| 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) |
Jonny JoJo
Amarr
The Imperial Guards
   |
Posted - 2008.02.01 12:13:00 -
[631]
Edited by: Jonny JoJo on 01/02/2008 12:13:45
 Originally by: Ishan Mons
wow...
caldari and gallente both need cap for their guns, but not drones or missiles... just like amarr needs cap for guns but not drones or missiles.
and there is the whole ammo thing
If you have more than 4 turrets, reloading in Amarr takes longer. Amarr Ammo decays randomly, e.g Navy AM crystal dissapears at random due to how decay works. Ammo costs a ton more for Amarr than any other racec - Would you pvp in a Torp raven carrying 25,000+ T2/faction Torps in your cargo? That is what Amarr has to do isk wise.
All races apart from amarr have a Cap free pvp bs option. For example, a PvP Torp Raven is a dangerous opponent, Any Minmatard combat Ship is powerful, and also the Gallente with its feared Dominix for pvp.
Think - Why are these ships good for PvP? They dont use cap on weapons. Even caldari Gallente ships that do use cap, the amount used is a fraction of Amarr's.
CCP lets bite the buttle and remove cap use for all turrets altogether. Lower total cap amounts if need be for all races, but remove the broken 2003 concept of cap weapons, as its 2008 and giving minmatar a 100% cacp reduction has paved the way
Sig locked, lack of Eve content |
Chrysalis D'lilth
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 12:16:00 -
[632]
If you looking to fix Amarr by changing resist, change EM resists only.
Changing Explosive resists too just makes absolutely no sense, otherwise it is just counter productive.
TBH, besides EM resists on Minimatar T2 ships, i'd leave shields as they are. They are by far the least popular tank to fit when it comes to pvp, and really don't need nerfing, this would perhaps encourage people to fit more shield tanks than armour tanks.
|
Tsu'ko
Valley Forge
STELLAR LEGION
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 12:22:00 -
[633]
Edited by: Tsu''ko on 01/02/2008 12:24:58
Shield tanked ships issue:
Introduce warp disruptors on hi-slot.
Would help Amarr a bit too as we can spare a mid slot for cap module instaid (unless a neut or smartbomb is fitted perhaps)
Would give Minmatar another reason to shield tank
Gallente well they will be even more pwn :P.
Don't see much cons with this idea, anyone got one?
|
Ogul
Caldari
ZiTek Deepspace Explorations
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 12:32:00 -
[634]
Originally by: Tsu'ko
Shield tanked ships issue:
Introduce warp disruptors on hi-slot.
Would help Amarr a bit too as we can spare a mid slot for cap module instaid (unless a neut or smartbomb is fitted perhaps)
Would give Minmatar another reason to shield tank
Gallente well they will be even more pwn :P.
Don't see much cons with this idea, anyone got one?
Oh and we might see more caldari ships in pvp lol.
No.
Warp disruptors are only part of the issue, you need webs, mwds, cap boosters too and I don't think they will all become high slot modules. Additionally, shield tanks tend to have less mid slots than armor tankers have low slots. The fact that active shield tanking demands even more slots (boost amp, cap booster) doesn't help either.
---
This is a war declaration, issued from your alt corp. It is used to gank people in high sec. |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 12:34:00 -
[635]
Originally by: Tsu'ko
Oh and we might see more caldari ships in pvp lol.
I see many of em, drakes drakes drakes and falcons and did I mention drakes?
Amarr pvp Vids: Inq - I Inq - II |
xOmGx
Warriors tribe
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 12:35:00 -
[636]
No..No..NOWAY 100% cap reduction on lasers!!!
-50% for all lasers (pulses and beams)
replace cap bonus to somesing usefull
Make some ship's in line with Inquisitor!!!! (he is the only T1 ship with rockets)
Example:
remake Maller +10% to EM Heavy+HeavyAssault Missile damage +5% ress /lvl
remake Omen - more slots 5% ROF +5% ressistance
Remake Apoc - xx% to EM damage Cruise and Torpedo missiles +5% resistnce
Make 1 line ships fully dedicated to missiles!!!
no change to resistance are needed.
No Pain - No Gain |
SonOfAGhost
Minmatar Munitions and Tactical Assets Repository
Zzz
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 13:07:00 -
[637]
Originally by: Miyamoto Shigesuke
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
By far the largest problem is that armor tanking is quite a lot more popular than shield tanking.
