| Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Andreus Ixiris
Gallente
Dichotomy
Total Comfort
   |
Posted - 2007.12.10 23:05:00 -
[1]
CCP, you need to undo some of the nerfs. Seriously. The Sensor Booster/Dampener and the Tracking Disruptor Nerfs were completely unneccessary and serve only to homogenise an already fairly flat and stale PvP situation, and the drone bandwidth nerfs to ships like the Myrmidon pretty much do the same thing. You need to undo this.
I freely admit, there are some things, like the Nos nerf, which have made the game work better for some people, and not for others, because it encourages other tactics to be used as well. The Nos nerf however, has not made the Nosferatu a useless module - it allows a stable capacitor to be maintained, but it doesn't completely screw over enemies for free.
But there are some nerfs that have, over time, really proved to have no effect on game balance and have only upset players, but you have not reversed them. These are the kind of nerfs you should reverse. The Sensor Booster/Dampener and Tracking Disruptor nerfs are a great example of this - they were absolutely fine before the nerf. They completely screwed up someone's ability to fight, but that was what they were meant to do. That's exactly what ECM did, and still does, because it hasn't been nerfed identically.
Now, Sensor Dampeners are all but useless, Sensor Boosters are an afterthought and the nerf to Tracking Disruptors make the already highly-shaky state of Amarrian EW completely unviable. This doesn't work. This isn't good for PvP. And in PvE, the rats still have the un-nerfed equipment, and, if that wasn't already a show of ridiculous and noncanonical imbalance, none of the EW equipment has any effect against them.
CCP, I understand why you don't undo nerfs - it means owning up to a mistake. Trust me when I say that I, and any other right-thinking EVE player will respect you much, much more if you man up, admit you made one and fix it than if you stubbornly refuse to admit the very existence of those same mistakes.
Scripts should be there to specialise E-War modules, not to make them basically functional.
CCP, please un-nerf some stuff. It won't cause the end of happiness and cute puppies.
-----
The views expressed in these posts, while inarguably correct, are not neccessarily the views of my corporation or alliance.
I never sleep. I wait. |
Jovienus
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 23:15:00 -
[2]
I agree CCP have gone OTT this time, the torpedo realignment with previous missile types has rendered my poor raven a get in ya face smack you once and hope you don't hit back ship.
WHY CCP why torpedoes were fine, they were balanced, having torpedos out ranging scramblers means targetted ship could run. Now you force Raven pilot to act suicidal just to get close enought to get a shot off! Missiles are range weapons not melee!
|
Darth Peanut
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 23:15:00 -
[3]
Dear OP:
Please following these three instructions.
(1) stop crying
(2) uninstall
(3) go back to WOW
|
Andreus Ixiris
Gallente
Dichotomy
Total Comfort
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 23:17:00 -
[4]
 Originally by: Darth Peanut
Dear OP:
Please following these three instructions.
(1) stop crying
(2) uninstall
(3) go back to WOW
No.
-----
The views expressed in these posts, while inarguably correct, are not neccessarily the views of my corporation or alliance.
I never sleep. I wait. |
Esmenet
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 23:21:00 -
[5]
It was very obvious that the myrmidon and damps were going to get nerfed sooner or later. The only thing that can be argued is if specialised damps ship should be boosted a bit.
Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes -Kreul Intentions ([email protected]) |
SoftRevolution
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 23:23:00 -
[6]
:'(
EVE RELATED CONTENT |
Jovienus
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 23:24:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Darth Peanut
Dear OP:
Please following these three instructions.
(1) stop crying
(2) uninstall
(3) go back to WOW
I have concluded that the only people that say these kinda things are those who aren't actually affected by the nerfs. If they were then I bet my bottom dollar I'd hear their whining from miles off.
|
Donna Maria
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 23:24:00 -
[8]
I though eve was a grown up game, TBH.
Sensor boosters, tracking disruptors and Dampeners still work, you just now have to choose what you want to boost, disrupt, or dampen. No more one module fits all.
ECM, wasnt around for the hey day, but I have had some jams on enemy ships so it still works, but the day of Multi Spec = win are over.
Nos Nerf, ya, it was a good thing. Now you can use Neuts, but kill your own cap, then switch to a Nos. More micromanagement but you get to do the same thing. Guess what, more micromanagement = more challenge.
OP..
Format computer
Call Verizon or Comcast tell them you want to cancel internet.
Burn computer..
Im the girl momma warned you about..
|
me bored
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 23:27:00 -
[9]
Roll back the stacking nerf and hp buffs!
|
Shiner BockBeer
Go Go Gadget ForumPostingAlt
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 23:34:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Andreus Ixiris
What he said.
Good:
Presenting a clear argument as to why these changes weren't necessary.
Bad:
Following up with this lovely little insult:
CCP, I understand why you don't undo nerfs - it means owning up to a mistake. Trust me when I say that I, and any other right-thinking EVE player will respect you much, much more if you man up, admit you made one and fix it than if you stubbornly refuse to admit the very existence of those same mistakes.
Seriously man, that's just infantile trolling and its not going to work.
Support Pregnant Ambulation! |
Joe Sales
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 23:43:00 -
[11]
That's not entirely correct. Sensor damps were a hot topic for a long time. Sensor damps deserve to be nerfed to some degree.
However, the other modules were nowhere near the danger zone of nerfing, yet CCP nerfed them. I understand CCP was probably focusing on fleet setups, where people stacked 2-3 sensor boosters and tracking comps. CCP wanted to encourage people to try other setups. That's fine, but those who use those mods for non-fleet setups are badly hit by this nerf. I'd rather see a stronger stacking penalty than 50% decrease in module effectiveness.
Seriously, there's no point in ever fitting a tracking computer now, for anything other than a fleet setup.
|
Karlemgne
Infinitus Odium
The Church.
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 23:45:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Shiner BockBeer
Originally by: Andreus Ixiris
What he said.
Good:
Presenting a clear argument as to why these changes weren't necessary.
Bad:
Following up with this lovely little insult:
CCP, I understand why you don't undo nerfs - it means owning up to a mistake. Trust me when I say that I, and any other right-thinking EVE player will respect you much, much more if you man up, admit you made one and fix it than if you stubbornly refuse to admit the very existence of those same mistakes.
Seriously man, that's just infantile trolling and its not going to work.
I believe, technically speaking, that his "infantile trolling" was successful the moment you responded to him, and used an adverb that implies he behaves like an infant.
-Karl
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 23:46:00 -
[13]
Damps were approaching 06 ECM levels, every ship seemed to use at least one. I dont think the nerfs that bad a thing, probably necessary if Im honest with myself (and I used to fly a nano-damp curse). Im just going to sit back, adapt a bit and see what CCP brings out next - Tech III cant be too far away now...
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Lord XSiV
Amarr
Elysium Labs
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 23:48:00 -
[14]
Try being Amarr and until then shut your yap about getting nerfed.
You should be happy that CCP only went this far.
|
Gort
Storm Guard Elite
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 00:26:00 -
[15]
I'm going to seriously start training Amarr.
They can't possibly be nerfed any more....
Can they?
G
--
When in doubt, empty the magazine. |
Ulstan
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 00:29:00 -
[16]
Quote:
The Sensor Booster/Dampener and the Tracking Disruptor Nerfs were completely unneccessary
No. The sensor booster nerf was needed. The sensor dampener nerf was badly needed.
RSD's may have gotten nerfed a bit too much, but they definitely needed a nerfing.
|
Xaroth Brook
Minmatar
BIG
Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 00:33:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Lord XSiV
Try being Amarr and until then shut your yap about getting nerfed.
You should be happy that CCP only went this far.
go back to wow, i've seen more than enough wtfpwnage being done by amarr ships to state they aren't as nerfed as people claim they are.
anyhow.. to the OP.. it's not that hard to train cruise missiles.. i mean.. the moment people started moaning about it when it appeared on singularity, you could have started training on cruise missiles and you'd be fielding T2 cruise launchers a week before the patch.
Just because you fail to adapt doesn't mean it is a nerf.
oh and yes, my main used to field torps, now he fields cruise missiles.
It was like a baby, it landed on my lap and was helpless and totally defenseless. Then I shot it and bragged about it on a killboard.
|
Ed Gein
lolcat incorporated
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 00:37:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Jovienus
Originally by: Darth Peanut
Dear OP:
Please following these three instructions.
(1) stop crying
(2) uninstall
(3) go back to WOW
I have concluded that the only people that say these kinda things are those who aren't actually affected by the nerfs. If they were then I bet my bottom dollar I'd hear their whining from miles off.
I have concluded that the only people that whine about nerfs are exploiting something overpowered to the fullest and when its gone realize they have no real pvp skill.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
What do you call the person that brings a gun to a knife fight?
The Winner. |
SiJira
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 00:38:00 -
[19]
ccp you jerks your players are so angry that they all logged on to break the most online record by over 10%  
Trashed sig, Shark was here |
shinsushi
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 00:44:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Gort
I'm going to seriously start training Amarr.
They can't possibly be nerfed any more....
Can they?
G
Thats what people said before the HP buff in revelations (longer combat = quicker capping out), and before the killing of cap recharge as an asset, and before the NOS nerf, and before the EW nerf.
An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. |
Achuramale
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 00:47:00 -
[21]
Sensor Dampeners are hardly worthless especially when you consider that the Sensor booster nerf was huge boost for them. I mean what do most people use dampeners for ? reducing locking range, and what do most people use sensor boosters for in non-sniping ships? scan resolution. Considering now most non-sniping ships don't have that extra 60% locking range buffer I don't think the dampener nerf was too much. Tbh I didn't like the idea at first either but eg. sensor boosters, everyone had at least one...doesn't say that they were too poor to be used at least. I personally think this will actually make PvP more fun in the end. |
chiefyuk
Amarr
StateCorp
Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 00:49:00 -
[22]
This thread fails!
The only useless nerf was dictor speed. now shush.
------------------------------------------------
You can kill the protester but you cant kill the protest
------------------------------------------------ |
watermelon420
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 00:57:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Lord XSiV
Try being Amarr and until then shut your yap about getting nerfed.
You should be happy that CCP only went this far.
All you whinners should listen to this guy
|
Righteous Deeds
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 01:00:00 -
[24]
Nothing needed nerfing OR buffing.
Counter-technologies, skills, and module/ship improvements may have needed to be released. Maybe. And if they did, they needed to be in limited release at first, with improvements coming along as the months/years ticked by. This is how technology works, and it makes for a better game.
It's so simple. You ADD to the game, you don't just change the rules.
|
Wacoede
Amarr
Allied Combat Team
Endless Horizon
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 01:01:00 -
[25]
if people couldn't see these nerfs coming after the last alliance tournament then you were blind or just that dumb (my personal thought is the alliance tournament is just a way for the devs to observe what tactics are being overused and then nerf them)
using different tactics = good (and this coming from someone who just finished training Recon ships 5 and is Amarr)
_______________________________
Originally by: Avery Fatwallet
when someone sez "eve is too tuff"
standard reply is "can i have stuff?"
|
SoftRevolution
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 01:02:00 -
[26]
Edited by: SoftRevolution on 11/12/2007 01:06:06
Quote:
It's so simple. You ADD to the game, you don't just change the rules.
Yes. Adding yet more content to balance as a counter to existing imbalances is a superb idea.
EVE RELATED CONTENT |
Karyuudo Tydraad
Caldari
Whiskey Pete's Drycleaning Services
The Acquisition
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 01:03:00 -
[27]
Some us actually like Trinity... |
Oddball
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 01:09:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Andreus Ixiris
Scripts should be there to specialise E-War modules, not to make them basically functional.
This.
|
Righteous Deeds
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 01:12:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Righteous Deeds on 11/12/2007 01:12:13
Originally by: Karyuudo Tydraad
Some us actually like Trinity...
That's as valid an opinion as those of us who dislike almost everything about it. Hope you're having fun. (Even while hoping you're in the minority ;) )
|
Buyerr
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 02:03:00 -
[30]
PLEASE rollback the forum IQ nerf!!!!
since you nerf 98% of all posters IQ to the minimum of r.etarded (81points) it have been impossible to use the forums.. PLEASE unnerf that :P
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |