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) |
Vy'kar
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 00:43:00 -
[211]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark What we're talking about here is fixing the EM problem. Fixing ships for a specific race (in this case Amarr) is also being done. These two things are not mutually exclusive. If we just fixed the Amarr ships EM damage would still be a problem. If we just fixed EM damage, some Amarr ships would still be a problem.
You see, this is the misconception. Other races don't have an "EM problem." They simply don't use EM damage ammunition or drones. Amarr don't have this option unless they replace their lasers with another race's weapons.
Don't go making sweeping changes to every ship when you only need to change a handful of crystals. Your solution is like re-writing a book from the beginning because you made a typo on page 950. Fix that page and move on to finishing the book.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 00:47:00 -
[212]
Originally by: Vy'kar
Originally by: CCP Zulupark What we're talking about here is fixing the EM problem. Fixing ships for a specific race (in this case Amarr) is also being done. These two things are not mutually exclusive. If we just fixed the Amarr ships EM damage would still be a problem. If we just fixed EM damage, some Amarr ships would still be a problem.
You see, this is the misconception. Other races don't have an "EM problem." They simply don't use EM damage ammunition or drones. Amarr don't have this option unless they replace their lasers with another race's weapons.
Don't go making sweeping changes to every ship when you only need to change a handful of crystals. Your solution is like re-writing a book from the beginning because you made a typo on page 950. Fix that page and move on to finishing the book.
Well its not really hard to drop EM resists on all ship data. Thats not really a problem. A problem might be to foresee the effects compared to just a crystal/dmg type change. I think it shouldnt be a big problem and its going in the right direction, because they are also going to look at individual ships in next blog. Well see soon enough.
Amarr pvp Vids: Inq - I Inq - II |
F90OEX
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 00:48:00 -
[213]
That's great, you make a torp pvp Raven a close combat ship, but now are taking away some of its shield tanking..and this is boosting Amarr ???
LOL give me a break .. makes perfect sense
I think its safe to say if this is how Amarr are getting a boost, seems like someone at CCP has lost the plot with all the countless of threads on the subject.
|
Arkios Odymei
Incarnation of Evil Nocturnal Legion
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 00:59:00 -
[214]
Edited by: Arkios Odymei on 31/01/2008 01:00:55 Meh, This change dosent look like it is in the right direction... seems to me more of a boost to Minmatar than Amarr. Also, it fails to adress anything that is not PvP related. (PvP is really important, but you need to remember its not tho only thing that these ships are used for.)
Anywho, I sugest we deal with the "Amarr" problem as opposed to the "EM Damage" problem that this proposed fix is really targeting.
The real Amarr problem is a problem with Amarr ships. Some are fine while others need love, either by adjusting their fitting stats, slot layouts, ship bonuses, capacitor, etc... Lasers need some looking into aswell, not so much about EM damage, but more about cap use and fittings.
Lasers do pretty good damage as it is, But thats not to say a slight damage boost may be in order.
Just my views... ------------------------------------------------------------------
|
FarnhamTheDrunk
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 00:59:00 -
[215]
Well, I reserve judgement until I see how this all plays out, it looks like it is worth a shot to me. however I have always felt that the biggest problem with amarr was the fact that their ships only have one bonus. I remember being a new player and listening to freinds talk about their ships and the bonuses. They would list the bonuses and it would be something cool there would be something cool and usefull for each one. I would look at my ships and there would only be one thing, this makes for very boring ships. I am fine with the sit and tank and pray approach but still shouldn't there be a little more to it? If all the ships have the cap use bonus what is the use of it being there at all? Why not just lower the cap use of lasers and give amarr only one bonus? also as mentioned before beam lasers need help. the thought of putting one on a ship has not crossed my mind for over a year now. I think they should at least be an option for PVP or PVE. I love my geddon IMHO it is one of the best values for a pvp ship but it would be nice if I had some other options. I realize that the apoc specifiically you want to rework, at this I rejoice. again I have not even debated buying one since before the Abbadon came out.
As you said tanking and praying is the way of Amarr, you are the gods of Eve, we have been praying a long time |
Sprobe
Panta-Rhei Phoenix Allianz
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 01:00:00 -
[216]
DON'T NERF MINMATAR TO DEATH, PLZZZ
WE ARE THE ONLY RACE HAVING TO LEARN ARMOR _AND_ SHIELD TANK SKILLS... AS WELL AS PROJECTILE _AND_ MISSILES.
|
Vy'kar
Amarr PoliCratton Technologies Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 01:01:00 -
[217]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Well its not really hard to drop EM resists on all ship data. Thats not really a problem. A problem might be to foresee the effects compared to just a crystal/dmg type change. I think it shouldnt be a big problem and its going in the right direction, because they are also going to look at individual ships in next blog. Well see soon enough.
Well, that was my point. Changing crystals has a far more limited scope of potential impact. Changing every ship means taking more NPCs, missions, etc. into consideration for adjustment.
|
Daan Sai
HAZCON Inc Knights Of Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 01:03:00 -
[218]
Drop EM armour base resists, fine. Increases EM damage effectiveness. There were no serious problems with Exp damage dealing, so why the arbitrary change to shield Exp base resist?
Shields could/should be different to armour?!? This isn't a zero sum game, just because you are making an adjustment to a perceived imbalance doesn't mean you have to appear to make a similar change to another area that wasn't out of balance (if anything the lower popularity of PvP shield tanks suggest they need a boost).
You don't balance a lopsided see-saw by taking the same of each side! Just adjust the EM problem, and see where that goes. So shields get a bigger Exp base than armour gets in EM, so what?
The overall idea to help amarr damage is fine (I fly Gal), but don't bring in knee-jerk side issues to an already complex problem.
|
Guillame Herschel
Gallente Cheers Restaurant and Bar Coalition Of Empires
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 01:05:00 -
[219]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
We have to maintain a balance between shield tanking and armor tanking. Only taking away resistances from the armor would tip the scale quite a bit and removing 10% from Explosive resistance on shields seems the logical thing to do.
It's a foolish consistency. Shield tanking has drawbacks that don't affect armor tankers. Amarr don't do explosive damage. So this is not an Amarr boost, it's a general tanking nerf. It's also a Minmatar boost, since the highest damage T1 and Faction projectile ammo does mostly EM and Explosive damage. You've not boosted Amarr so much as you've boosted EMP ammo.
Just boost lasers, that's all Amarr need to bring them in line with the other races!
-- Guile can always trump hardware -- |
Haakelen
Gallente United Forces Black Star Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 01:14:00 -
[220]
Originally by: Guillame Herschel
Just boost lasers, that's all Amarr need to bring them in line with the other races!
Agreeing with this. At first glance, I thought CCP might be doing something reasonable for a change. How silly of me to think that . Oh well.
|
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 01:16:00 -
[221]
No, it is an amarr boost.
|
Corrupt Panda
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 01:18:00 -
[222]
Originally by: Guillame Herschel
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
We have to maintain a balance between shield tanking and armor tanking. Only taking away resistances from the armor would tip the scale quite a bit and removing 10% from Explosive resistance on shields seems the logical thing to do.
It's a foolish consistency. Shield tanking has drawbacks that don't affect armor tankers. Amarr don't do explosive damage. So this is not an Amarr boost, it's a general tanking nerf. It's also a Minmatar boost, since the highest damage T1 and Faction projectile ammo does mostly EM and Explosive damage. You've not boosted Amarr so much as you've boosted EMP ammo.
Just boost lasers, that's all Amarr need to bring them in line with the other races!
Quoted for truth. If this devblog was posted under the label "tanking rebalance" we wouldn't have 7 pages of complaints with a few "I'm interested, sounds good" posts.
Honestly, I'm not sure what this will do, but I'm pretty confident that it's going to A) be interesting and B) do nothing for Amarr specifically. Amarr issues have been talked about to death, and been formally recognized in the blog post as being worked on -- for this I am grateful and I'm looking forward to the changes. But I don't think Amarr ship issues (everything from faction concept, to ship role, to specific fittings) have anything to do with this tanking rebalance.
Basically, you should have made a two-part devblog, Zulu -- and kept the tanking changes and Amarr boost seperate from each other.
|
Phrixus Zephyr
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 01:18:00 -
[223]
Oh look, another knee-jerk reaction. Why not, instead of picking an arbitrary number like 10% out of thin air, don't you actually look at common fits and final resistance before you come crashing through with a rediculously heavy handed change like this.
It boosts Minmatar more than it does Amarr and you can see that if you spend 2 minutes picking ship setups from the recesses of your memory.
Amarr ship redesign? Great. Laser fitting adjustment? Excellent. Re-balance of EM/Therm damage and cap usage of crystals? Amazing. Blanket resistance change to all ships regardless of the actual stacked resistance calculations before or after setups? Ye..... what?
Why not nerf 'dictors again while we're at it. We can all see how that was a neccesary and succesful change for the better...
|
Zarad
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 01:23:00 -
[224]
Edited by: Zarad on 31/01/2008 01:26:21
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
We have to maintain a balance between shield tanking and armor tanking. Only taking away resistances from the armor would tip the scale quite a bit and removing 10% from Explosive resistance on shields seems the logical thing to do.
Tech 1 BS Before: Shield Tank cumulative resistance: 120 Armor Tank cumulative resistance: 140
After: Shield Tank cumulative resistance: 110 (9% difference) Armor Tank cumulative resistance: 130 (7% difference)
Everyone already knows the disparity between Shield and Armor tanking...at least nerf it equally.
I wish CCP would drop the base resist of one armor resist to 0..and see how everyone feels then. Finally we would have some sort of balance between the two.
|
Janu Hull
Caldari Terra Incognita Dark Matter Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 01:26:00 -
[225]
Missed the boat completely.
Armor tanking is more popular in PvP because armor tanking modules don't compete for space with Ewar and tackling. Period. The End.
In the event of an emergency, my ego may be used as a floatation device. |
Tzar'rim
Minmatar Reckless Corsairs
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 01:26:00 -
[226]
So they're lowering explosive resist on shields and EM resists on armor, perhaps it's just me but uhm doesn't this boost EMP ammo a fair bit? :)
Reckless Corsairs is looking for a few aspiring team PVPers |
Daan Sai
HAZCON Inc Knights Of Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 01:34:00 -
[227]
Originally by: Janu Hull
Armor tanking is more popular in PvP because armor tanking modules don't compete for space with Ewar and tackling. Period. The End.
QFT!
|
Skyslider
Gallente Omerta Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 01:36:00 -
[228]
As a Tempest sniper, I would like to thank Zulupark for this wondrous boost in the range of ships I can alpha-strike. Thank you!
|
Sean Drake
Caldari Dirty Deeds Corp. Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 01:44:00 -
[229]
ROFL oh dear god there still making you post these great ideas you sure you did not sleep with the bosses wife or somthing
Anyway as a long time caldari player i'm used to nerf's but if your going to leave us with 2 large holes in our defence and still be unable to fit any of the needed pvp gear how about a passive omni mod like a EANM for sheilds?
As it is most caldari ships are very lacking in PvP you fit the needed mods and you gimp your tank you fit a decent tank and your target ****es themselves laughing and warps of before you missles hit or in the case of the rail boats before the abysmal dps effects them. Our specialist ships are EW using sheild tankers hmmm yes the amount of blackbirds I have lost after just 1 cycle of jamming failed is a testament to there design.
Oh and I would like to ask once again is Zulu a real person and does he actually play EvE because as far as I can tell he could be a ccp alt they use to rattle our cages and have a laugh at the responses
If Goons AND BoB are agreeing with each other that your idea is stupid, it's probably stupid. |
Caligulus
Legion of Lost Souls
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 01:44:00 -
[230]
You've gotta love it when the devs release news like this at the end of the day before they go home to let us sit here and stew with unanswered questions. It'd be a GREAT idea to release community upsetting news like this at the beginning of your day so you can spend the rest of it answering questions about the holes in your logic.
We'd like more answers or at least more feedback from the dev team. ------------------------------------------------- **** You're out of your mind!
**** Well that's between me and my mind. |
|
Sasha Saucer
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 01:44:00 -
[231]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Originally by: Elmicker Perhaps it's time to directly address the mechanics that're broken? You know, like, switching em/therm around and lowering cap use?
I think it's general consensus that one of the underlying problems for Amarr is that base EM resistances are too high. As I said, we're not adverse to more changes but we want to see how these changes pan out before we commit to doing even more changes.
This change is EPIC FAIL. Yes, EPIC FAIL.
Your nerfing Explosive damage on shields, why exactly? Lowering EM resistances is not the main issue. Just introduce more crystal variety and be done with this sillyness. Setups and tanks are going to be hit for what reason exactly? Oh yes lets make ship combat last even less than before. Yeah that makes sense.
Seriously, why is it so hard for CCP to see the real problem. After all, your out there PVPing with the rest of us anyway?
/me shakes head
|
Cailais
Amarr VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 01:50:00 -
[232]
Bit of an 'off the wall idea' this one. What if EM resists on a ship were a function of:
Base resist + [Cap %]/2
Obviously youd need to adjust the base shield and armor tank of each race - say giving Minmatar T2 a 50% resist to shields then add on the cap % / 2. As your cap fluctuates so does your resists to EM.
Just an idea.
C.
Improved Low Sec Idea!! |
Kain De'Stroi
Epic.
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 01:51:00 -
[233]
ooh, time to conquer the universe
-------- Boost Amarr and I will conquer the Universe - you been warned |
Sylper Illysten
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 01:52:00 -
[234]
So, how does nerfing shields fix the Amarr problem? I don;t see a 0% resist anywhere on armor.
|
Rucku5
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 01:52:00 -
[235]
Does this mean Amarr will be getting the 10% reduction in EM resists on their ships too? Coz if thats so the devs are nerfing Amarr ships as well as other races ships to give them a buff... That don't make sence.
Lowering EM resists on Amarr armor will also make it harder for the Amarr mission runners. Maybe help in PVP but running a difficult lvl4 or 5 mission in Amarr or any races ship will imediately get harder. So my question is how in the world is this going to help a non pvp mission runner? Isn't this going to make all missions in which NPCs deal EM damage harder? Many of the missions I get in Amarr empire require me to kill rats that deal EM damage. So this aint going to help me one bit, im still gonna have cap issues and find it hard to fit certain energy turrents. Does the devs plan on nerfing all NPCs too?
Please someone correct me if I'm getting this wrong but that's how i see this so called 'buff'.
|
Sean Drake
Caldari Dirty Deeds Corp. Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 01:52:00 -
[236]
Originally by: Durao
EM damage in general has been under-utilized. I'm glad you are fixing it. I don't want to see anyone else say they are going to fit ACs on their Amarr ships.
Not sure if your being ironic or not but now I think about it this boost to emp ammo will benefit all the unbonused ships that use ac's so it kinda is a boost to amarr just not how they thought
If Goons AND BoB are agreeing with each other that your idea is stupid, it's probably stupid. |
Pheonix Kanan
Caldari Murder-Death-Kill
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 01:53:00 -
[237]
As a Minmatar pilot, I support this nerf. Implement it as soon as possible. /sarcasm.
Seriously, it doesn't address the real problem (which has already been mentioned), CAPACITOR. In Eve, cap is life. In PVP, without cap, you die. Amarr are very bad at using cap. Their guns use WAY too much, I think by about 30% or so, and they can't run their tank long enough to matter (unless Amarr was meant to be a tank OR gank race, not both). They do good damage, just lower the cap cost on the guns. Why punish everyone else (except Minmatar ) when the solution is rather simple? (Nuclear weapon to kill a fly, anyone?) -----
|
jongalt
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 01:53:00 -
[238]
i would like to see goumindong's analysis of The Situation, since he seems to be pretty smart about these things.
if he has already posted, would somebody be so kind as to link the page...?
if he hasnt, then i would like to ask goumindong what he thinks...
-jg.
|
DuPuy
Scrap Iron Flotilla Namtz'aar k'in
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 02:03:00 -
[239]
Edited by: DuPuy on 31/01/2008 02:05:59 Edited by: DuPuy on 31/01/2008 02:03:07
So... Shield tanks are being nerfed now to be as effective as armor tanks? Admittedly, this is a "reading between the lines" look at the blog and may be off target... However, if so:
BALANCE ISSUE:
a) Why fly shields if you can fly armor for same effectiveness... but also get the ability to takle and use ewar mods?
SOLUTION IDEAS?
a) Move shield tanks to low slots, like armor (then why have any difference).
b) or move takle and ewar mods to high slots (which makes takle ships non-effective combat ships).
c) Give shields some form of compensation to *balance* the sacrifice of ewar and takle necessary to get the same effectiveness as an armor tank...
|
Thalagar
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 02:04:00 -
[240]
Do the guys at CCP burn down their houses whenever the paint starts to chip? Just a suggestion, but if one aspect of the game is unbalanced, maybe the fix should focus on that aspect of the game instead of affecting everything?
|
|
|
|
|
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 |