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) |
Tsu'ko
Valley Forge STELLAR LEGION
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 08:46:00 -
[721]
Originally by: CCP Wrangler The Amarr are the tanking and ganking floating rods of gold. While the Minmatar are versatile and the Caldari do electronic warfare the Amarr simply sit there and charge their lasers, secure in their knowledge that God is on their side.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler The Amarr are the tanking and ganking floating rods of gold. While the Minmatar are versatile and the Caldari do electronic warfare the Amarr simply sit there and charge their lase |
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 09:23:00 -
[722]
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer We love the changes to Zealot and Apoc! Good job zulu!
Ha ha, Apoc is now the best sniper in the game hands down.
Yea, its overpowered.
MAybe not THE best because is still hard to fit it and a DD proof tank. But indeed its right thereon the top of list.
Wonder if the navy apoc got same fix ( i have a collection of 4 NAvy APOC that now shoudl become way more valuable :) )
------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Bon Hedus
Amarr O.E.C Legionnaire Services Ltd.
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 13:22:00 -
[723]
Hmmm.... Boost Amarr by nerfing the em armor and Explosive shield?
Lets look at some previous Amarr "boosts" shall we?
EANM nerf.... Raise the CPU requirements of the EANM II, so that there is less tanking... this boosts Amarr.... wrong.
What this had done was ruin the Retribution's dual eanm tank and other Amarr ships. The stated idea behind this was that Omni tanks were way too common and that was Amarr's problem. It was stated vehemently that CCP wanted to go with more active tanks. With this intended upcoming nerf/boost, the Omni tank will return.
NOS nerf... Amarr keep getting their cap drained, and they need Cap to fire thier weapons. Definitely needed, but it killed a whole area of Amarr ships... Curse/Pilgrim, and especially the Pilgrim. The Nos/Neuts are Amarr's racial weapon, and of course Amarr got the shaft again on this one as well.
There are many threads stating what Amarr needs, and it seems to be mainly ignored by CCP. After the Carrier debacle, please forgive me Zulupark, but I don't believe you could get it right if all you had to do was jump off a cliff and hit the ground. You would screw it up somewhere on the way down. -------------------------------------- Heavy Lag Spike II belonging to EvE Cluster Node #0815 hits your Connection, wrecking your latency to 998ms |
Kel Dario
Amarr Blue Sky Inc
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 13:29:00 -
[724]
I been pondering over this EM-resistance change a bit further and I was asking myself: Isn't a reduction of -10% EM on armor on all ships in EVE going a bit to far?
Shouldn't it be just the tech 1 ships that get the reduction and leave the tech 2 alone?
Reason for that is because I dunno if everyone fit 2 EAMS II + DCU II when hitting power is more useful. Why should you othervise fly expensive uninsurable tech 2 ships in the first place when you want the damage potential?
I fear that this EM-resistance change will screw up many already good setups and make omnitanks and EM-rigs mandatory, so the problem with amarr won't be solved it will just be shuffled around.
I am really doubtfull if this is the right way to go but we have to see I guess.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 13:51:00 -
[725]
Originally by: Kel Dario Edited by: Kel Dario on 02/02/2008 13:42:02 I been pondering over this EM-resistance change a bit further and I was asking myself: Isn't a reduction of -10% EM on armor on all ships in EVE going a bit to far?
Shouldn't it be just the tech 1 ships that get the reduction and leave the tech 2 alone?
Reason for that is because I dunno if everyone fit 2 EAMS II + DCU II when hitting power is more useful. Why should you othervise fly expensive uninsurable tech 2 ships in the first place when you want the damage potential?
I fear that this EM-resistance change will screw up many already good setups and make omnitanks and EM-rigs mandatory, so the problem with amarr won't be solved it will just be shuffled around. EM-Resistance is already lowest resistance on many tech 2 ships after damage mods and the each race resistance hole been plugged.
I am really doubtfull if this is the right way to go but we have to see I guess.
EDIT: Added a line for clarification of what I mean.
No this is a good thing. Sometimes you have to sacrifice and have a hole or two in your tank to do other stuff well. This is spot on.
Amarr pvp Vids: Inq - I Inq - II |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 14:12:00 -
[726]
By far the largest problem is that armor tanking is quite a lot more popular than shield tanking and EM by far is the highest resistance on armor for all races.
To maintain a correct ratio between shield tanking and armor tanking we'd also remove 10% from the explosive resistances on shields.
Why does it sound like CCP Want to maintain armor tanking as the "quite a lot more popular" form of tanking in PvP ??????
Explosive damage doesn't really have an issue as most people are armor tankers and the explosive dealing Projective Weapons also deal a great amount of EM damage with the right ammunition. Also being able to outDPS a caldari shield tanker using missiles.
And all arguments to nerf shield resists so far doesn't make sense at all...
- 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 - 2008.02.02 15:10:00 -
[727]
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 02/02/2008 15:11:16
Originally by: Pinky Denmark By far the largest problem is that armor tanking is quite a lot more popular than shield tanking and EM by far is the highest resistance on armor for all races.
To maintain a correct ratio between shield tanking and armor tanking we'd also remove 10% from the explosive resistances on shields.
Why does it sound like CCP Want to maintain armor tanking as the "quite a lot more popular" form of tanking in PvP ??????
Explosive damage doesn't really have an issue as most people are armor tankers and the explosive dealing Projective Weapons also deal a great amount of EM damage with the right ammunition. Also being able to outDPS a caldari shield tanker using missiles.
And all arguments to nerf shield resists so far doesn't make sense at all...
Because shield tanking in pve is ridiculously overpowered?
-------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
SiJira
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 15:20:00 -
[728]
ccp keep it up Trashed sig, Shark was here |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 15:56:00 -
[729]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Because shield tanking in pve is ridiculously overpowered?
Yeah - this balance is all about PvE ... Shield tanks for PvE are great because we don't have to tackle or fit MWDs and enable us to fit damage mods.
- I'm a nice guy!!
But hook me up with some pew pew, because I'm really bored... |
DeadDuck
Amarr Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 15:57:00 -
[730]
Originally by: Cosmo Raata Lets see the checklist:
Apoc rework____________________Check Zealot/Omen 5th turret_________Check EM rebalance___________________Check (even though it wasn't great) Tracking Disruption fix________Check Laser Cap reduction_________????? Laser Fitting redution_________????? 7th turret Absolution__________????? Retribution Med slot___________????? Nos rework for Curse/Pilgrim___?????
So, its a start, but there is more work to do, dont forget CCP.
Well dont forget that with tracking disruption changes, Pilgrim and Curse receive a indirect boost.
________________ God is my Wingman |
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 16:02:00 -
[731]
Originally by: Pinky Denmark
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Because shield tanking in pve is ridiculously overpowered?
Yeah - this balance is all about PvE ... Shield tanks for PvE are great because we don't have to tackle or fit MWDs and enable us to fit damage mods.
Yeah but you cant simply boost shield tanking overall because then it will be even more overpowered. A complete rehaul of the whole shield tank system would be nessesary to do this. I dont think they are planning or have time for it right now. You got your torp gank boost, use it.
-------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
Jacob Holland
Gallente 19th Star Logistics
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 16:44:00 -
[732]
I've been trying to keep up with this thread since I read the devblog but I'm going to give up and simply post my thoughts as it's growing faster than I have time to read it.
If the aim here is to reduce the effectiveness or prevalence of the dual EANMII + Damage control tank then it won't succeed, the primary drawback of the EANM and the Invulnerability field is that the resists applied to the strongest portion (EM for armour and Explosive for shields) are rather wasted while the weakest resist is barely covered. This change would reduce that disadvantage and increase the efficiency of that choice.
The alternative to the Dual EANM is active hardeners, If you're in a plated, trimarked or slaved ship then the likelyhood is that three active hardeners is a more effective choice in terms of survivability, even taking into account the increased hull resistances of a damage control. Especially on a ship which fits an armour rep...
Triple active hardener resists reflect the likely proportions of damage you're going to take, lots of Kinetic and Thermal and a bit less EM and Explosive, so why aren't they used more often? The fitting doesn't help, especially with ships like the Megathron already so tight on CPU that you need an implant to fit them appropriately but it's not the only factor.
I don't know how feasible it is, the actual mechanics are somewhat beyond my understanding. What if the effects of a session change did not result in all of your hardeners turning off? What if you could jump through to break a gate camp and not have to worry about whether lag would leave you being stripped of your defences with almost no resistances on your primary buffer? What if you didn't need to remember to turn your hardeners on at every session change?
Might active hardeners become more common in PvP in that case?
One of the primary advantages of passive hardening is simply that you don't need to worry about it. It takes care of itself while you take care of killing badguys. --
Originally by: cordy
Respect to IAC .Your one of the few people who truly deserve to own and live in the space you are in.
|
Anacrit Mc'Sinister
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 17:55:00 -
[733]
Originally by: Grytok Another tme CCP fails at rebalancing.
-10% EM on armor -10% Explosive on Shield
EMP: EM/Explosive/Kinetic damage mix.
MinMatar get's double the bonus out of this change, stil using no cap to fire their guns. Am I the only one seeing something happening here?
Resistances are not the problem at all tbqfh. All the problems Amarr have are CAP, CAP and CAP.
Amarrian ships should be flying reactors, which they aren't. With all related skills to LvL 5 there are alot of amarrian ships, that cannot fire their guns without running out of cap. This is the real issue. Where other races fire their weapons, they've cap to run their tanks, Amarr can't, simple as that. If Amarr could fire their guns, while running their repairers as long as other races, then we'd achieve balance.
I'm glad that I chose to have a MinMatar-Alt as primary PvP-Toon and yet another change that boosts him even more? Thank you very much
also true
|
Aidonis Heideran
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 18:07:00 -
[734]
Originally by: Grytok Amarrian ships should be flying reactors, which they aren't. With all related skills to LvL 5 there are alot of amarrian ships, that cannot fire their guns without running out of cap. This is the real issue. Where other races fire their weapons, they've cap to run their tanks, Amarr can't, simple as that. If Amarr could fire their guns, while running their repairers as long as other races, then we'd achieve balance.
Yeah. Not to mention cap injectors/batts/rechargers/power relays are hard to fit (lasers still take up too much freaking PG) or waste of slots (that could otherwise be used on much needed MWD, SB, HS, EANM, DC, and Plates, among others).
Oh and people crunching numbers on EFT or going "oh yeah watch these vids". Try and keep in mind we don't all have 20+ mill SP toons with maxed skills for everything cap/armor/ship/nav/gun/drone/resist/etc wise? kkthnx.
Amarr should be playable as a whole, not just at the higher levels. If you can't fly the ships at a decent level through the 1-2 years you need to get all the skills to "fly amarr awesomely" as some people do, it's not a viable race, and therefore not balanced.
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 18:42:00 -
[735]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Yeah but you cant simply boost shield tanking overall because then it will be even more overpowered. A complete rehaul of the whole shield tank system would be nessesary to do this. I dont think they are planning or have time for it right now. You got your torp gank boost, use it.
They are definately not boosting shield tanking and I believe you are way off topic... And maybe even a bit wrong... If they are reducing em resist on armor it is IMO not necesary to reduce the explosive resist on shields - It's impossible to calculate exactly how the armor/shield is balanced but most people using armor tanks in the real action proves my point of a shield nerf not being needed. You can always send me a mail if you want a better debate. And I trained for torpedoes long before they were made bbq-weapons - I'm a nice guy!!
But hook me up with some pew pew, because I'm really bored... |
Sky Marshal
Aeden Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 22:32:00 -
[736]
With the boost of the Zealot & Apocalypse, and the nerf of Shield Resistance, I guess that now we can say that there is a "Caldari Problem".
_______
16/20 Dragon : ½ Great Game + 14/20 Revelations : ½ Desyncs... + 11/20 Trinity : ½ BBSOD, Bugs, Desyncs, F*** Nerfs + 10/20 v1.1 : ½ [...] + EXP shield nerf +
CCP, you are tiring. |
Angelic Eviaran
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 22:43:00 -
[737]
Originally by: Sky Marshal With the boost of the Zealot & Apocalypse, and the nerf of Shield Resistance, I guess that now we can say that there is a "Caldari Problem".
Im sure that caldari will be the most common ships seen a long time after these changes. Lets not go all emo on these changes please.
|
Sky Marshal
Aeden Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 23:30:00 -
[738]
It is not about numbers of players, but of the utility in battle.
I am not a pro in Caldari ships despite months of game, but I can't stop believe that I am more and more useless, and now an more easiest target _______
16/20 Dragon : ½ Great Game + 14/20 Revelations : ½ Desyncs... + 11/20 Trinity : ½ BBSOD, Bugs, Desyncs, F*** Nerfs + 10/20 v1.1 : ½ [...] + EXP shield nerf +
CCP, you are tiring. |
mishkof
Caldari Shadows of Valor Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 23:47:00 -
[739]
AS someone who flys gallente for PVP, and Caldari for PVE, I would just like to send a thank you to the whining amarrian pilots and zulu WTF ever your name is for nerfing my ships in the quest to buff amarr.
I will now be fitting an extra EM active hardener just for you.
Nice ship buffs too. How about some Moa and Ferox love now.
I own a T2 BPO and Capital alt, therefor all of my views will be pro-Capital Alt/T2 BPO orientated. Please pick one of the following settings for your response. []hate me []troll me []smack me |
Aidonis Heideran
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 00:29:00 -
[740]
Edited by: Aidonis Heideran on 03/02/2008 00:31:22
Quote: AS someone who flys gallente for PVP, and Caldari for PVE, I would just like to send a thank you to the whining amarrian pilots and zulu WTF ever your name is for nerfing my ships in the quest to buff amarr.
I will now be fitting an extra EM active hardener just for you.
Nice ship buffs too. How about some Moa and Ferox love now.
I own a T2 BPO and Capital alt, therefor all of my views will be pro-Capital Alt/T2 BPO orientated. Please pick one of the following settings for your response. []hate me []troll me []smack me
okay lets get a few things straight: 1) Don't complain about T1 BC's please. The Amarr Prophecy is total crap, even after fitting the best setup (Autocannons and tank). 2) Don't complain about T1 cruisers. Currently the Amarr T1 cruisers are EPIC FAILS. (Though admittedly Maller does barely okay as bait - but everyone KNOWS they are bait, and the Arby makes a semi-decent drone boat. well okay not really, because you'd have to fit minmatar frig crap on the arby for drone boat due to lack of CPU/grid) 3) You're fitting an extra EM hardener for Caldari pve WHY? 4) As an amarr player, you're welcome. Thank you, have a nice day, don't come again. 5) If you fly Gallente for pvp, I still don't see problem. Use EM drones. The EM res nerf affects Amarr ships too! And besides, Kin/Therm are still generally best damage types.
|
|
Aidonis Heideran
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 02:48:00 -
[741]
Update: Well, according to new dev blog Moa and Ferox got some love anyway.
|
Rawr Cristina
Caldari Cult of Rawr
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 04:01:00 -
[742]
Good changes, It's nice to see that CCP didn't completely cave in to the dedicating whining of Lyria and Jojo and do a Tuxford by buffing them beyond all reason.
It's a reasonable and well-thought out change imo and will definately make people reconsider those omnitanks - 15% more effective DPS vs them is nothing to laugh about. (It also isn't terribly overpowered since it's VERY counterable)
I do feel a little sorry for the Gallente, though...
|
Verx Interis
Amarr Aurora Security The Cyrene Initiative
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 04:19:00 -
[743]
This has probably been mentioned, but..
There is another side affect to the resistance change. Using a Kinetic, Thermal, and Explosive hardner gets you balanced resistances, but less than 3 EANMII's. With this change, nobody will ever use that because they'll have **** EM res.
Wouldn't it be a lot better to make the compensation skills affect the active bonus of active hardners? I figure a tank should go something like this:
Repper - Hardners/Energized plating (damage type specific) to balance out the resistances - EANMII to pop everything up more - Damage control II for good measure and 60% hull resists.
This would bring back the use of Armor Hardners on most tanks. If you haev 3 slots left for resistance stuff, 3 hardners should be better than 3 EANM. As it is now, it's not, and with this change, it'll be even worse. -----sig-starts-here------
|
Pod Man
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 05:48:00 -
[744]
Problem statement: Amarr lasers can't melt butter. Problem solution : Replace all armor and shields with margarine.
|
Ogul
Caldari ZiTek Deepspace Explorations Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 06:13:00 -
[745]
Edited by: Ogul on 03/02/2008 06:13:56
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Because shield tanking in pve is ridiculously overpowered?
Care to substantiate that claim?
--- This is a war declaration, issued from your alt corp. It is used to gank people in high sec. |
Maraleith
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 09:01:00 -
[746]
I have to admit a bit of a surprise at the Amarr racial EW boost. Of course, I fly minmatar ships and we have the most effective eWAR in the game, so I wonder why I should be concerned.
I also note that the tempest in sniper mode needs ALL its mods to effectively hit out to ranges that other races seem to be getting an inherent bonus too.
This PLUS the mooted 10% reduction in EM armour resistances for Minmatar currently on Sisi one of the fiercest NERFs of any race ever.
Remember the 20% nerfage to Tremor and the alpha strike damage reduction; perhaps if we whine enough we will get them back too.
|
Incredibuild
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 09:45:00 -
[747]
Oh bubba noooo, please stop fixing the game.
|
rgreat
Gallente OEG Red Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 12:11:00 -
[748]
Edited by: rgreat on 03/02/2008 12:13:47 By nerfing EM/EXP resistances you will boost all weapons except hybrid.
Hybrid weapons do only Kinetic+Thermal damage.
Also, usually on Gallente T2 cruisers explosive is the already worst resistance. It will be even weaker now.
How about Gallente/Hybrid boost then? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
Vishous
Port Royal Independent Kontractors Atrum Tempestas Foedus
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 12:33:00 -
[749]
Originally by: rgreat Edited by: rgreat on 03/02/2008 12:17:34 By nerfing EM/EXP resistances you will boost all weapons except hybrid.
Hybrid weapons do only Kinetic+Thermal damage.
How about Hybrid damage boost then?
Exactly what I was thinking. (since I have not the time nor the will to read 26 pages of post, apologies if mentioned earlier, and sympathy to CCP and their eyes.) Giving Amarr explosive lasers will just open a Pandora's box as well as complaints on unfair treatment of Gallente damage types. Granted, we have drones, but then other races can use drones to, not to mention that the only real boost Gallente give to their drones is threw ships, and not all ships are drone boats. It just doesn't seem right to leave Gallente out in the cold when it comes to high slot damage types.
I don't know what would be a good solution to this dilemma, I just wanted to help point out this possible issue. Otherwise I believe the base resists changes will make things better for everyone in the long run.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 13:06:00 -
[750]
Originally by: rgreat
How about Hybrid damage boost then?
So blasters can do even more stupid damage? I think not. -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
|
|
|
|
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 |