You say this then nerf shield tanking more. Simply brilliant! 
Exactly. Why not make the change outlined to armour EM resistances first, then wait a month or two and revisit the shield explosive nerf. Since shield tanks are generally inferior for PvP now, why not see how it balances out first? Maybe it should get the full 10%, maybe 5%, maybe 0%. Making a change that, instead of fixing, actually maintains an imbalance you've identified yourselves makes no sense.
---
Originally by: Treelox
Dear Mod,
Yes it was worth it.
---
Lag? GTFOOJ! |
Reatu Krentor
Minmatar
Void Spiders
Fate Weavers
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 13:10:00 -
[638]
I just had a random thought on a fix for amarr and their coveted 2nd bonus they claim to need changed.
What about changing a skill, after all why do all turret skills have to be 5% damage boost per level. What if you would make lasers have that 25% extra damage out of the box and then change the skill bonus to reduce cap by a certain amount BUT only for amarr ships.
The extra damage could make the lasers usefull on other ships however so I would say, also increase cap use by 50% while changing the cap bonus to 13.5% to keep maxed skill cap use approximately the same as now.
End result of this would be that only amarr ships can really benefit from lasers, as well as free up the bonus slot used by cap use bonus on quite a few amarr ships. In addition low-skilled amarr pilots would do nice damage out of the box but would run into cap issues much sooner.
-- stuff -- |
Commander Awkward
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 13:13:00 -
[639]
Did you realize that nerfing resists will make freighters easier to suicide in highsec? These ships has no way of compensating for lower resists with changes to the fitting setup.
|
Tobias Sjodin
Ore Mongers
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 13:14:00 -
[640]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
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.
I just can't believe how you go from a sound idea, which is to lower the EM-resists to a slippery slope of flawed argument "Well, hey let's nerf EXP resists on shields while we're at it".
You said it yourself. ONE CHANGE AT A TIME.
"Bring back the pain."
|
Sky Marshal
Aeden
Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 13:29:00 -
[641]
Edited by: Sky Marshal on 01/02/2008 13:34:33
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
By far the largest problem is that armor tanking is quite a lot more popular than shield tanking.
I think that in this topic, we can retrieve so much contradictions between CCP words and CCP actions that we can write a book.
I still remember when CCP said that it is more easy to nerf a ship than boost the same ship type of others races, and yes, this had a sense. But today, it is more easy to nerf all ships of all races, and boost Matar, than only boost Amarr... Well, why not, after all...
Guess I have to forget my Cerberus for soloplay. It is already difficult to have a correct tank and a warp disruptor, without stasis..., but now with this boost for Matar, I prefer stay in gangs...
_______
16/20 Dragon : ½ Great Game +
13/20 Revelations : ½ Desyncs... +
11/20 Trinity : ½ BBSOD, Bugs, Desyncs, F***** Nerfs +
10/20 v1.1 : ½ [...] + EXP shield nerf +
Time to go back, CCP. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 13:30:00 -
[642]
Edited by: Pinky Denmark on 01/02/2008 13:34:11
who cares about freighters 
Zulupark is completely right that the fix should be towards EM damage... Im just not believing it's done right, or at least the "logical" (my a$$) consequences is way off.
Dropping EM on armor is the short term working solution, BUT:
1)Armor tank vs Shield tank for PvP is the real issue
2)Efficiency of omni tanks is the major issue of armor vs shield for PvP
3)Having to drop expl resist on shield because we have recharge is wrong
The recharge might work on very few setups, but those setups are basically already very weak against EM damage... Besides Having same total amount of resist points on basic T1 shield/armor tanks doesn't have a bad effect as the recharge on shields barely compensates on an active shield tank for the lack of practically available tankslots...
Edit:
Besides armor tankers also have the compensation of sheer amount of armor on ships and fitting of plates. Shield recharge really only matters in a few specific setups...
-
I'm a nice guy!!
But hook me up with some pew pew, because I'm really bored... |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 13:34:00 -
[643]
Originally by: Commander Awkward
Did you realize that nerfing resists will make freighters easier to suicide in highsec? These ships has no way of compensating for lower resists with changes to the fitting setup.
OMG, when will the Im-not-secure-enough-in-high-sec whine squad gonna give up? You whined and they boosted sentries, you whined they boosted concord now you cant take a little resist loss? LoL
Amarr pvp Vids: Inq - I Inq - II |
Aindrias
Amarr
Labteck Corporation LTD.
Libertas Fidelitas
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 13:36:00 -
[644]
I don't believe the Dev should look at EM and Exp as opposites where if they do something to one they must do to the other. Shield tanks and Armor tanks are imbalanced and the 10% fix to EM may help fix that, but the 10% adjustment to Exp just reverses the balancing.
There's no math there, but they are no Yin and Yang.
On a postive, I'm happy things are in the works for Amarr, it makes this Player the Happy! =-)
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 13:38:00 -
[645]
Originally by: Pinky Denmark
Dropping EM on armor is the short term working solution, BUT:
1)Armor tank vs Shield tank for PvP is the real issue
2)Efficiency of omni tanks is the major issue of armor vs shield for PvP
3)Having to drop expl resist on shield because we have recharge is wrong
Uhm say what?
Shields already have less resistance total so when they remove 10% off armor EM resist they are going to nerf all armor tanks. Why wouldnt they nerf the same amount off EX on shields? It does make sense and I could come up with the same crap argument as you to counter "well why did they nerf armor tanks, we already have trouble tanking in pve unlike shield tanks that are uber there".
You want shields to be equally good + full rack of tackle then I think shields need a serious nerf to get inline with armor tanking in pve. I just dont think any shield tankers are willing to give that up. You just want to totally dominate pve tanking AND now pvp tanking.
There is nothing wrong with -10% EM on armor and -10% EX on shields except that EMP ammo is getting a big boost from it. That may be debatable if its a good or bad thing.
Amarr pvp Vids: Inq - I Inq - II |
Nicholas Barker
MASS
Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 13:51:00 -
[646]
this is like making 2 guys fight, one has a bat, the other has an m16. So you think, oh lets even this up and break the m16, so they can only bat each other, rather than actually fixing the original problem.
---
|
adriaans
Amarr
Advanced Capital Ship Designs
Hephaestus Rising
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 13:52:00 -
[647]
Edited by: adriaans on 01/02/2008 13:53:21
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong
Originally by: Cpt Abestos
There was no need to screw with every other race's ships to fix amarr. The biggest problems amarr have is that there a very few ships that are worthwhile, the cap use of lasers, the fitting reqs on beams, and to a lesser extent the effectiveness of em dmg.
If you notice that the newer amarr ships(harb,abso etc) tend to be on fairly equal footing with their counterparts, that should show that you need to revamp the older amarr ships to update them.
What I would do is.
-Reduce Lasercap usage by %50-60
-Remove the cap usage bonus and replace it with something useful
-Reduce the fitting of beams considerably.
-Increase the amount of thermal dmg t2 longrange ammo does
-Increase the amount of thermal dmg that t1 ammo does slightly
Heres an example of how I would change the bonuses on a few amarr ships.
-Punisher - %5 dmg %5 resists
-Crusader - %10 dmg
-Retribution - Drop 1 high for a mid, %5 resists same bonuses per af skill lvl
-Omen - 5th turret, more pg/cpu - %5 rof %7.5 tracking
-Maller - %5 dmg %5 resists slightly more pg
-Zealot - 5th turret slightly more pg %5 rof %7.5 tracking per cruiser lvl same bonus per hac lvl
-Devoter- 5th turret slightly more pg %5 dmg %5 resists pre cruiser lvl same bonus per hictor lvl
-Prophecy - %5 dmg %5 resists
-Harbringer - %5 rof %7.5 tracking
-Absolution - %5 resists %5 dmg per bc lvl %5 rof %either a %10 range or %7.5tracking per cmd ship lvl
-Armageddon - %5 rof %7.5 tracking
-Apoc - %5 dmg %10 range
-Abbadon - keep the same
something like this would focus on the amarr problems without broad nerfs to everyone.
This would be a huge change but it would put amarr rightfully where they should be: Mid range domination.
this, and it is sooooo much more simple and has much a less of a consequence for all races ships, this is what we(amarr pilots) have been asking for!
edit: apoc could be wanted to be a missile boat....
-sig-
Support the introduction of Blaze M crystals for Amarr! (Or make Amarr the only race able to deal EM damage from turrets).
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 13:55:00 -
[648]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Uhm say what?
Im not saying I want all that - But apparantly most pvp-people are prefering/using armor tanks for a reason... Why is that? In the fix on EM damage we either have to get more people on using shield tanks or nerf armor tanks.
-
I'm a nice guy!!
But hook me up with some pew pew, because I'm really bored... |
Darth Felin
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 13:59:00 -
[649]
Well after some testing I have to withdraw my support for those changes. They really solves issues with omnitank for T1 ships (we are talking about BS mostly) but it will have serious side effect to T2 ships and their tanking abilities. I fly mostly gallente ships and made some testing for them. Their tank had to be completly reworked. As result I had to use more EANMs. It did not change resist against EM much and just make EXP resist lower.
P.S.
BTW EM was one of the lowest or lowest resist on my ships before changes.
P.P.S. Some my mates fly Amarr ships only and their complains were about capacitor not about their damage.
|
Ogul
Caldari
ZiTek Deepspace Explorations
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 13:59:00 -
[650]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
There is nothing wrong with -10% EM on armor and -10% EX on shields except that EMP ammo is getting a big boost from it. That may be debatable if its a good or bad thing.
Right. Given the (completely fictional) situation of damage A being broken on tank B and damage C being fine on tank D, the obvious course of action is to modify both.
And why is exp getting nerfed? Why not kin or therm? All of them could be used to fix the magical resistance ratio between shields and armor that seems to be tattooed into people's brains.
---
This is a war declaration, issued from your alt corp. It is used to gank people in high sec. |
Rastigan
Caldari
Ars ex Discordia
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 14:00:00 -
[651]
Originally by: Shadowsword
Originally by: Hugh Ruka
I see no need for such a general change.
Then, how do you propose to deal with a blasterthron fitted with 2 EANM II, 2 damage mods, damage control II, 2 1600 plates and 3 trimark rigs? You can take any amarr gunship to try to kill it.
changing the base EM resist on armor was the right thing to do. Wether 10% are enough, or other races got more of a boost, remain to be seen.
A double plated triple trimarked Blasterthron is incredibly slow, and could be soloed by a Curse.
|
Hugh Ruka
Caldari
Exploratio et Industria Morispatia
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 14:07:00 -
[652]
Originally by: Shadowsword
Originally by: Hugh Ruka
I see no need for such a general change.
Then, how do you propose to deal with a blasterthron fitted with 2 EANM II, 2 damage mods, damage control II, 2 1600 plates and 3 trimark rigs? You can take any amarr gunship to try to kill it.
changing the base EM resist on armor was the right thing to do. Wether 10% are enough, or other races got more of a boost, remain to be seen.
You can do the same to him, if you don't need fitting and cap mods in lows to just get guns going. When amarr fitting issues are gone, you can even fit plates and large guns, MWD and such. Then it is a matter of your player skill versus his player skill.
Try to think deeper into the problem. When you get 10% less EM resist to fight, the mega will adapt by swaping a trimark or plate for another resist mod (min-maxing as usual), he can do so. But you will still cap out before you can finish him, you won't be able to fit large guns or tank like he does. What will you do then ? Whine some more ??
Originally by: Aravel Thon
Originally by: Nith Batoxxx
Hi my alt just leanred to fly the ferox...............
I am so so terribly sorry...
|
Amira Shadowsong
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 14:18:00 -
[653]
Originally by: Rastigan
Originally by: Shadowsword
Originally by: Hugh Ruka
I see no need for such a general change.
Then, how do you propose to deal with a blasterthron fitted with 2 EANM II, 2 damage mods, damage control II, 2 1600 plates and 3 trimark rigs? You can take any amarr gunship to try to kill it.
changing the base EM resist on armor was the right thing to do. Wether 10% are enough, or other races got more of a boost, remain to be seen.
A double plated triple trimarked Blasterthron is incredibly slow, and could be soloed by a Curse.
And non plated non trimarked blasterthron can catch a curse or whats your point?
|
Takeshi Yamato
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 14:35:00 -
[654]
Edited by: Takeshi Yamato on 01/02/2008 14:45:27
CCP Zulupark: What was wrong with the idea of adding some crystals that deal a moderate amount of explosive damage?
Is it because you do not like the idea of an amarr player using EM/THERM crystals to melt shields and then quickly switching to EM/EXP crystals for the armor?
That would make sense since everyone else has a 10 second reload time. I could think of solutions that would add a 10 second delay when switching from EM/THERM to EM/EXP crystals and back though.
|
Steve Clone
Amarr
Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 14:48:00 -
[655]
Dear Eve players,
I like playing with numbers and making up stories. Here is my proposed revamp of all ships. Dont flame me plz cause Im just fooling around.
Old Amarr Shield: 0% Em, 20% Th, 40% Kin, 60% Exp = 120%
Old Amarr Armor: 60% Em, 35% Th, 25% Kin, 20% Exp = 140%
New Amarr Shield: 0% Em, 40% Th, 40% Kin, 40% Exp = 120%
New Amarr Armor: 35% Em, 35% Th, 35% Kin, 35% Exp = 140%
Amarr will henceforth be known as armor omnitankersą Passive EANM/ANM together with plates is the preferred form of tanking resulting in most of the capacitor used in the purification of infidelsą The Amarrian arrogance to dominate any culture and to counter any weaponry dictated such tanking philosophy. However, it first came to light due to the flexible damage of the Minmatar slave rebels.
Old Gallente Shield: 0% Em, 20% Th, 40% Kin, 60% Exp = 120%
Old Gallente Armor: 60% Em, 35% Th, 35% Kin, 10% Exp = 140%
New Gallente Shield: 0% Em, 60% Th, 60% Kin, 0% Exp = 120%
New Gallente Armor: 60% Em, 30% Th, 40% Kin, 10% Exp = 140%
The war with the fascist Caldarian State compelled the Gallente to use their ędisposableĘ shield as an efficient buffer against Kinetic weaponry. However, Gallentian engineers were cooled-heated enough not to neglect other resists on their armor, especially after the encounter and rising tension with the Amarrian slavers.
Old Caldari Shield: 0% Em, 20% Th, 40% Kin, 60% Exp = 120%
Old Caldari Armor: 60% Em, 45% Th, 25% Kin, 10% Exp = 140%
New Caldari Shield: 20% Em, 20% Th, 40% Kin, 40% Exp = 120%
New Caldari Armor: 35% Em, 35% Th, 35% Kin, 35% Exp = 140%
Caldari can be highly resistant to laser weapons by fitting EM and TH shield hardeners or be a shield omnitanker with invulnerability fields fitted. Once a damage control unit is fitted in the few low slots found on most Caldarian ships, the small increase in resistance not only strengthen the omni-shield tank, but also provide a relatively strong armor and structure buffer against all damage.
Old Minmatar Shield: 0% Em, 20% Th, 40% Kin, 60% Exp = 120%
Old Minmatar Armor: 70% Em, 35% Th, 25% Kin, 10% Exp = 140%
Old Minmatar Shield: 10% Em, 25% Th, 35% Kin, 65% Exp = 135%
Old Minmatar Armor: 70% Em, 40% Th, 30% Kin, 10% Exp = 150%
Minamtar ships are renowned for their flexibility and adaptability. By equalising the number of low and mid-slots, this provide the Minmatar pilots the ability to either shield or armor tank and hence, an element of surprise to their enemy. This however prevents the possibility of extreme resistance to either form of tanking due to an even distribution of slots.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 14:56:00 -
[656]
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 01/02/2008 14:57:44
Originally by: Steve Clone
Old Minmatar Shield: 0% Em, 20% Th, 40% Kin, 60% Exp = 120%
Old Minmatar Armor: 70% Em, 35% Th, 25% Kin, 10% Exp = 140%
Old Minmatar Shield: 10% Em, 25% Th, 35% Kin, 65% Exp = 135%
Old Minmatar Armor: 70% Em, 40% Th, 30% Kin, 10% Exp = 150%
Minni get more resist total on shield and armor? I think not. If anything amarr should be getting more total on armor because we are a heavy tanking race. Minmatar has speed and flex already you also want to make them ubertank both shields and armor? 
Amarr pvp Vids: Inq - I Inq - II |
Steve Clone
Amarr
Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 15:02:00 -
[657]
Edited by: Steve Clone on 01/02/2008 15:02:14
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 01/02/2008 14:57:44
Originally by: Steve Clone
Old Minmatar Shield: 0% Em, 20% Th, 40% Kin, 60% Exp = 120%
Old Minmatar Armor: 70% Em, 35% Th, 25% Kin, 10% Exp = 140%
Old Minmatar Shield: 10% Em, 25% Th, 35% Kin, 65% Exp = 135%
Old Minmatar Armor: 70% Em, 40% Th, 30% Kin, 10% Exp = 150%
Minni get more resist total on shield and armor? I think not. If anything amarr should be getting more total on armor because we are a heavy tanking race. Minmatar has speed and flex already you also want to make them ubertank both shields and armor?
Woups made some changes on the % of caldari and minmatar...
Yup minmatar get more resists... because the low-mid slot will be equalised hence less slots to get a final high resistance like other races dedicated to either armor or shield tank.. but hey im just playing with numbers.. u get my ideas if a change in base resists is to be implemented...
|
Shevar
Minmatar
A.W.M
Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 15:08:00 -
[658]
Originally by: Pinky Denmark
Edited by: Pinky Denmark on 01/02/2008 13:34:11
who cares about freighters
Zulupark is completely right that the fix should be towards EM damage... Im just not believing it's done right, or at least the "logical" (my a$$) consequences is way off.
Dropping EM on armor is the short term working solution, BUT:
1)Armor tank vs Shield tank for PvP is the real issue
2)Efficiency of omni tanks is the major issue of armor vs shield for PvP
3)Having to drop expl resist on shield because we have recharge is wrong
The recharge might work on very few setups, but those setups are basically already very weak against EM damage... Besides Having same total amount of resist points on basic T1 shield/armor tanks doesn't have a bad effect as the recharge on shields barely compensates on an active shield tank for the lack of practically available tankslots...
Edit:
Besides armor tankers also have the compensation of sheer amount of armor on ships and fitting of plates. Shield recharge really only matters in a few specific setups...
1) It isn't the only real issue for Amarr, yes effective DPS is one of the issues but not the only one.
2) Yes because invul fields are so much more worse then an eam
3) This is because if shield tanking would suddenly become popular minmatar would be in somewhat the same boat as amarr. So they change the explosive resistance as well. This has nothing to do with the shield recharge, the shield recharge explains why shield resistances are lower in the first place.
To conclude;
-Yes one of the issues is effective DPS of amarr ships caused by high em resistance, thanks for fixing this CCP but will this also change NPC resistances?
-The mayor issue is cap useage and fitting, there is NOTHING to justify the insane cap/fitting requirements that lasers have compared to hybrids/missiles and projectiles. The only laser which comes somewhat close to living up its cap use and fitting reqs are tachs. But they are only available in BS modules, not to mention that heavy/medium beams are already so heavy to fit that they can be considered tachs in the fitting department (try fitting an omen with 4 t2 heavy beams) but lack the extra oompf compared to the other turrets.
If lasers are supposed to be cap hungry and impossible to fit without fitting mods they need to be highly superior in comparison to every other weapon system. Which is a total pain to properly balance.
---
-The only real drug problem is scoring real good drugs |
Jai Gar
Agents of the Veiled Dragon
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 15:12:00 -
[659]
Originally by: Nicholas Barker
this is like making 2 guys fight, one has a bat, the other has an m16. So you think, oh lets even this up and break the m16, so they can only bat each other, rather than actually fixing the original problem.
Agreed! This is why my two accounts are going inactive tomorrow... CCP is turning EVE into just another stupid PvP arcade game. Amarr ships are strong in certain respects and not in others... You don't bring a knife to a gun fight... and you don't nerf the guns to make the knife wielders able to survive...
... oh, and no... no one can have my stuff... I'll be back in a while to see if EVE has trully devolved into a space based Team Fortress 2...
|
Sebastien LeReparteur
Minmatar
Altera Odyssea
Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 15:27:00 -
[660]
Edited by: Sebastien LeReparteur on 01/02/2008 15:29:39
MY EMP ammo so much loves that change!!!!
EMP FTW!!!!
I don't know if any one said it but that ammo as 3 dmg type 2 of which are getting the AXe in resist.
That Ammo will be a bit over the top form that point on but BE MY GUESS PLS
|
| |
|
| 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 |