 here, +1 there if necessary). Otherwise balancing this will be a nightmare.
"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |