Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Elve Sorrow
Amarr Shinra
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 10:07:00 -
[61]
Ironically enough, this nerfs every Gallente ship, except for the ones that could actually use a little nerf. (*cough*Domi*cough*)
gg CCP.
EVE-O Forums Rules summary: If the thought of doing something makes me giggle for more then 15 seconds, I am to assume I'm not allowed to do it. |
Eleana Tomelac
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 10:08:00 -
[62]
Sounds really crap...
I'm not too much of an EANM user, they're going to be useless (because un*****ble in most setups), the required CPU will make it impossible to easyly switch (for setups with around 0-5 CPU free, like most good setups) between different energized platings when changing tank for the next mission. -- Pocket drone carriers (tm) enthousiast ! Happy owner of a Vexor Navy Issue and few ishkurs. The Vexor Navy Issue is much more fun than the Myrmidon ! |
Zenst
Gallente Reikoku Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 10:09:00 -
[63]
Nooooooo.
Egads SHeilds already way more better than armour, given the passive sheild aspects and extra skills sheilds have.
IF you are going to do this then BALANCE things as in:
Shield has a powergrid reducing skill, as sheilds are grid biased for fittings. Armour is CPU biased and has NO equivelant skills, actualy no equivelant hardwiring links or rigs. Kinda got padded with salvaging in there :|.
I have maxed fitting skills and I'm always having spare powergrid with CPU being the holdup all the time.
Sheilds, well I can put few hardwirings in or add power and cpu easily in my lows IF needed.
To handicap armour tanking when its not needed by hammerings its fittings and only having one option to counter and that being a CO-PRO which also takes the same slots as armour modules is clearly the thoughts and feelings of somebody who sheild tanks or insane.
OK So registered my feelings upon this before this laments onto the live server.
|
n0thing
Northern Intelligence Artificial Intelligence.
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 10:15:00 -
[64]
Thanks, the following nerf just killed:
Ishtar - I dont think every Ishty pilot will spend 200mil for fitting it with faction gear. Those nerfs only force people to use un-conventional stuff like shield tanked Ishtars.
Megathron - It already needs a -5% CPU reduction implant to fit a close-range setup.
Nice, so why change or boost Amarr when you can just nerf other race`s best performers.
Now Im certainly all for using an All-nosf Domi and Myrmi because Im not gonna put another few tens/hundreds mil to compensate CPU on above ships.
Rather then promote Gallente to use all their ships, wer just being pointed back to our I-win ships. Dont ever whine then when you get killed by 5 nosf Dominixes. ---
|
Zirator
Times of Ancar THE R0NIN
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 10:18:00 -
[65]
Hmmmm look like some strange bug turned the devs balance tool into the biggest nerfstick to ever hit the EVE-universe.
|
Kakita Jalaan
Viriette Commerce and Holding
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 10:20:00 -
[66]
Edited by: Kakita Jalaan on 31/05/2007 10:23:51
Originally by: IntegralHellsing lol CCP.
2 X EANM T2 = 20 more CPU. currently with best skills, you can't fracking fit 2 EANM T2 unless you use -3% or -5% turret cpu implant.
...and I think that's EXACTLY the point of this nerf. 42%+ (at compensations lvl 4) passive omni tank for 2 slots, 60 cpu and 4 grid is overpowered.
With the EANM nerf, it might actually be worth tanking versus specific damage types, instead of relying on the holy omni tank of EANMs. Energized single resist platings give 45% resists at compensation lvl 4, which is more than 2 EANMs with compensations at lvl 5. Same fitting as now, two slightly better resists but two holes (one of which is most likely EM, there is your effective Amarr damage boost). Alternatively, you can sacrifice 20 cpu worth of gank, if you absolutely want those 2 EANMs.
Sounds like a fairer tradeoff for me than the current situation.
edit: Hi Zirator, btw ^^ ______________ Join the Family |
R'adeh
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 10:26:00 -
[67]
Great, now the only viable Blasterthron is the gankathron with a plate tank. My Ishtar will be next to useless as well, it's already hard enough to fit it as it is.
Not a good solution imo. _______________________________________________
My views are my own and I don't represent my corp. |
Katarina Hetiako
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 10:27:00 -
[68]
Hmm well I guess there are reasons for this change,
In the past though I always modified my tank to gank setups by having two EAN or two Dmg/ROF Mods, or perhaps one of each, I guess those tight fittings I had where I could do that won't be possible anymore, tsk.
Yup, I'm an alt... if only you could see my main... he's so strong and tough! |
Gabriel Karade
Celtic Anarchy Anarchy Empire
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 10:28:00 -
[69]
Edited by: Gabriel Karade on 31/05/2007 10:33:35
Originally by: Ruciza Edited by: Ruciza on 31/05/2007 09:44:26
Well, dear blaster pilots, maybe you have to rethink your fittings. There exist energized membranes of all types and stripes. Those still have their CPU at 30, one of them gives you the resistance of 2 EANMs for their respective damage type. Tux said that he doesn't like the 2xEANM + DC combo. Now you can for example fit 3x Energized Membranes, and if you still want a DC, get rid of a damage mod. The thought behind this is clear. The essential question is:
WILL YOU FIT AN EM-PASSIVE MOD ON AN ARMOR TANK?
Answer: No you won't. It isn't worth the slot with 60% (+DC) default resists. EM damage buff. Either you have a resist hole, or no more 3x Magstabs, no more 1600mm Raxes/Ruppies with omnitank, it's awesome. You might also reconsider your nos.
This may also not be the end of it.
There already is a resistance hole, it's called explosive (54% resistance)...
And three passive membranes with maximum compensation skills gives you an awe inspiring resistance total of 60/52/65/65 (compared to 80/54/67/67 currently) - or in other words a 17% drop in normalised armour HP's.
----------
Video - 'War-Machine' |
murder one
Gallente Death of Virtue Vigilance Infinitas
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 10:31:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Ruciza Edited by: Ruciza on 31/05/2007 09:44:26
Well, dear blaster pilots, maybe you have to rethink your fittings. There exist energized membranes of all types and stripes. Those still have their CPU at 30, one of them gives you the resistance of 2 EANMs for their respective damage type. Tux said that he doesn't like the 2xEANM + DC combo. Now you can for example fit 3x Energized Membranes, and if you still want a DC, get rid of a damage mod. The thought behind this is clear. The essential question is:
WILL YOU FIT AN EM-PASSIVE MOD ON AN ARMOR TANK?
Answer: No you won't. It isn't worth the slot with 60% (+DC) default resists. EM damage buff. Either you have a resist hole, or no more 3x Magstabs, no more 1600mm Raxes/Ruppies with omnitank, it's awesome. You might also reconsider your nos.
This may also not be the end of it.
Simply isn't enough slots on a Mega (for instance) to fit passive resists (multiple types) and have enough slots left over for damage mods (2 minimum).
With all the nerfs to DPS setups, a Blasterthron can barely make it by with two magstabs, usually needing three, and that's only if you fit Neutrons. Ions and Electrons are completely worthless.
The thing is, this change only affects a very narrow range of ships: CPU limited ships that armor tank. What ships are those? Blaster ships and Laser BS. Everything else won't be hurt by it.
GG CCP.
Because I said so...
|
|
Caya
Amarr Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 10:31:00 -
[71]
If this becomes true, i want training time for my compensation skills lvl5 back!
|
LUH 3471
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 10:35:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Mysterlee T2 Energized adaptive nano membranes are now using 40 cpu on sisi, 10 more than currently on TQ. Thats only 4 cpu and a bit of cap usage less than a T2 invuln field yet the invuln gives 10% more resists.
CCP please rethink this change, Gallente blaster pilots already have enough problems with cpu as it is and are forced to use hybrid cpu reduction implants to fit almost any setup, now it will be even harder for us to fit a decent setup.
