EVE Search - Some love for the Amarr, new Dev Blog by Zulupark

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

Some love for the Amarr, new Dev Blog by Zulupark

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 34 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 16 post(s)
Julio Torres Phantom Squad Insurgency	Posted - 2008.01.31 14:34:00 - [421] I dont see much oomph for Amarr. But the Minmatar in me loves the boost EMP ammo received
Rastigan Caldari Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.01.31 14:35:00 - [422] Originally by: CCP Zulupark Do you dispute that Gallente get a damage bonus to EM drones when they get a bonus to all drones? I think you're just trying to misunderstand my answer here. EM drones are totally useless, to even suggest its usage to defend your argument is silly.. Please stop.... Thermal drones outdps EM drones even vs Sanshas.
Inflexible Shokei	Posted - 2008.01.31 14:37:00 - [423] Originally by: CCP Zulupark EM is the highest natural armor resistance on all ships. That means that you don't have to fit any resistance modules to harden specifically against it in pretty much any scenario and by fitting the omni-tank modules you can bring that resistance up to a quite ridiculous level while still hardening the other resistance types decently. But lowering highest resist will not ppl make to abandon omnitank modules. Lowering the lowest resist will do. Without holes to patch up or drastic nerf there is no reason to drop omnitanks. If there is need to fit specific hardeners, you don't have room to fit adaptives/invuls - problem solved. Also, I think EM resist is overrated - on decently fitted T2 ship EM is not usualy highest armor resist.

CCP Zulupark	Posted - 2008.01.31 14:41:00 - [424] Originally by: Rastigan Edited by: Rastigan on 31/01/2008 14:36:45 Originally by: CCP Zulupark Do you dispute that Gallente get a damage bonus to EM drones when they get a bonus to all drones? I think you're just trying to misunderstand my answer here. EM drones are totally useless, to even suggest its usage to defend your argument is silly.. Please stop.... Thermal drones outdps EM drones even vs Sanshas. Why dont you dissect the problem instead of a ham fisted change ? The biggest problem is Battleships vs Battleships and their omni tank... That's the whole point, to make EM drones and EM missiles useful again.

Cailais Amarr VITOC	Posted - 2008.01.31 14:41:00 - [425] CCP Zulupark, I think what people are after is a boost to Amarr: not an adjustment to every ship and race in the game. Applying a 'catch all' solution probably isnt going to work as there are far to many variables (as some have pointed out this solution actually improves some minmatar set ups aswell). C. Improved Low Sec Idea!!
Paulo Damarr	Posted - 2008.01.31 14:43:00 - [426] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Every ship shouldn't be able to do every single job in Eve equally well. So you agree Gallente ships shouldn't be able to use high damage output weapons, loads of drones along with good tanks and enough mid slots to be able to use MWDs sensor boosters and E war mods?

CCP Zulupark	Posted - 2008.01.31 14:44:00 - [427] Originally by: Cailais CCP Zulupark, I think what people are after is a boost to Amarr: not an adjustment to every ship and race in the game. Applying a 'catch all' solution probably isnt going to work as there are far to many variables (as some have pointed out this solution actually improves some minmatar set ups aswell). C. You must have missed my post where I stated that we have another devblog coming out very soon that lists some boosts to specific Amarr ships and Ewar.

Julio Torres Phantom Squad Insurgency	Posted - 2008.01.31 14:44:00 - [428] As I have posted many times before. A clever little cap boost to Amarr: Guns only use cap on shots that hit (Since lasers is speed of light, they wont have to fire if they dont get a 100% fire sollution)
Elve Sorrow Amarr Game-Over Insurgency	Posted - 2008.01.31 14:45:00 - [429] Edited by: Elve Sorrow on 31/01/2008 14:45:55 Originally by: CCP Zulupark That's the whole point, to make EM drones and EM missiles useful again. And his point is that EM drones will still be useless, because their BASE DAMAGE is lower. 1.38 * 24 (Praetor II) vs 1.92 * 24 (Ogre II) Thats, err, significant. Do Neutron IIs do ~45% more damage than Mega Pulse IIs? EDIT: Fixed pyramid quote.
Minerva Vulcan Caldari The Nexus Foundation Endless Horizon	Posted - 2008.01.31 14:46:00 - [430] Originally by: CCP Zulupark Originally by: Rastigan Edited by: Rastigan on 31/01/2008 14:36:45 Originally by: CCP Zulupark Do you dispute that Gallente get a damage bonus to EM drones when they get a bonus to all drones? I think you're just trying to misunderstand my answer here. EM drones are totally useless, to even suggest its usage to defend your argument is silly.. Please stop.... Thermal drones outdps EM drones even vs Sanshas. Why dont you dissect the problem instead of a ham fisted change ? The biggest problem is Battleships vs Battleships and their omni tank... That's the whole point, to make EM drones and EM missiles useful again. But this change isn't going to do that. _______________________________ Proof that Zulupark does in fact play EVE: Originally by: CCP Zulupark Some Gallente ships get damage bonuses to EM drones, some Caldari ships get bonuses to EM missiles

Dristra Amarr Shadows of the Dead The Dawn of Darkness	Posted - 2008.01.31 14:46:00 - [431] Originally by: CCP Zulupark Originally by: Minerva Vulcan Originally by: Kaalise You do realise that a boost to all damage types necessitates a boost to EM damage? Yeah, it does if you want to be technical about it... However, he was being specific... and no Gallente ship that I've seen gets a singular bonus to EM drones. Caldari still doesn't get bonus to EM missiles... unless you count one single ship... the Kestrel, who gets 5% to Thermal, Explosive, and EM, and 10% to Kinetic. I know when flying a Kestrel my first thought is "damn I wish I did more damage with these EM missiles." At least a few Caldari ships get a ROF bonus, that is in fact a damage bonus and it applies to all types of missiles. Do you dispute that Gallente get a damage bonus to EM drones when they get a bonus to all drones? I think you're just trying to misunderstand my answer here. Yes, it would appear many players are "trying" to misunderstand you. Ignore them or post constructive replies like you just did. On a side note, I don't really agree, or disagree on the resist changes, but I feel this thread is a big "bash the resist topic" and that another, more constructive thread about what can be done with the other Amarr issues is needed. I tried to keep one going myself, but it got locked because of this thread... It's great being Amarr isn't it. Support the introduction of well thought out Amarr solutions!

CCP Zulupark	Posted - 2008.01.31 14:49:00 - [432] Originally by: Elve Sorrow And his point is that EM drones will still be useless, because their BASE DAMAGE is lower. 1.38 * 24 (Praetor II) vs 1.92 * 24 (Ogre II) Thats, err, significant. Do Neutron IIs do ~45% more damage than Mega Pulse IIs? One change at a time. We're already looking at EM resistances, ships and ewar this patch. We've stated there's a lot of other options we're willing to look into once these have been tested thoroughly.

Damned Force Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2008.01.31 14:50:00 - [433] The DPS of the amarr ships is mostly ok, with some exception. To incrase the dps would be a bad idee because they would be even more powerfull against shield tanks and so even less peoples would use shield tanked ships in pvp. There are basicly 2 diferent problems which needs to be resolved: 1st make shield tanked ships worth to fly in pvp 2nd make energy weapons use less cap. The second one can be made easy... reduce the energy usage or incrase the ship bonuses and done. The first is more difficult, because thats a complex problem. But to make same changes to both would not incrase the usage of shield tanked ships and so the core of the problem would still there.
Leandro Salazar Aeon Industries	Posted - 2008.01.31 14:51:00 - [434] Edited by: Leandro Salazar on 31/01/2008 14:52:21 Originally by: CCP Zulupark Do you dispute that Gallente get a damage bonus to EM drones when they get a bonus to all drones? I think you're just trying to misunderstand my answer here. Seeing such fundamentally flawed attempts at logic written by a Dev is really quite disillusioning When you have EM drone doing 10 dps and thermal drone doing 20 dps (yes I pulled those numbers out of thin air but it is nearly that bad in reality I am afraid), and apply a 50% bonus on top of it, you still have thermal drones doing 50% more damage, i.e. there is NO boost for the EM damage. And slightly weakening the EM base resists won't change anything since the other drones still do a lot more base dps than EM and the other base resists are still lower. Of course I am somehow getting the impression that some people at CCP need math courses as well as game balance courses, especially in light of them throwing around absolute percentage changed rather than relative changes. And lastly like someone else already posted, giving us a simple 'reload all guns with ammo X' button would be a much bigger boost for Amarr than this half assed resistance change. So why not give us that? There is no 'n' in turret There is no 'r' in faction There is no 'a' in Scorpion There is no 'e' in Caldari There is no makeup in rogue drones
Minerva Vulcan Caldari The Nexus Foundation Endless Horizon	Posted - 2008.01.31 14:52:00 - [435] Originally by: Leandro Salazar Seeing such fundamentally flawed attempts at logic written by a Dev is really quite disillusioning Indeed. _______________________________ Proof that Zulupark does in fact play EVE: Originally by: CCP Zulupark Some Gallente ships get damage bonuses to EM drones, some Caldari ships get bonuses to EM missiles
PeacefullNub	Posted - 2008.01.31 14:53:00 - [436] CCP Zulupark So what do you think about laser jamming bug? Is it realy hard to fix it?
Mila Prestoc	Posted - 2008.01.31 14:56:00 - [437] Zulupark, do you forsee more EANM tanks? Or do you think people will accept shields and armour both being low EM resistance? Or do you think people will add a 4th hardener for EM? ------------------------- Originally by: "Lord Violent" EvE is slowly becoming a game for the stupid, catered to by devs as they lack ability to kill/survive anything.
Sakura Nihil Stimulus	Posted - 2008.01.31 14:57:00 - [438] Edited by: Sakura Nihil on 31/01/2008 14:59:06 Here's the simple answer from where I'm standing. Give Amarrian laser ships, or if you're feeling generous all Amarrian ships, a flat role bonus of say 50% cap reduction, adjustable numbers there of course. At the same time, remove the cap bonus gained by ship skills on a number of ships, like the Armageddon, Apocalypse, Harbinger, Prophecy, et cetera... What do you replace it with? That's the fun part, you give Amarrian ships their second real bonus, and in turn increase the capabilities of the ship to make it more attractive for PvP. Already have a rate of fire bonus on a ship, consider adding a damage bonus to increase DPS and slice through that well-resisted armor faster, or if you see that as too much, perhaps a grid increase per level, or better tracking, or a better tank, whatever you can think of. This would have an interesting side effect, namely, that ships like the Apoc might have a chance to be given a real purpose - as it stands right now, that ship has lots of capacitor, and that's about it. Replace that capacitor use bonus with say a damage bonus, or ROF bonus, and suddenly it might become a lot more seen in fleets, as it may be a competitive ship now. Upsides to this style of a fix? Its been done before, as evidenced by the Sansha's ships, its simple to do, and focuses on buffing Amarr over indirectly nerfing all races. Cons? It weakens shield-tanking further, which may decease the number of Caldari ships seen in combat as it is. If this is the case, consider a simple decrease in the armor's EM resist, rather than doing that and decreasing explosive damage against shields.
Minerva Vulcan Caldari The Nexus Foundation Endless Horizon	Posted - 2008.01.31 14:59:00 - [439] Originally by: Sakura Nihil Here's the simple answer from where I'm standing. Give Amarrian laser ships, or if you're feeling generous all Amarrian ships, a flat role bonus of say 50% cap reduction, adjustable numbers there of course. At the same time, remove the cap bonus gained by ship skills on a number of ships, like the Armageddon, Apocalypse, Harbinger, Prophecy, et cetera... What do you replace it with? That's the fun part, you give Amarrian ships their second real bonus, and in turn increase the capabilities of the ship to make it more attractive for PvP. Already have a rate of fire bonus on a ship, consider adding a damage bonus to increase DPS and slice through that well-resisted armor faster, or if you see that as too much, perhaps a grid increase per level, or better tracking, or a better tank, whatever you can think of. This would have an interesting side effect, namely, that ships like the Apoc might have a chance to be given a real purpose - as it stands right now, that ship has lots of capacitor, and that's about it. Replace that capacitor use bonus with say a damage bonus, or ROF bonus, and suddenly it might become a lot more seen in fleets, as it may be a competitive ship now. Upsides to this style of a fix? Its been done before, as evidenced by the Sansha's ships, its simple to do, and focuses on buffing Amarr over indirectly nerfing all races. I like it. _______________________________ Proof that Zulupark does in fact play EVE: Originally by: CCP Zulupark Some Gallente ships get damage bonuses to EM drones, some Caldari ships get bonuses to EM missiles
Dezzereth Two Swords Guild	Posted - 2008.01.31 15:02:00 - [440] Originally by: CCP Zulupark Quote: This is a stealth Minmatar boost! 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. You still don't get it? This little thing, does it ring a bell? No? It is not about the lower EM resist, but about lower EXP resist. This ammunition Type tears easier through shields (lower EXP) AND through armor (lower EM) with these changes. Where is that NOT a boost to Projectile weapons, ie Minmatar? Also you seem to forget that you also make Amarr ships themselves more vulnerable to EM damage by this (and ofc to EXP to shield). Make the cap of Amarr ships bigger, or give the amarr ships a role bonus to laser's cap use, or combine these options. That would be basically the only thing that is needed here, instead of a dozen changes that will likely screw up things again heftily, and I bet we will wait an other 4 years till we get rid of your "boosts", if at all. Will NPC's resists be "adjusted" too? What about Capitals? Seriously CCP, please for the love of the MMO gods, get either TomB back or get a new guy overlooking game balance.

Dezzereth Two Swords Guild	Posted - 2008.01.31 15:06:00 - [441] Originally by: Sakura Nihil Edited by: Sakura Nihil on 31/01/2008 14:59:06 Here's the simple answer from where I'm standing. Give Amarrian laser ships, or if you're feeling generous all Amarrian ships, a flat role bonus of say 50% cap reduction, adjustable numbers there of course. At the same time, remove the cap bonus gained by ship skills on a number of ships, like the Armageddon, Apocalypse, Harbinger, Prophecy, et cetera... What do you replace it with? That's the fun part, you give Amarrian ships their second real bonus, and in turn increase the capabilities of the ship to make it more attractive for PvP. Already have a rate of fire bonus on a ship, consider adding a damage bonus to increase DPS and slice through that well-resisted armor faster, or if you see that as too much, perhaps a grid increase per level, or better tracking, or a better tank, whatever you can think of. This would have an interesting side effect, namely, that ships like the Apoc might have a chance to be given a real purpose - as it stands right now, that ship has lots of capacitor, and that's about it. Replace that capacitor use bonus with say a damage bonus, or ROF bonus, and suddenly it might become a lot more seen in fleets, as it may be a competitive ship now. Upsides to this style of a fix? Its been done before, as evidenced by the Sansha's ships, its simple to do, and focuses on buffing Amarr over indirectly nerfing all races. Cons? It weakens shield-tanking further, which may decease the number of Caldari ships seen in combat as it is. If this is the case, consider a simple decrease in the armor's EM resist, rather than doing that and decreasing explosive damage against shields. More constructive than my gibberish, and definitely the right direction to go. Actually it would be so awesome, if each race had a special bonus for certain modules or module types. Amarr -50% cap laser use, Caldari maybe -5% Missile PG use, etc.
Tiny Tortuga Amarr	Posted - 2008.01.31 15:09:00 - [442] ****, I started an amarr char because of the hardmode aspect, and now it's getting buffed?:\\\

CCP Zulupark	Posted - 2008.01.31 15:15:00 - [443] Originally by: PeacefullNub CCP Zulupark So what do you think about laser jamming bug? Is it realy hard to fix it? I'm not a programmer so I really wouldn't have any idea.


CCP Zulupark	Posted - 2008.01.31 15:16:00 - [444] Originally by: Mila Prestoc Edited by: Mila Prestoc on 31/01/2008 14:56:16 Zulupark, do you forsee more EANM tanks? Or do you think people will accept shields and armour both being low EM resistance when using tripple active hardeners? Or do you think people will add a 4th hardener specifically for EM? I honestly can't predict it either way. That's why the changes are on SISI, to see what you, the players, do with it.

Damned Force Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2008.01.31 15:19:00 - [445] Originally by: CCP Zulupark Originally by: Mila Prestoc Edited by: Mila Prestoc on 31/01/2008 14:56:16 Zulupark, do you forsee more EANM tanks? Or do you think people will accept shields and armour both being low EM resistance when using tripple active hardeners? Or do you think people will add a 4th hardener specifically for EM? I honestly can't predict it either way. That's why the changes are on SISI, to see what you, the players, do with it. Yeah, just the prob with siSi is, what we saw in the past u would implement even if the community think is a bad idea
Richard Masterson Virulence. Insurgency	Posted - 2008.01.31 15:21:00 - [446] And I thought CCP wanted to make fights last longer?
Damned Force Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2008.01.31 15:26:00 - [447] Originally by: Richard Masterson And I thought CCP wanted to make fights last longer? They are longer, because laaaaaag
PeacefullNub	Posted - 2008.01.31 15:34:00 - [448] Originally by: CCP Zulupark Originally by: PeacefullNub CCP Zulupark So what do you think about laser jamming bug? Is it realy hard to fix it? I'm not a programmer so I really wouldn't have any idea. Something like this used now: <reload> remove ammo delay 2s swich ammo to (ammo number) <.> If 2 guns are reloaded at the same (2s) time they WILL use 1 cry (if they are not stacked) - in the end only 1 turret will be reloaded. Something like this must been used to fix it: <reload> remove ammo swich ammo to (ammo number) delay 2s <.> Simply replacing operation sequenses would help <reload> remove ammo stack ammo swich ammo to (ammo number) if ammo allready used then use next ammo delay 2s <.> No more jammings becouse of laggs And it takes not much time (5-15m to fix open sourse)
Carl Smite Gallente Dracula Order Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.31 15:40:00 - [449] U're trying to fix something that doesn't work by breaking something that works just fine... wtf? i'm all for amarr boost, make their lasers run on less power / make them equal in dmg to blasters/ autocannons / rails / artys or whatever you make them but DON'T NERF THE RESISTANCES !!!!! And if you DO nerf the resists, then add an extra low slot for all gallente / amarr / minmatar ships so they can compensate; and an extra med slot for caldari. Originally by: Laechyd Eldgorn Most important is that reducing shield exp resist helps least amarr ships. And most minmatar who are shooting EMP and faction EMP and just moar EMP in pvp, not caring much of resists since they can just speed tank. Like someone already said amarr problem never was damage or damage types. Just few particular ships and lack of some ships for roleplayer newbies who put civilian shield boosters on their ships, thinking it's good fit since it permaruns. /signed
shuckstar Gallente Hauling hogs	Posted - 2008.01.31 15:46:00 - [450] Originally by: LordVodka Edited by: LordVodka on 30/01/2008 19:31:39 Originally by: Rells Originally by: Tempest Kane Guys, you seem to be missing the point a bit. Its not so much the DPS of amarr thats the problem. Its the lack of cap to sustain the weapons even with max level 5 cap & weapon skills. You need to increase Amarr base capacitor on all ships that use turrets. ABSOLUTELY! Now how do we get CCP to realize what every single Amarr pilot knows? Any suggestions? -- Rells /Signed A 10% amarr capacitor boost, or just a reduction in Energy Turret cap use would work so many wonders! /signed Zulupark FTL



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 34 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.