| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 16 post(s) |
Wu Jiun
   |
Posted - 2008.01.31 02:56:00 -
[1]
I am happy to see that you finally reached the drawing board state. Thats a nice boost for laser damage and i won't exactly complain.
Still here are some points to be considered(probably posted serveral times already but what can i do):
- You mention the amarr problem as if this blog and the changes were aimed specifically at amarr. Yet it is indeed a general boost of exp/em as damage types. As amarr don't really do exp on their laser ships (short of drones) you could also call it a minmatar or caldari or even a gallente drone boat boost.
This isn't necessarily bad. On the other hand a ravens siege launcher already outdamage megapulses from 0 to 45km(med range=supposed laser specialty...). Now they can do 100% em or 100% exp and as such they profit actually much more from these changes as say a geddon that has basically about 50:50 or about 80:20 em/therm fixed. Same for minnie ships ofc although they don't have these kind of "gank" dmg and are still bound to specific damage type ratios.
- A tri hardener + dc tank already had em resistance quite low. Now it gets even less em resistance. On the other hand the kin/therm/exp hitpoints don't really improve significantly against combinations of eanm/dc and plates. And on top of that active hardeners are harder to fit.
In my opinion a tank combination that usually uses 1 less slot, less cpu and less (=no) cap should be inferior at least in some considerable situations.
- Decreasing the shield resistance is consistent. On the other hand i have never seen a minmatar complaining about high exp resistances. Of course if shieldtanks ever become more common in pvp this problem might have been more apparent.
But the fundamental difference is that minnies can adjust their dmg to more reasonable combinations. This has drawbacks but its different from a situation where you are just stuck with the dmg you do. Ravens and other missile platforms get a plain boost from this although dmg types are obviously much less of a problem there. So i am still not convinced that applying the same logic to both dmg types is anything more than consistent.
It reminds me of the script introduction where lots of modules got the same treatmeant totally unrelated in any way to the usefulness and or popularity of specific mods.
- What really is important now is looking at specific ships that need help. I know you are going to do this and i hope you will come up with good fixes. Ships to be looked at(imo):
Apoc - Maller - Omen - Prophecy - Pilgrim - Punisher
After looking at these ships the according t2 hulls that are laser ships need to be revised too obviously. Some ships like the Omen mostly need fitting while others like the Apoc or Maller have bad fitting too but whats more important they lack a role. "Tank" is not a role for a cruiser because of how cruiser combat works. And being the only ship that can use your racial sniping weapons for more than 1.5minutes isn't one either.
- Giving amarr ships distinct roles is imo the hardest but most important point. Ships should have their own special flavour besides lower cost and a little bit more drone dmg instead of gun damage here and there (like with geddon vs. abaddon).
Amarr ships finally need some 2nd bonuses. For this the cap reduction bonus needs to go. I know this is lots of work and its difficult because some ships could become "too good". So its really a matter of going through the ships one by one and looking specifically what it needs without making it "pwn".
I think this is extremely important. The original motivation for extra high cap usage and the inherent cap bonus was that lasers were just plain better than other weapon systems.
This is no longer true for some time now.
Tuxford once (long time ago) said lasers should in theory be superior to all other weapons. Today they are better sometimes and sometimes worse. Like all other weapons. They shouldn't have the drawbacks of "superweapons" then either.
|
Wu Jiun
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 06:58:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Wu Jiun on 31/01/2008 07:05:07
Edited by: Wu Jiun on 31/01/2008 07:00:36
 Originally by: Roemy Schneider
especially not with the usually higher amount of turret slots.
Higher amount of slots compared to what exactly?
Some ships and that come to mind (if there are more hardpoints that hislots i give only one of the possible configurations that uses all hislots):
Punisher 3t - Rifter 3t + 1l - incursus 3t
Maller 5t - Thorax 5t - Rupture 4t + 2l - Caracal 5l
Zealot 4t - Deimos 5t - Muninn 5t + 2l for example - Eagle 4t + 2l
Prophecy 6t + 1l - Brutix 7t - Ferox 5t + 2l for example - Cyclone 5t + 3l
Geddon 7t - Domi 6t - Scorp 4l+4t - Phoon 4l + 4t
Apoc 8 - Megathron 7t + 1l - Tempest 6t + 2l - Raven 6l
Abaddon 8t - Hyperion 8t - Maelstrom 8t - Rokh 8t
So what we see here is that amarr can usually mount the same number of weapons as everyone else. They are more focused towards turrets than say Minmatar or Caldari obviously though. Gallente usually have the same or more turrets.
So judging from this (of course one would have to look at more ships but i am lazy) amarr are more in the middle. And given that they mostly have no launchers at all it appears only reasonable that they have more turret slots than minmatar.
Furthermore if we accounted for the different damage bonuses (or lack of) on the ships we'd see the numbers being more in favourite of the other races generally speaking.
Of course some of these ships aren't comparable at all and thus its pretty inappropriate to compare their weapon hardpoints. However after this quick (thus superficial) comparison i'd really like to know which ships you talk about specifically.
|
Wu Jiun
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 17:07:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Minerva Vulcan
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
This change boosts EM damage, no matter what faction is using it. Some Gallente ships get damage bonuses to EM drones, some Caldari ships get bonuses to EM missiles etc.
Um...
Are you an idiot?
Last I checked Gallente ships get bonuses to all drones... certainly not just EM drone damage...
And Caldari bonuses go towards Kinetic missile damage.
Please play the game before making any more changes.
kthx.
I wonder who is the idiot here. I mean obviously neither gallente nor caldari recieve specific em bonuses.
On the other hand the drone damage bonus will apply to all drones including the em ones. And a rof bonus like on the raven will apply to all missiles including the em ones. This is clearly what he meant and only someone with
a whole lot of frustration would step so low to deliberately misunderstand him just to make a cheap shot. You really should go back to kindergarden, you know?
The point was that missile ships (with generic dmg or rof bonuses) and drone boats (with generic drone damage bonuses) can all profit from em dmg being more useful. If you didn't understand that than maybe you should learn what "context" means?
|
Wu Jiun
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 17:36:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Wu Jiun on 31/01/2008 17:36:12
Originally by: Minerva Vulcan
Except this change won't make anyone use EM Drones or missiles anymore than they already are. There's still going to be better to use all around... so him trying to spin this with that to make a point is just... well... pointless.
Em is best resistance to shoot at on a lot of t2 tanks just fyi. Yes, generally speaking on armor you'd still prefer exp and em on shields for both of which the performance won't change. However this is just for t1 resistances. All my t2 ships have lowest resistance em(well except the minnies ones ofc). If you are too stubborn to accept that this can be useful so be it.
Originally by: Minerva Vulcan
He made it sound like Gallente and Caldari has specific bonuses to EM damage directly. His words, not mine.
Yeah, it sounded like that. But from the context it was clear
that it wasn't what he meant. So, why make a big deal of it? Its just nitpicking to make yourself feel better. Way to go.
|
| |
|