If this is all some "genius" plan to boost amarr, why don't you just reduce the EANM EM resistance bonus to around 12.5% on T2 EANM while leaving the other resist bonuses and cpu usage the same? That change will result in armor EM resistance being around 70% with 3 T2 EANM and armor comp skills at 4, much more amarr friendly and you do it without making other ships needlessly harder to fit.
/signed blasterships have even with eanm fitted low resistances and they cant fit hardeners, because cap is a huge problem, plus theyre way short on cpu. this change will nerf gallente, but even more so the amarr. ccp rethink this and come up with a better solution, pls. i know u can do it.
|
DerArt1st
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 10:41:00 -
[73]
Oh noes... pls let the EAN like they are now. Just increase the thermaldamage on laser, pls.
|
Ragnor Dayton
Amarr Paxton Industries Paxton Federation
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 10:49:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Gabriel Karade Edited by: Gabriel Karade on 31/05/2007 10:33:35
Originally by: Ruciza Edited by: Ruciza on 31/05/2007 09:44:26
Well, dear blaster pilots, maybe you have to rethink your fittings. There exist energized membranes of all types and stripes. Those still have their CPU at 30, one of them gives you the resistance of 2 EANMs for their respective damage type. Tux said that he doesn't like the 2xEANM + DC combo. Now you can for example fit 3x Energized Membranes, and if you still want a DC, get rid of a damage mod. The thought behind this is clear. The essential question is:
WILL YOU FIT AN EM-PASSIVE MOD ON AN ARMOR TANK?
Answer: No you won't. It isn't worth the slot with 60% (+DC) default resists. EM damage buff. Either you have a resist hole, or no more 3x Magstabs, no more 1600mm Raxes/Ruppies with omnitank, it's awesome. You might also reconsider your nos.
This may also not be the end of it.
There already is a resistance hole, it's called explosive (54% resistance)...
And three passive membranes with maximum compensation skills gives you an awe inspiring resistance total of 60/52/65/65 (compared to 80/54/67/67 currently) - or in other words a 17% drop in normalised armour HP's.
So you get a much more balanced tank then! the drop in the other 3 is pretty marginal, so minimal drop in normalised armor HP, and EM is balanced to them. Don't see a problem. Makes lasers usable again. ------------------------------------------------ Just because your not paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you! |
SFShootme
The Carebear Stare
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 10:55:00 -
[75]
Armor hardners stack better than shield hardners, so the argument in the first post isn't exactly acurate.
And, have you ever tried to take down an abaddon? 90ish% resist?
Tho shall give Life, for Life. |
Eamz
Endgame.
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 11:06:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Kakita Jalaan Edited by: Kakita Jalaan on 31/05/2007 10:23:51
Originally by: IntegralHellsing lol CCP.
2 X EANM T2 = 20 more CPU. currently with best skills, you can't fracking fit 2 EANM T2 unless you use -3% or -5% turret cpu implant.
...and I think that's EXACTLY the point of this nerf. 42%+ (at compensations lvl 4) passive omni tank for 2 slots, 60 cpu and 4 grid is overpowered.
With the EANM nerf, it might actually be worth tanking versus specific damage types, instead of relying on the holy omni tank of EANMs. Energized single resist platings give 45% resists at compensation lvl 4, which is more than 2 EANMs with compensations at lvl 5. Same fitting as now, two slightly better resists but two holes (one of which is most likely EM, there is your effective Amarr damage boost). Alternatively, you can sacrifice 20 cpu worth of gank, if you absolutely want those 2 EANMs.
Sounds like a fairer tradeoff for me than the current situation.
edit: Hi Zirator, btw ^^
less than 40% with 2 eanm IIs at lvl 4 skills fyi.
|
Minas Reul
Dark Horizons Red Horizon
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 11:08:00 -
[77]
Not a particularly well thought out change, to be honest. Considering that many blaster ship setups relied on a named DC, fitting 3 passive hardeners instead of the DC+EANM actually takes 13 more cpu (which of course the ship doesn't have).
Given that the compensation skills take 4 days of training each just to get to level 4, it's shouldn't be too much to expect that the EANM compares favourably to a module that takes 3 days to train for, and has more resistance (albeit at the cost of cap).
If amarr damage is getting hurt by omni-tanks, then here's an idea: reduce the base em resistance on armor. I fly gallente ships, and i know i'd far rather be taking more damage from lasers that having to find faction items to make a sensible setup, or using active hardeners which are so vulnerable to nos and cap intensive weapons (not that those would ever get fixed )
|
Hectaire Glade
Forum Jockey
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 11:13:00 -
[78]
Originally by: murder one
The thing is, this change only affects a very narrow range of ships: CPU limited ships that armor tank. What ships are those? Blaster ships and Laser BS. Everything else won't be hurt by it.
GG CCP.
Don't forget the Zealot, significant CPU problems on it already
|
Davik Kurchek
The Littlest Hobos Betrayal Under Mayhem
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 11:16:00 -
[79]
Edited by: Davik Kurchek on 31/05/2007 11:16:40 So devs decide to nerf armor tanking to oblivion, dragging the race they're 'trying' to fix furher down the hole.
This change just doesn't have any logic at all. Funny thing is that the two races that will suffer from this are the ones that use the most cap to fire their guns + run other mods, and now you're making them use active tanks. Wich won't fit because of even more CPU requirement. ---
|
Kakita Jalaan
Viriette Commerce and Holding
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 11:17:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Gabriel Karade
There already is a resistance hole, it's called explosive (54% resistance)...
And three passive membranes with maximum compensation skills gives you an awe inspiring resistance total of 60/52/65/65 (compared to 80/54/67/67 currently) - or in other words a 17% drop in normalised armour HP's.
I assume you used 3 energized single, compared to 2 EANMs + DCU? I personally think this change doesn't look too bad, since everything but EM loses 2% resistance, which is not so terribly much. The 17% normalized HP drop is a bit misleading I think, since mainly it's a 50% effective "EM HP" drop from 80% to 60% resists and an average 6% (or so) drop versus everything else. AKA, not so bad versus everything but lasers and EM missiles.
The current explosive hole can only be exploited by Minnies and explosive missiles/drones, but not at all by regular Amarr and Gallente guns and Caldari rails.
Here are just some fitting alternatives to 2xEANM + DCU (currently 90/5 fitting, soon 110/5), off the top of my head: - EANM + Adaptive Nano Plating + DCU (77/49/63/63) for 20/1 less than now (possibly "best" alternative in terms of EHP drop) - EANM + Adaptive Nano + Energized Reactive (73/64/57/57) for 20 cpu less if you need exp resists - 3x energized platings (Gabriel's choice) (60/52/65/65) for 1 more grid - EANM + 2 energized platings (69/61/51 and 72 as you see fit on Gallente ships) for 10/1 more - DCU + 2 energized platings (66/58/45 and 70 as you see fit) for same fitting as now
Some percentages might be 1 too low, don't have all lvl 5 compensations. I don't think losing some effective HP on one or two resists is all that terribly bad, since in some cases you actually free up cpu on very cpu intensive fittings, as several people pointed out above. It also makes your setup less predictable, which is always good in my book. ______________ Join the Family |
|
Phish1
Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 11:22:00 -
[81]
Cos amarr have the best CPU in game
|
Keitaro Baka
Babylon Scientific and Industrial Enterprises Babylon Project
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 11:22:00 -
[82]
I honestly feel this is not a amarr boost, just a armour tank nerf.
So let's see, as quite a few people here have mentioned already, the solo aspect is getting nerfed a fair bit here (blasterthron, gundomi, even pulse amarr shippies) not to mention the small ships ..
Unless you rebuild your fits with heavy nos I think, which takes less cpu than a heavy t2 blaster ..
So we get back the use of nosDomis .. everybody loved those right? yay...
What it does mean for gang action is that a megathron will just start fitting for pure gank and will always fly with buddies.. and you were scared of a solo blasterthron? watch em rip through stuff with a buddy in a recon..
Does shield tanking need to be boosted for amarr to be effective? Does omni armour tanking have to be reduced to make amarr effective?
Why the frell would you change something only partly related to the problem and then expect the problem to be (partly) fixed??
I don't pretend to know what the solution would be for amarr but I certainly feel this is not part of it..
I do understand that by doing this you're forcing blaster pilots to either go for a nerfed active fit (same if you would lower the resistances btw) or to just fly around in gangs .. I thought you guys wanted to lower the blob feeling..
All the stuff above does not necessarily reflect my corp, my alliance or even me.. Drone guide.. |
Kakita Jalaan
Viriette Commerce and Holding
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 11:23:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Eamz
Originally by: Kakita Jalaan
42%+ (at compensations lvl 4) passive omni tank for 2 slots, 60 cpu and 4 grid is overpowered.
less than 40% with 2 eanm IIs at lvl 4 skills fyi.
Ok sorry, forgot stacking penalty. So it's 39-40%, still overpowered. ______________ Join the Family |
adriaans
Amarr Interstellar StarShipWrights Hedonistic Imperative
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 11:26:00 -
[84]
won't this nerf amarr also --sig-- Knowledge is power! |
Copine Callmeknau
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 11:57:00 -
[85]
Couldn't you simply use explo + kinetic + thermal energized instead of 2x EANM + DCU?
-----
Originally by: Uncle Chop Chop Harden the **** up
|
Valandril
Caldari Leela's Lamas
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 11:59:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Couldn't you simply use explo + kinetic + thermal energized instead of 2x EANM + DCU?
Won't fit on most ships (cpu issues) --- I swear to god, ccp choose changes in game via lottery system. |
Mysterlee
Gallente 5punkorp Betrayal Under Mayhem
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 12:02:00 -
[87]
Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Couldn't you simply use explo + kinetic + thermal energized instead of 2x EANM + DCU?
That would result in 60/50/64/64 resists on armour and no resists whatsoever on hull, thats a pretty big nerf. If we went with DCU and one of each passive hardener then we lose a mag stab or a plate depending on setups and still get lower resists than with dcu and 2 eanm.
|
Copine Callmeknau
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 12:12:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Mysterlee
Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Couldn't you simply use explo + kinetic + thermal energized instead of 2x EANM + DCU?
That would result in 60/50/64/64 resists on armour and no resists whatsoever on hull, thats a pretty big nerf. If we went with DCU and one of each passive hardener then we lose a mag stab or a plate depending on setups and still get lower resists than with dcu and 2 eanm.
So basically what you're saying, is that you will end up with balanced resists, and to truly tank you have to drop damage mods for a DCU?
Jeez, it's almost like they nerfed omni tanks and made lasers worthwhile or something....
-----
Originally by: Uncle Chop Chop Harden the **** up
|
Kakita Jalaan
Viriette Commerce and Holding
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 12:17:00 -
[89]
EANMs are overpowered in so far that they are better than any other armor tanking module, out of a whole zoo that is available. If the devs had wanted everybody to use the same module, they would only have made one. Single resist energized and non-energized platings, energized as well as non-energized regenerative platings and to some extent even active hardeners are made redundant by EANMs due to their overpowered tank/fitting.
If you don't believe that, check the market curves (price and turnover) for the above modules in Jita, which possibly best represent the usage of certain modules over others. ______________ Join the Family |
Tanaka Nari
|
Posted - 2007.05.31 12:18:00 -
[90]
Originally by: Valandril
Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Couldn't you simply use explo + kinetic + thermal energized instead of 2x EANM + DCU?
Won't fit on most ships (cpu issues)
Then 2 EANMs + DCU won't fit now, either.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |