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) |
|
CCP Wrangler
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 16:56:00 -
[1]
The Amarr race has been longing for a bit of dev lovinÆ for some time now, depending on who you ask. In this Dev Blog Zulupark takes a look at the current state of the Amarr and what could be done to improve them. And whatÆs even better, we have some of this on our test server, Singularity, already! Read the Dev Blog Amarr oomph and other similar words and then get in and try it out so you can post your feedback here!
Wrangler Community Manager CCP Games, EVE Online Email / Netfang
"The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it." |
|
Caol
UK Corp Rare Faction
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:06:00 -
[2]
<3 Amarr
|
Fulmen
Amarr Caldari Deep Space Ventures
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:08:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Fulmen on 30/01/2008 17:08:16 Boost Amarr!!! oh wait, you are!
We've (us whiny Amarr) been waiting for this so long, I bet that no matter what you do, it will be antclimactic. However, any change is better than no change, so keep up the good work.
|
Zarch AlDain
The Establishment Establishment
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:14:00 -
[4]
Simple and effective, a much better change than the previous EANM one!
I approve of the idea of making a few changes and then evaluating them rather than rushing in all guns blazing too - and it's nice to see NPCs getting some lovin' (by reducing player resistances) as they have had a hard time with rigs and hp buffs.
Zarch AlDain
|
Kyoko Sakoda
Caldari Ghost Festival
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:15:00 -
[5]
Actually doesn't seem like that bad of an idea. ^_^
|
Caligulus
Legion of Lost Souls
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:16:00 -
[6]
Raven base resistances
- Before changes
Shields EM - 0%, Exp - 60%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 20% Armor EM - 60%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 45%
- After changes
Shields EM - 0%, Exp - 50%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 20% Armor EM - 50%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 45%
I fail to see how modifying the explosive damage resistance on the raven increases Amarr damage. ------------------------------------------------- **** You're out of your mind!
**** Well that's between me and my mind. |
ExcellciuM
Exair Holding Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:16:00 -
[7]
Nerf amarr, boost caldari
I guess this is good news for all those amarr players out there.
|
Xioden Acap
Lightspeed Enterprises Burning Horizons
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:19:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Caligulus I fail to see how modifying the explosive damage resistance on the raven increases Amarr damage.
By introducing explosive damage crystals!
Although thats kind of pointless since explosive is the shield tankers highest resist anyway, and once your past that they more or less melt anyway regardless of what you shoot them with.
|
|
CCP Zulupark
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:19:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Caligulus Raven base resistances
- Before changes
Shields EM - 0%, Exp - 60%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 20% Armor EM - 60%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 45%
- After changes
Shields EM - 0%, Exp - 50%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 20% Armor EM - 50%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 45%
I fail to see how modifying the explosive damage resistance on the raven increases Amarr damage.
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.
|
|
ExcellciuM
Exair Holding Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:22:00 -
[10]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Originally by: Caligulus Raven base resistances
- Before changes
Shields EM - 0%, Exp - 60%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 20% Armor EM - 60%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 45%
- After changes
Shields EM - 0%, Exp - 50%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 20% Armor EM - 50%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 45%
I fail to see how modifying the explosive damage resistance on the raven increases Amarr damage.
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.
Maybe whilst your messing with caldari shield tanks you could modify the Nighthawks weird armour resistances and move them to shields.
|
|
Elmicker
The Phoenix Rising FreeFall Securities
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:30:00 -
[11]
Stealth minmatar boost.
Minmatar's most common damage type: Explosive.
Minmatar's most damaging ammo: EMP.
Won't help amarr much, though. They still can't fit ships worth a damn or fire for longer than a minute or two.
|
Athena Attom
Black Eclipse Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:31:00 -
[12]
In before Cosmo 'whine a lot' Raata
|
ExcellciuM
Exair Holding Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:32:00 -
[13]
I think i prefered the blog about the roids tbh.
|
Elmicker
The Phoenix Rising FreeFall Securities
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:34:00 -
[14]
Oh, i also forgot to mention the whole "We're ignoring the issue and just doing a massive gameplay mechanic change in the hope it'll solve itself."
Here's a tip, free of charge.
The initial carrier blog was following this strategy. The mineral compression nerf followed this strategy. Scripts follow this strategy.
None of the above achieved their objective. Perhaps it's time to directly address the mechanics that're broken? You know, like, switching em/therm around and lowering cap use?
|
|
CCP Zulupark
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:35:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Elmicker
Won't help amarr much, though. They still can't fit ships worth a damn or fire for longer than a minute or two.
I can hardly agree with that. It's quite easy to PVP fit a mean Amarr ship. I suggest you check out the changes on SISI.
|
|
Athena Attom
Black Eclipse Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:35:00 -
[16]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Originally by: Caligulus Raven base resistances
- Before changes
Shields EM - 0%, Exp - 60%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 20% Armor EM - 60%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 45%
- After changes
Shields EM - 0%, Exp - 50%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 20% Armor EM - 50%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 45%
I fail to see how modifying the explosive damage resistance on the raven increases Amarr damage.
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.
Yes just like the 5 fighters idea. Logic + CCP = failed idea.
What exactly did you listen to with regards to peoples whining? Just damage types? Cap, fitting, etc. Still not touched; damage poorly attempted at fixing.
|
Mika Meisk
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:35:00 -
[17]
Nice too see that you have reached the tinkering stage. I don't really get why you decreased the explosive resistance on the zealots armor though?
This is nice and all and its good you take small steps. But you will take a closer look at the t1 cruisers of amarr using lasers, as well as the other "gimp"-mobiles as well I hope?
//Mika
|
Zaphroid Eulthran
Minmatar Imperial Visions
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:36:00 -
[18]
So Amarr arnt doing enough damage.. so make everything else weaker?
This only affects Amarr vs Player ships unless you plan on reducing npc resistances as well.
Also this "solution" hurts those people who do shield tank (like me) when lasers never had much of a problem vs shields. Not only does it make shields more vunerable to lasers it makes them more vunerable to everything else as well.
You had the problem nailed, so why this off the wall solution?
Hi-Sec Industry NEEDS Mini Freighters <- not T2 bazillion ISK alliance toys |
|
CCP Zulupark
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:38:00 -
[19]
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.
|
|
Miyamoto Shigesuke
Macrohard Foundation
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:42:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Miyamoto Shigesuke on 30/01/2008 17:42:23
Originally by: CCP Zulupark Amarr simply sit there and charge their lasers, secure in their knowledge that God is on their side.
You know that this does not make sense
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!
|
|
Mika Meisk
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:43:00 -
[21]
A question as well:
Have you a design goal for amarr, as you stated they are supposed to gank and tank.
For battleships this methodology is actually rather ok. The slow lumbering beasts combined with large optimal range offsets the capuse and the dps compared to other races.
On the cruiser level, amarrs extra optimal doesn't really have any effect since amarr cruisers can't control range, they are too slow to outpace the other nimble and fast cruisers, and amarr long range weapons are the shortest range of all the long range weps. Have you given this any though?
//Mika
|
Elmicker
The Phoenix Rising FreeFall Securities
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:45:00 -
[22]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark I can hardly agree with that. It's quite easy to PVP fit a mean Amarr ship. I suggest you check out the changes on SISI.
Hahaha, joke, right? Unless you have (contrary to the dev blog) changed fitting costs, it's still going to take 2-3x PG mods to get a decent fleet fit out of any one of the BSes. The tier 2 BS is still utter kack due to it only really having 1 bonus and no tank OR gank bonus. I could go on, but i'm not qualified to talk on amarr ships, i don't fly them often. I'll leave it to goumindong. He'll be along shortly.
So, as you think this is the best solution. What was the reasoning against swapping em/therm on the guns and lowering fitting costs? While this would still have left EM as the least useful damage type, it would actually have made Amarr useful in the mean time.
The problem with EM damage being useless lies not in the racial armour resists, but in the fact 90% of pvp fits are armour tankers. You SHOULD be looking at the spread of utility modules across low/med slots. You should be encouraging people towards shield tanks, not just beating the entire game with a nerf bat as you have in your last couple of pathetic attempts at "fixing" what you see as broken.
|
Chronos VIII
Amarr Infinitus Odium The Church.
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:50:00 -
[23]
Sorry Zulu, but to me you havent really put much thought into this "boost". It doesnt adress any amarr problems but stealth boosts minmatar Chronos
|
|
CCP Zulupark
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:50:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Elmicker
Hahaha, joke, right? Unless you have (contrary to the dev blog) changed fitting costs, it's still going to take 2-3x PG mods to get a decent fleet fit out of any one of the BSes. The tier 2 BS is still utter kack due to it only really having 1 bonus and no tank OR gank bonus. I could go on, but i'm not qualified to talk on amarr ships, i don't fly them often. I'll leave it to goumindong. He'll be along shortly.
You're talking about a very limited way of fitting a ship. Also, I said in the blog we were looking at some Amarr ships. There will be a blog shortly about how/what ships we've balanced.
Originally by: Elmicker
So, as you think this is the best solution. What was the reasoning against swapping em/therm on the guns and lowering fitting costs? While this would still have left EM as the least useful damage type, it would actually have made Amarr useful in the mean time.
Every race has "its" damage type. For Amarr that's EM. It just wouldn't make much sense to effectively remove one damage type from the game instead of trying to make it useful again. Also, what would then happen to EM drones and EM missiles?
Originally by: Elmicker
The problem with EM damage being useless lies not in the racial armour resists, but in the fact 90% of pvp fits are armour tankers. You SHOULD be looking at the spread of utility modules across low/med slots. You should be encouraging people towards shield tanks, not just beating the entire game with a nerf bat as you have in your last couple of pathetic attempts at "fixing" what you see as broken.
Thank you. We'll take that into consideration.
|
|
Francis Inch
Amarr Lightyear Inc
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:54:00 -
[25]
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.
I definately agree this is the major factor in the equation, but there are still a number of fitting issues with Amarr - too many of the beams are too harsh on grid to fit and make comparable set ups to the ships of other races. A little attention to these at the same time, or at least phased in shortly after would, in my view, solve much of it.
While everyone would always love more mid slots, I can see why this would lose the flavour of the ships and if I could fit less powergrid upgrades to boost my damage, then I'd be be comfortable with the tanking vs EW trade off that Amarr face, or maybe even look to fitting some sensor boosters etc. As it is, I can hardly fit some of the guns on their own, let alone in a balanced set up, which is not as significant an issue for most other races weapons.
All in all though, this is a great step forward and it's nice to see CCP not nibbling at the edges of it just to avoid upsetting other race players - the resists were the major issue and it's right that they are addressed without tweaking something that could tilt the balance in an unknown direction.
|
Alexander Knott
Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 17:55:00 -
[26]
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.
If armor tanking is overwhelmingly more popular than shield tanking, why is this true? It would seem that the player base has spoken on which form of tanking it feels is superior.
----- "I like to loot, especially going to the can of the battleship, sometimes there is a surprise inside, sometimes there is only carp..." |
Bahamir
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:01:00 -
[27]
I like the idea, i just hate the games that see an issue with something and just PUMP it, then its bigger than the other race/class and pump the second one, and everyone finish with 99.975% resistances and x80 damage.
There are people that never understand that "just pumping a race" is the same that "nerfing the other 3 races".
|
Caiman Graystock
Quantum of Solace
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:03:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Caiman Graystock on 30/01/2008 18:04:03 So to boost amarr, we gots to nerf everyone else? :D Ah well, I can live with that, better than boosting them and having to do it with everyone else and getting into that kind of cycle.
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:04:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Alexander Knott
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.
If armor tanking is overwhelmingly more popular than shield tanking, why is this true? It would seem that the player base has spoken on which form of tanking it feels is superior.
Shield tanking is superior. That is not the question. The question is "what is the best use of the slots I have?" and shield tanking, while superior to armor tanking, is not superior to other uses of the med slots for the most part.
All that means is that when performing different tasks, different slots are more or less valuable. Over a certian number of med slots or low slots are unnecessary to a long ranged passive tanked ship. This is why the Armageddon is pretty good, because 3 meds, no big deal, they are sensor boosters anyway, but the extra low is another damage mod or plate, which is hugely important. But if you take the tempest, with 5/6, it cant armor tank effectivly because it needs damage mods in a passive gank setup, it cant shield tank effectivly because it doesnt have enough med slots to fill with ewar, and split tanking is less effective because EANMs do not benefit shield resistances and plates dont benefit shield hit points which reduces the synergy between stacking tanking mods.[in the same way that adding an MAR to a drake with an invuln results in the same EHP on both, but a drake with a shield booster would tank a lot better due to the synergy between the shield resists and the shield booster]
|
Marn Prestoc
Minmatar Spartan Industries Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:04:00 -
[30]
Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad idea.
There is no racial problem, its select ships.
All you've done is increased the performance of lasers vs all armour tanks: eanm, tripple hardened and t2 (as well as shield tanks slightly).
Well done at boosting a hole race when the problems are with certain hulls / modules. -
|
|
Rob Erachar
Destructive Influence Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:05:00 -
[31]
How about also stacking penalizing the racial resists? I.E. minmatar receive a 10% bonus to EM damage on armor. With your current suggestion of reducing the base em resistance on armor to 50% that 10% bonus is actually a 20% reduction in damage (50% -> 60% reduces damage by 20%) With a stacking penalty a 10% racial bonus on a 50% base would only raise overall resistance to 55%. As your example a Jaguar would go from 90% EM base armor resistance to 88.75% base EM armor resistance. A zealot would go from 80% to 79.75% base EXP armor resistance.
P.S. There is an error in the Blog. Currently a Zealot has a base EXP resistance of 80% and not 87.5%.
Originally by: AceonfireAlso, "do not expect to make any money from killing GOONS. When I tried to tractor beam one of their wrecks, a message box popped up and asked me if I was serious." |
Alski
Gallente Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:06:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Zaphroid Eulthran So Amarr arnt doing enough damage.. so make everything else weaker?
This only affects Amarr vs Player ships unless you plan on reducing npc resistances as well.
Also this "solution" hurts those people who do shield tank (like me) when lasers never had much of a problem vs shields. Not only does it make shields more vulnerable to lasers it makes them more vulnerable to everything else as well.
You had the problem nailed, so why this off the wall solution?
Agreed, to me that blog started off perfectly, listed exactly the changes people have been crying out for for ages, and then took off in the twisted direction of nerfing everyone else, the Amarr problem is not limited to PVP only, the overall design has some gapeing flaws that need fixing.
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
I can hardly agree with that. It's quite easy to PVP fit a mean Amarr ship. I suggest you check out the changes on SISI.
Its quite easy to fit a lot of Amarr ships yes, however Amarr also have the highest number of ships that DO have fitting issues.
Originally by: devblog Remove the energy turret capacitor need bonus and replace it with more damage bonuses
This to me personally is one of the biggest issues with Amarr, EVERY ship in Eve is defined by its roles, if you look at any other ship you can clearly see the advantages of using it above another based on its roles, "ability to use your own races weapons systems without capping-out and dieing" is not a role.
Have you guys considered just making laser cap usage reduction a separate skill? or even just give every Amarr ship an extra bonus?
-
(combat) Patch belonging to CCP hits your drones, wrecking their liberty and freedom.
|
Zarch AlDain
The Establishment Establishment
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:08:00 -
[33]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Originally by: Elmicker
The problem with EM damage being useless lies not in the racial armour resists, but in the fact 90% of pvp fits are armour tankers. You SHOULD be looking at the spread of utility modules across low/med slots. You should be encouraging people towards shield tanks, not just beating the entire game with a nerf bat as you have in your last couple of pathetic attempts at "fixing" what you see as broken.
Thank you. We'll take that into consideration.
Actually leaving his ranting aside this is a very good point.
As a Caldari/Shield specialist every single one of my pvp chars has now trained armour tanking. Hell I was looking at a phoenix fitting the other day and decided it was marginal whether to armour or shield tank it, but armour tanking required a month less training.
All sorts of ideas have floated around but fundamentally a mid slot is more valuable than a low slot simply because all you can put in low slots are speed, armor tank or damage mods while all the stuff like MWDs, tackling gear, ewar, etc are mid slots.
Rather than nerfing armour EM resists (or as well as) give people a reason to take shield tanks into PvP - and then we might see things change.
High slot warp scramblers (currently only available for hactors), low slot ewar. etc. I am not suggesting removing the difference between mid and low slots as the new modules should be different in some way to the mid slot ones but there should be some dilemma over fitting an armour tank in the same way shield tanks struggle.
For example low slot sensor amps could be boosted to be closer to the mid slot version in effect, the same for ECCM. How about a high slot 'projector' module and then low slots that generate effects like warp scrambling and webbifying. For example on a pvp raven you could have warp disruption generator, 2 webification generators and then a high slot effect projector. Use the projector on someone and it warp scrambles and dual-webs. (Only one projector per ship? Or allow multiple but increase the cap drain?) There are all sorts of options and ideas that would help the situation.
Zarch AlDain
|
R0ot
Eternity INC. Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:08:00 -
[34]
Wtf, please explain how you come about with the thought of lasers doing explosive damage, HOW?! ------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Elmicker
The Phoenix Rising FreeFall Securities
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:10:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Zarch AlDain Actually leaving his ranting aside this is a very good point.
This isn't me ranting. I talk like this all the time.
|
|
CCP Zulupark
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:10:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Rob Erachar
P.S. There is an error in the Blog. Currently a Zealot has a base EXP resistance of 80% and not 87.5%.
Woops, fixed. Thanks.
As to the other things you said: we're changing one thing at a time here, so I won't rule anything out.
|
|
Mastin Dragonfly
Absolutely No Retreat Synchr0nicity
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:11:00 -
[37]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Originally by: Elmicker
Hahaha, joke, right? Unless you have (contrary to the dev blog) changed fitting costs, it's still going to take 2-3x PG mods to get a decent fleet fit out of any one of the BSes. The tier 2 BS is still utter kack due to it only really having 1 bonus and no tank OR gank bonus. I could go on, but i'm not qualified to talk on amarr ships, i don't fly them often. I'll leave it to goumindong. He'll be along shortly.
You're talking about a very limited way of fitting a ship. Also, I said in the blog we were looking at some Amarr ships. There will be a blog shortly about how/what ships we've balanced.
Putting beams on a ship is a very limited way of fitting? Have you ever looked at the powergrid reqs of heavy beams, mega beams and tachyons?
|
redCube
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:12:00 -
[38]
Edited by: redCube on 30/01/2008 18:16:23 In my humble opinion the "amarr boost" will lead to even more armor tanking.
Armor tankers will benefit even more over the shield tankers: its because of the fixed -10% change.
t1 shield tanks currently have a accumulated value of 120% t1 armor tanks currently have a accumulated value of 130%
this is generally fine, as there is a "free" recharge for the shields.
now some math
if you remove a fixed 10% from 120% shield tank this leads to 110% which is in fact ~91.67% of the original value. if you remove a fixed 10% from 130% armor tank this leads to 120% which is in fact ~92.31% of the original value.
Although this is just a slight benefit for the armor tankers, it exists.
In my opinion -9% for shield tanks will do better: 120% -> 111% leads to 92.5% of the original value.
Best regards, redCube (a shield tanker ;))
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:12:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Goumindong on 30/01/2008 18:16:42
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Originally by: Elmicker
Won't help amarr much, though. They still can't fit ships worth a damn or fire for longer than a minute or two.
I can hardly agree with that. It's quite easy to PVP fit a mean Amarr ship. I suggest you check out the changes on SISI.
It was quite easy to pvp fit a mean Amarr before this change. The change doesnt change the fact that you can pvp fit a mean amarr ship. It doesnt change the ships that are bad. It doesnt make the ships more forgiving at low skillpoints[which its a twofold problem i can explain to you if you want, one deals with cap, and the second deals with the way damage and range contribute to each other]. It doesnt change the fact that laser ships are conductive to being laser bricks or bigger laser bricks. It doesnt change anything about Amarr except boost the relative damage of Amarr and Minmitar against everyone else.
edit: Also, you got the new shield resists of the new Zealot wrong, someone mentioned the armor already.
|
Elmicker
The Phoenix Rising FreeFall Securities
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:12:00 -
[40]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark As to the other things you said: we're changing one thing at a time here, so I won't rule anything out.
You said this last time with the carrier blog. Why do you do this - Post half-finished solutions when you (should) know they're just going to be lambasted for being half-finished.
|
|
Alski
Gallente Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:15:00 -
[41]
Originally by: R0ot Wtf, please explain how you come about with the thought of lasers doing explosive damage, HOW?!
A Laser hitting a solid material will vaporise the material into gas, the laser then has to pass through the gas to hit its target, in the process creating more gas and energizing the gas into a plasma, the plasma becomes superheated and rapidly expands causing an explosion. </geek>
-
(combat) Patch belonging to CCP hits your drones, wrecking their liberty and freedom.
|
|
CCP Zulupark
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:15:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Originally by: Elmicker
Won't help amarr much, though. They still can't fit ships worth a damn or fire for longer than a minute or two.
I can hardly agree with that. It's quite easy to PVP fit a mean Amarr ship. I suggest you check out the changes on SISI.
It was quite easy to pvp fit a mean Amarr before this change. The change doesnt change the fact that you can pvp fit a mean amarr ship. It doesnt change the ships that are bad. It doesnt make the ships more forgiving at low skillpoints[which its a twofold problem i can explain to you if you want, one deals with cap, and the second deals with the way damage and range contribute to each other]. It doesnt change the fact that laser ships are conductive to being laser bricks or bigger laser bricks. It doesnt change anything about Amarr except boost the relative damage of Amarr and Minmitar against everyone else.
I said in my blog we were looking at balancing some Amarr ships. There will be a separate blog about that soon so you should perhaps reserve judgment until then ;)
|
|
1Of9
Gallente The Circle STYX.
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:19:00 -
[43]
Zulupark, i dont care what u nerf next. Just keep away from capitals plz! geez ...
|
ExcellciuM
Exair Holding Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:20:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Elmicker
Originally by: CCP Zulupark As to the other things you said: we're changing one thing at a time here, so I won't rule anything out.
You said this last time with the carrier blog. Why do you do this - Post half-finished solutions when you (should) know they're just going to be lambasted for being half-finished.
This is to cover their arse when they make crap decisions. Don't think this is the last time it will come up. With that sentence they can eventually say we were just putting forward ideas and none of it was set in stone.
|
Drykor
Minmatar Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:20:00 -
[45]
I think it's not too bad of an idea.. though I don't see people with some skills have any issues with Amarr ships. CVA seems to do fine with them, Amarrians in my corp are quite happy with them, they have their strengths and weaknesses like every other race. We have people training up for Amarr now because they like alot of their ships. Factoring in that nanoships are quite popular among every race and that they generally have a shield buffer tank with 0% EM resists on shields, Amarr ships aren't that bad off combined with their huge range on their 'low range' weapons. The whole "90% of eve armor tanks" idea is nonsense. It's simply not true in 0.0.
But I don't have big issues with this change either. I am losing some explosive resists on my shields but meh.. only important vs minmatar ships and I don't care as it will equalize with the damage I'm doing on other people's shields.
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:20:00 -
[46]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
I said in my blog we were looking at balancing some Amarr ships. There will be a separate blog about that soon so you should perhaps reserve judgment until then ;)
If you were going to take the time to rebalance the Amarr ships, why change the em/ex ratios on shield and armor which changes even more things that are harder to control?
I mean, you were going to go look at the ships anyway right? Why make a big sweeping change that has repurcissions all accross eves balance if you didnt have to? And i know you didnt have to because you just told me you were going to go and look at the ships and modules that are causing the problem that arent going to be fixed by this change.
|
Yggdrassil
Amarrian Missionaires
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:21:00 -
[47]
Unless I am mistaken, this cooks down to:
Boosting Amarr damage with around 6-6.5% for fleet snipers. Boosting Amarr damage with around 4-4.5% for close range.
Boosting Minnie damage with around 2-3% for fleet snipers. Boosting Minnie damage with around 3%(?) for close range.
Leaving Hybrid damage unchanged
Boosting Missile damage with 5% vs em/expl.
This only applies to the hardened part of the hostile ships, wether that is shield or armor.
Not quite sure if it will balance everything out - but Hybrid users sure don't have any reason to shout "hoo-ray" :)
Yggdrassil |
|
CCP Zulupark
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:25:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
I said in my blog we were looking at balancing some Amarr ships. There will be a separate blog about that soon so you should perhaps reserve judgment until then ;)
If you were going to take the time to rebalance the Amarr ships, why change the em/ex ratios on shield and armor which changes even more things that are harder to control?
I mean, you were going to go look at the ships anyway right? Why make a big sweeping change that has repurcissions all accross eves balance if you didnt have to? And i know you didnt have to because you just told me you were going to go and look at the ships and modules that are causing the problem that arent going to be fixed by this change.
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.
The blog on ship changes will come soon.
|
|
Marn Prestoc
Minmatar Spartan Industries Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:28:00 -
[49]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark I said in my blog we were looking at balancing some Amarr ships. There will be a separate blog about that soon so you should perhaps reserve judgment until then ;)
Problem is your conclusion from your issues is flawed.
"Base EM resistances on armor are very high" is not the cause of problems. Its that when fitting a armour tank typically when using 3 or less resistance modules DC and X number of EANM are best. 4 or more and active specifics out perform EANM and except on minmatar make EM the lowest resistance.
Lets not forget t2 armour tankers, gallente and indeed amarr themselves. After filling the biggest holes EM is typically the lowest resistance. Even on none minmatar shield tanks EM is typically lowest, even after a specific hardener.
I think you need to reasses that issue and the cause you've drawn from it, hence reverse the solution. -
|
Haradgrim
The Wild Bunch INTERDICTION
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:29:00 -
[50]
This, in its current form, is such a bad idea its not even funny.
The reason I say this:
1) CCP is correct to believe that it would be unfair to change EM resist on armor without changing EXP resist on shield.
However; Caldari vs Minmatar is currently reasonably balanced, however, one *could argue* that minmatar currently have more "oomph" when it comes to PVP. If you nerf the base EXP resistance on shields you force every pvp caldari player as well as every other shield tank setup to either fit against exp damage or leave it open as a hole. This change assumes everyone fits omni-tanks, and with shield tankers, its simply untrue. I also fail to see how given minmatar more damage potential against shield tanks is in any way in Amarr's interest.
2) Clearly CCP is of the opinion that the "problem" with Amarr is that they do not do enough damage. Given the proposed change, they feel that the margin by which the damage is too little is somewhere between 3-10% (given then effect that the Armor change would have.
Here is what I would do to fix the issue rather then Nerf shield tanks:
Remove Laser Cap bonus from all Amarr ships that have it, remove a similar amount of cap usage from the weapons base usage. At this point, nothing has changed, the damage output and cap usage of lasers is the same as it currently is, the only difference is that a bonus on all the affected ships has not been used.
Here is where there is room for discussion as one of three things needs to happen to that free bonus slot:
1) A damage bonus - However this won't work for ships with a current damage bonus
2) a ROF bonus - this will increase DPS but it will make the capacitor issues even more pronounced. If a rate of fire bonus were introduced, the cap usage of Lasers would have to be reduced in general as well.
3) A range bonus/tracking bonus, this is probably the least palatable for Amarr players, but the truth is given amarr ships a bonus to tracking or range would help define their roles a little more specically.
__________________________________________________
If it were up to me; I would drop the cap bonus that currently exists, I would decrease the cap usage of lasers below what it is with lvl 5 of the relevant ship skill by about 20-25%. I would then give all ships that have a damage bonus a RoF bonus that would result in an overall DPS increase of about 7% (some ships closer to 10%, some closer to 3%). Barring that, I would only change crystals to create balance, you are going to have alot of unhappy people if you nerf their resists.
REMEMBER THE CARDINAL RULE OF MMO DEVELOPMENT: IT IS BETTER BOOST THAN NERF!
If the blogged change goes through then Caldari should get a damage bonus instead of the stupid Kinetic bonus.......
Originally by: CCP Oveur ...every forum whine feels like a baby pony is getting killed
|
|
DigitalCommunist
Obsidian Core
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:30:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
I said in my blog we were looking at balancing some Amarr ships. There will be a separate blog about that soon so you should perhaps reserve judgment until then ;)
If you were going to take the time to rebalance the Amarr ships, why change the em/ex ratios on shield and armor which changes even more things that are harder to control?
I mean, you were going to go look at the ships anyway right? Why make a big sweeping change that has repurcissions all accross eves balance if you didnt have to? And i know you didnt have to because you just told me you were going to go and look at the ships and modules that are causing the problem that arent going to be fixed by this change.
He did it because tweaking ships and guns doesn't bring about long term balance. It perpetuates FOTM. If there are any actual issues with Amarr ships and weapons, they are comparable in severity to, or inferior in severity to the issues present with ships and weapons from all other races.
The only reason to look at them now and make minor adjustments, is because you're looking at it anyways.
People who are expecting wide sweeping changes to one single race now are just as wrong as the people who would give it to them. What we need more of, is changes that affect all races at once.
Like an overhaul of the broken tracking formula ;) _______________________________ http://epicwords.net/ |
Elmicker
The Phoenix Rising FreeFall Securities
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:30:00 -
[52]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark What we're talking about here is fixing the EM problem.
You mean the broken EM resists on minmatar T2 ships, right?
|
Rick Thwaites
Black Podding
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:30:00 -
[53]
Edited by: Rick Thwaites on 30/01/2008 18:33:00 re reading blog. --
|
Louis DelaBlanche
Cosmic Odyssey YouWhat
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:31:00 -
[54]
Not a bad idea imo. That said, if this + a boost to amarr damage output was implemented, it might skew the balance too far in Amarr favor. Better to test both than pick the best/find middleground when it comes to actually implementing it on tranquility.
As for the Shield change, I guess it is a stealth boost for MInmatar fighting other shield tankers (though since Minmatar are pretty crap (with some exceptions) at both shield & armor tanking they perhaps need a damage advantage against both). But then again if 10% is universally taken off armor resis I guess the same should apply to shield.
As for giving Amarr more damage types, I personally would rather see them get kinetic rather than exp damage if they need a new type at all, otherwise u may just end up with Gallente complaining that they now have too little variation in racial damage types for hybrids (being the only race left that doesnt have a [drones excluded] weapon platform that does damage against EM/EXP/Both).
|
Hehulk
Black Sea Industries Cult of War
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:34:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Rick Thwaites No!
You are gimping Caldari pilots again - already EM resistances are poor, we can't fight Sansha or Amarr
Come again? I've used drakes, feroxes, ravens, etc against sansha and blood raiders, and I manage fine. ---------- It's great being minmatar, ain't it |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:37:00 -
[56]
Edited by: Goumindong on 30/01/2008 18:44:20
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
I said in my blog we were looking at balancing some Amarr ships. There will be a separate blog about that soon so you should perhaps reserve judgment until then ;)
If you were going to take the time to rebalance the Amarr ships, why change the em/ex ratios on shield and armor which changes even more things that are harder to control?
I mean, you were going to go look at the ships anyway right? Why make a big sweeping change that has repurcissions all accross eves balance if you didnt have to? And i know you didnt have to because you just told me you were going to go and look at the ships and modules that are causing the problem that arent going to be fixed by this change.
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.
The blog on ship changes will come soon.
Yes, but what I am saying is that largly it wasnt a problem. We know it wasnt a problem because we have 3 amarr ships that are fine or close enough to fine to not matter. These three ships are 1: a ship balanced specificially by nerfs in the past, and 2: the two newly designed ships taking into account the quality of current ships. If these ships were fairly balanced excepting a few problems with fitting that can be easily tweaked, then why in the world would the ships you went back and fixed not be balanced after you rebalanced them? Clearly its possible, we have 3 nice examples. And to top it off, the main resistance imbalance you didnt even fix[hint, it has to do with the flat 10% racial increase in resistances on armor].
Look, you have 3 ships that are good despite the em/ex change right?
So changing this makes them better? Where they at the right level before? If they were at the right level before, wouldnt a damage increase make them too good?[possibly, as there are ranges to this].
Oh, and the EM/Ex change also makes Ravens, Tempests, Typhoons, Malestroms, Hurricanes and Ruptures[to a lesser extent] much better.
So if you wanted to fix the ships that were a problem, but didnt want to change the ships that wern't a problem then why change the em/ex resistances if you were just going to go fix the ships that were a problem anyway?
if you fix the ships that were a problem you would have a line up of ships without problems and wouldnt have to worry about all the other changes to the game balance you just made.
Individual ship balance changes are MUCH MUCH more minor than sweeping resistance changes. I know it may not look like that because ships are so integral to the game. But it is. Changing one ship changes one combat variable[I.E. that ships performance]. Changing the resistances of all ships changes all combat variables. Do the small changes first, do the big changes last. If you cant fix amarr by fixing the problem ships, the fitting issues, then racial attributes that dont affect other ships. Then look at sweeping changes. The only time this doesnt hold true is if there are other changes you need to make to affect the game balance. Are there? Was minnmitar DPS a problem?
|
Elmicker
The Phoenix Rising FreeFall Securities
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:40:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Kweel Nakashyn I just don't understand : You remove 10% to EM AND remove 10% to Exp. It's not an Amarr boost, it's an Amarr/Minnie boost, no ?
It's a nerf to everyone as EHP falls across the board, however this affects amarr the most significantly, as they're the most reliant on passive EHP tanks.
|
Bane Glorious
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:40:00 -
[58]
Would it be possible to consider reducing EM and maybe EXP resistances on NPC pirates as well? Nearly 3/4 of EVE has rats that have high EM resistances, which makes making money as a new Amarr player difficult and drives people to cross-train for a Dominix or Raven.
EVE would be more interesting if there were more options for NPCer, and more variety of targets for pirates that hunt NPCers. |
Treelox
Amarr Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:42:00 -
[59]
/me sighs
Seriously Zulu, I have to agree with all the rest of the naysayers in this thread. Useless for me to just reiterate the same points that everyone else has made, since as usual you will ignore them.
I have a much better idea for game improvements, how about we nerf your dev blog posting abilities. Since they always seem halfc()cked.
The amarr problem is far more complex than your little proposed fix. How about instead of mucking about with everyones resist, you instead sit in the*****pit of every Amarrian ship. Then try fitting each one for pulse, beam, mega beam, tach(as appicable). Try doing this in a high SP and an average SP character. I think at this point you will start to see where the real amarrian problems stem from.
Yes Amarrian ships have damage dealling issues, but for most of those ships if they could be "properly" fitted a lot of the issue would be negated. --
|
DigitalCommunist
Obsidian Core
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:45:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Haradgrim This, in its current form, is such a bad idea its not even funny.
The reason I say this:
1) CCP is correct to believe that it would be unfair to change EM resist on armor without changing EXP resist on shield.
However; Caldari vs Minmatar is currently reasonably balanced, however, one *could argue* that minmatar currently have more "oomph" when it comes to PVP. If you nerf the base EXP resistance on shields you force every pvp caldari player as well as every other shield tank setup to either fit against exp damage or leave it open as a hole. This change assumes everyone fits omni-tanks, and with shield tankers, its simply untrue. I also fail to see how given minmatar more damage potential against shield tanks is in any way in Amarr's interest.
You say they're "correct to believe this" but you don't offer any counter point. I don't see, from anything that you've written, a reason why they should not reduce shield explosive damage.
There is nothing in EVE that states shield explosive and armor em are two resistances which you don't have to tank. The RP only states they're the highest, and CCP hasn't changed that. You're just used to having that hole plugged completely.
Originally by: Haradgrim 2) Clearly CCP is of the opinion that the "problem" with Amarr is that they do not do enough damage. Given the proposed change, they feel that the margin by which the damage is too little is somewhere between 3-10% (given then effect that the Armor change would have.
Here is what I would do to fix the issue rather then Nerf shield tanks:
Wait, what? Please don't spin with propaganda. They said:
A little backstory
There have been a lot of requests (to put it mildly) and petitions to do "something" about the so called Amarr problem. Most of those are about Amarr not being competitive when it comes to damage output and therefore not a viable race to fly in PVP.
They are claiming this is what YOU the players think, and obviously they don't agree so the rest of your proposal is probably never going to happen.
Originally by: Haradgrim REMEMBER THE CARDINAL RULE OF MMO DEVELOPMENT: IT IS BETTER BOOST THAN NERF!
If the blogged change goes through then Caldari should get a damage bonus instead of the stupid Kinetic bonus.......
Wow. Not even close.
The general rule of MMO development that speaks about making changes (in particular), is that people will ask for changes which benefit them. If there's an issue with something and is acknowledged as being broken; players affected by it will demand a boost and players not affected by it will demand their stuff be left alone.
So you have both sides asking for a boost, when the better solution is to nerf. Nerfing itself is harder to do, because then you have both sides being unhappy. Any devs that take this path have balls, because they trust their judgment more than the biased drivel of players.
Usually, boosting creates short term satisfaction with long term damage and problems. All changes should be made with the long term in mind. If you think for even one second, that any race needs a blanket damage increase, you have no clue and should refrain from posting. _______________________________ http://epicwords.net/ |
|
Triath Lon
Keepers of Balance Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:46:00 -
[61]
I fly Amarr and Minmatar ships and live in 0.0 space. Lately we've been taking out more and more Amarr hacs to deal with nanoishtars, while abaddons are rapidly gaining in numbers amongst our snipers. You know, introducing a little laser fire into those artillery barrages.
With these new changes our sniperddons just got a nice boost!
Now, i don't know what kinds of ship changes Zulupark has in mind, but so far - two thumbs up! Keep up the good work, and post this to TQ as soon as possible. ________
Ambassador Extraordinary Plenipotentiary |
x psy
The Graduates Brutally Clever Empire
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:52:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Elmicker The problem with EM damage being useless lies not in the racial armour resists, but in the fact 90% of pvp fits are armour tankers. You SHOULD be looking at the spread of utility modules across low/med slots. You should be encouraging people towards shield tanks, not just beating the entire game with a nerf bat as you have in your last couple of pathetic attempts at "fixing" what you see as broken.
I endorse this.
|
Kweel Nakashyn
Minmatar Aeden Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:55:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Elmicker
Originally by: Kweel Nakashyn I just don't understand : You remove 10% to EM AND remove 10% to Exp. It's not an Amarr boost, it's an Amarr/Minnie boost, no ?
It's a nerf to everyone as EHP falls across the board, however this affects amarr the most significantly, as they're the most reliant on passive EHP tanks.
I don't know what EHP is, but my char shoot in Exp... So CCP gave me basically 10% more DPS on shields, I won't say no :) 2isk
|
Elmicker
The Phoenix Rising FreeFall Securities
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:56:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Kweel Nakashyn I don't know what EHP is, but my char shoot in Exp... So CCP gave me basically 10% more DPS on shields, I won't say no :)
I apologise. EHP is "Effective hitpoints". This is your hitpoints with resists applied.
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 18:58:00 -
[65]
Originally by: DigitalCommunist
Wow. Not even close.
The general rule of MMO development that speaks about making changes (in particular), is that people will ask for changes which benefit them. If there's an issue with something and is acknowledged as being broken; players affected by it will demand a boost and players not affected by it will demand their stuff be left alone.
So you have both sides asking for a boost, when the better solution is to nerf. Nerfing itself is harder to do, because then you have both sides being unhappy. Any devs that take this path have balls, because they trust their judgment more than the biased drivel of players.
Usually, boosting creates short term satisfaction with long term damage and problems. All changes should be made with the long term in mind. If you think for even one second, that any race needs a blanket damage increase, you have no clue and should refrain from posting.
It depends on the problem. If the problem is that one thing is too strong, nerf it. If the problem is that one thing is too weak, you buff it. They key part is the "one thing".
|
Ishan Mons
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:01:00 -
[66]
so lemme get this straight... Armor tankers are gonna take about 25% more EM damage, and Shield tankers are gonna take about 25% more Explosive damage... just to boost amarr
and yet there's no compensation for the lost resistances? if you really wanted to balance it out you could make it so armor tankers take 25% less explosive, and shield tankers take 25% less EM... that would basically just level out all resistances that way everyone's weapons would be good against everyone!
seriously tho, I thought the whole point of damage types was to make weapon types situational, lasers were good at ripping through shield tanks and great for 0.0 ratting against EM weak factions because of the almost non-existent ammo consumption.
you are basically homogenizing damage types which is totally weaksauce ------------------------ BOOST PATCH! BOOST PATCH! BOOST PATCH! BOOST PATCH! |
Pitbull1
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:02:00 -
[67]
seems like some good changes. keep up the work and i might even train for amarr myself
|
Kweel Nakashyn
Minmatar Aeden Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:02:00 -
[68]
Edited by: Kweel Nakashyn on 30/01/2008 19:02:56
Originally by: Elmicker I apologise. EHP is "Effective hitpoints". This is your hitpoints with resists applied.
Well they cut +/-/~5% in EHP then. That's not that much. The real problem is everybody shooting in Ki/Th. Today, somebody who focus on Ki/Th have no problem tanking 3/4 of Eve due to the server population :) 2isk
|
Ritzenhoff
Gallente The Pink Hippo Riding Club
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:04:00 -
[69]
So I see how this boosts Amarr for PvP (the rights and wrongs of the methodology I will leave to others).
But with all ships getting a blanket decrease in resistances, this will be a nerf for PvE. I'll take more damage and missions get harder. Will NPC ships be getting a similar nerf to resistances? If this is the case then it'll balance out, otherwise there will be a few more ships lost in missions... though I suppose that's a boost for manufacturers
|
DigitalCommunist
Obsidian Core
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:05:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Goumindong stuff
The problem with everything you say is that you think discrepancies with ships and modules is the problem, or the source of the problem. No, its a problem that exists in every race.
Tweaking one race does nothing in the long term. It is playing whack-a-mole with balance, and perpetuating FOTM. It is something that gets done, but it should NOT be the main priority after so many years.
What Zulupark is doing, is targeting issues that affect not only Amarr, but any race in a similar situation. The situation this blog is focusing on, is the one where your weapons and/or ships are completely impotent against another just because you happen to use the worst counter.
In general, its stupid to have the fight skewed so much in favour of one ship or race just because of uncontrollable base stats. I'm not advocating all ships be the same, but player skill and experience should determine the outcome of a fight first, and if its too close, then skillpoints and stats should play a deciding role.
If you feel its not fair for lasers to be completely impotent against omni armor tanks, then you must also agree that explosive should not be useless against omni shield tanks. The only reason we do not see as many complaints about the latter, is because shield tanks are less common, and Minmatar do not deal explosive damage exclusively, even if they are the explosive race.
Doing things this way is far more logical, and better for the long term. If you changed ships or weapons to a point where lasers are effective even against high EM resisted armor, then what is going to happen to effectiveness of shield tanking? You inadvertently entice even more people to stop using shields and switch to armor.
Do you want to be using Amarr in combat, where 90% of the time your guns are "meh, okay" because 90% of the time you're fighting other armor tankers - OR - do you want your guns to absolutely chew through the enemy in 50% of the engagements, because those are the times you're fighting a shield tanker? _______________________________ http://epicwords.net/ |
|
Alski
Gallente Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:06:00 -
[71]
Something that keeps bothering me over and over again about this solution…
Changing the base resists on every single ship in the game effects every form of PVP AND PVE, it influences ALL other races choice of drones and missiles, and minmatars projectile ammo, it makes the second highest damage mod drones – explosive drones even more viable vs. all enemies, it makes explosive damage even more of the damage type of choice for all who can chose it, and it nerfs ALL T1 ships active armor tanks as EM will always be their lowest resist, it changes NPC tanking stats for both shield and armor tankers, while doing nothing to increase Amarr’s NPCing capability.
Is my thinking just paranoid or is this not basically reinventing the wheel because of one little rough patch of road?
-
(combat) Patch belonging to CCP hits your drones, wrecking their liberty and freedom.
|
Disteeler
Segunda Fundacion
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:08:00 -
[72]
Lowering EM armor resistances coupled with raising EM shield resistances seems to me more reasonable and more into Occam's razor style. Maybe, of course :)
Sig by Black Necris |
Rells
Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:10:00 -
[73]
Edited by: Rells on 30/01/2008 19:14:19 Dev Blog basically boils down to:
"We are going to give Minmatar, Missiles and Drones a HUGE BOOST. ...
oh and ya, we will thrwo a tiny bone to Amarr"
There is no assurance there will be an explosive crystal and this is a massive boost to non minmatar ships. Furthermore this is actually a NERF to the Amarr ships since explosive is their highest resist meaning that they can no longer tank as well as before against projectiles, missiles or drones.
Way to do .... well ... NERF Amarr through the backdoor again.
EDIT: The 25% increase in damage for EM is inconsequential to the 25% increase in damage for explosive. Explosive damage is already high due to across the board lower resists than EM. So you give Amarr a 25% bonus to 10 and explosive wielders a 25% bonus to 30 ? I wonder who comes out on top there.
Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken! |
Volucer S
Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:18:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Rells Edited by: Rells on 30/01/2008 19:14:19 Dev Blog basically boils down to:
"We are going to give Drones a HUGE BOOST. ...
Drones got huge nerf, they dont restore shield in drone bay.
Boost Gallente!
|
Marn Prestoc
Minmatar Spartan Industries Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:19:00 -
[75]
Edited by: Marn Prestoc on 30/01/2008 19:20:43
Originally by: Rells Dev Blog basically boils down to:
"We are going to give Minmatar, Missiles and Drones a HUGE BOOST. ...
oh and ya, we will thrwo a tiny bone to Amarr"
There is no assurance there will be an explosive crystal and this is a massive boost to non minmatar ships. Furthermore this is actually a NERF to the Amarr ships since explosive is their highest resist meaning that they can no longer tank as well as before against projectiles, missiles or drones.
Way to do .... well ... NERF Amarr through the backdoor again.
Not so simple.
T2 Tanks: Amarr - Where therm was the only big hole both EM and therm will need filling. Probably results in a higher EM res than before.
Gallente - Where exp was the only major hole, EM is now the lowest by like 9.5% (just 1 t2 exp hard fit), EM is so low it probably warrents a EM res rig.
Caldari - EXP is now the lowest resistance after 1 T2 EM hardener. Probably warrents a EM and EXP res rig if not 2 more hardeners.
Minmatar - Exp and Kin are now quite low on shields (armour was like that already), yet not enough slots to do anything about it without screwing the ships so just gonna suck vs exp and kin.
Completely shifts the balances around, and not just to em and exp damage, because you have to accept the hole or fill them. Filling the holes will result in other damage types doing more damage as a slot/rig is taken up by a specific resistance. -
|
Velvet Spice
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:19:00 -
[76]
I stopped believing in your dev team's ability to properly balance this game a long time ago, so this doesn't really come unexpected, but I'm stunned nonetheless
"hi we're making sweeping changes to all ships and nerf tanking in general, and afterwards we might try balancing single ships" - seriously...
|
Rells
Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:20:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Volucer S
Originally by: Rells Edited by: Rells on 30/01/2008 19:14:19 Dev Blog basically boils down to:
"We are going to give Drones a HUGE BOOST. ...
Drones got huge nerf, they dont restore shield in drone bay.
Boost Gallente!
Wrong thread. You were lookign for the drone whine thread. This is the Amarr whine thread.
Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken! |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:20:00 -
[78]
Originally by: DigitalCommunist
The problem with everything you say is that you think discrepancies with ships and modules is the problem, or the source of the problem. No, its a problem that exists in every race.
Tweaking one race does nothing in the long term. It is playing whack-a-mole with balance, and perpetuating FOTM. It is something that gets done, but it should NOT be the main priority after so many years.
It is a problem that exists in every single race. No it does not perpetuate FOTM[unless sacrileges and Maledictions are FOTM now and simply no one has noticed]. Its almost always big sweeping change that make FOTMs because FOTMs are the result of unintended changes that do things the developers didnt intend. This is much much easier to do with a big sweeping change.
The best example of this is the I-stab change that boosted I-stabs to ridiculous values. This, conbined with the rigs just introduced and the old nanofiber mechanics to make ships that had more low slots and trackingless damage completly and totally overpowered. There was no specific ship change that cause it, but a general change to a module that affected every single ship in the game.
There are instances where individual ship balance is done in a manner that makes a ship overpowered[E.G. the Myrmidon]. However that is more rare than than a sweepign change causing that effect. Its much easier to predict becasuse you can just look at the values of the ships using the current accepted fittings, and then see how powerful it is. Its much easier to fix because you can just change that one ship.
Zulupark might be "targeting any race in the same situation". But there is no problem and there is no other race in the same situation. This means it becomes a sweeping change for no good reason instead of targeting the problem[****ty ships].
Quote:
In general, its stupid to have the fight skewed so much in favour of one ship or race just because of uncontrollable base stats. I'm not advocating all ships be the same, but player skill and experience should determine the outcome of a fight first, and if its too close, then skillpoints and stats should play a deciding role.
If you feel its not fair for lasers to be completely impotent against omni armor tanks, then you must also agree that explosive should not be useless against omni shield tanks. The only reason we do not see as many complaints about the latter, is because shield tanks are less common, and Minmatar do not deal explosive damage exclusively, even if they are the explosive race.
This would be true if it were also true that any ship that can shoot explosive out of its guns [or drones] can not also shoot another type of damage[oh hey look, they all can!]. Or if those ships that were shooting explosive out of their guns were having a problem in balance because of it[oh hey, they arent!]
Quote:
Doing things this way is far more logical, and better for the long term. If you changed ships or weapons to a point where lasers are effective even against high EM resisted armor, then what is going to happen to effectiveness of shield tanking? You inadvertently entice even more people to stop using shields and switch to armor.
Do you want to be using Amarr in combat, where 90% of the time your guns are "meh, okay" because 90% of the time you're fighting other armor tankers - OR - do you want your guns to absolutely chew through the enemy in 50% of the engagements, because those are the times you're fighting a shield tanker?
Are the Abaddon, Geddon, and Harbinger too good against shield tanks? If they are, then you need to make a change to bring them back in line. If they arent then there should be a problem with brining up all the other ships to be reasonable against armor tanks because the Abaddon, Geddon, and Harbinger dont suck. And if there is a problem it will be easily detectable because we are only changing small things with regards to balance[the ships]
|
Tempest Kane
Amarr Reikoku Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:21:00 -
[79]
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. __________________________________________ - Tempest Kane, Reikoku Director, Band Of Brothers.
|
Cynthia Nixon
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:23:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Alski
Changing the base resists on every single ship in the game effects every form of PVP AND PVE, it influences ALL other races choice of drones and missiles, and minmatars projectile ammo, it makes the second highest damage mod drones û explosive drones even more viable vs. all enemies, it makes explosive damage even more of the damage type of choice for all who can chose it, and it nerfs ALL T1 ships active armor tanks as EM will always be their lowest resist, it changes NPC tanking stats for both shield and armor tankers, while doing nothing to increase AmarrÆs NPCing capability.
This.
I totally agree with the sentiment behind Zulu's idea, but I think that it doesn't take this sort of massive change into account.
|
|
Salaman Rushid
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:23:00 -
[81]
Edited by: Salaman Rushid on 30/01/2008 19:23:33 While resistances are something someone can argue about forever as far as tweaking and changing, this blog doesn't fix what I consider the main problem with Amarr ships to be:
We can't fit our own damn guns. No Amarr ship can properly fit its T2 guns without massive amounts of power grid modifications. For any battleship, this means a minimum of 2 RCU IIs. This is a problem because in doing so you're losing slots for capacitor recharge, tracking/range, or tanking mods.
While I understand the 'give and take' mechanism of fitting, Amarr are simply screwed in this respect, and they are currently the only ones. The Minmatar battleships are the only ones even close to the same problem, and really it's not even significant.
Please fix the power grid for the Omen, Maller, Zealot, Harbinger, Armageddon, Apocalypse, and Abaddon. You can probably fix this more simply by fixing power grid requirements for the lasers themselves.
If you don't understand what I'm talking about, try fitting out some Ravens, Rokhs, Megathrons, and Dominix -- with your goals in mind of long range/dps/tanking. Try to take the same goals and apply them to Amarr ships. Amarr are supposed to be all lasers and tank, but we can't actually fit it, even with perfect skills.
|
ArmyOfMe
Exotic Dancers Club
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:24:00 -
[82]
not a bad start
|
Kweel Nakashyn
Minmatar Aeden Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:24:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Alski Something that keeps bothering me over and over again about this solutionà
Changing the base resists on every single ship in the game effects every form of PVP AND PVE, it influences ALL other races choice of drones and missiles, and minmatars projectile ammo, it makes the second highest damage mod drones û explosive drones even more viable vs. all enemies, it makes explosive damage even more of the damage type of choice for all who can chose it, and it nerfs ALL T1 ships active armor tanks as EM will always be their lowest resist, it changes NPC tanking stats for both shield and armor tankers, while doing nothing to increase AmarrÆs NPCing capability.
Is my thinking just paranoid or is this not basically reinventing the wheel because of one little rough patch of road?
I think you're just paranond. I like the way it is going : Exp guys like me will still have to tend to shoot EM first on shields, change ammo on armor, switch on Exp with range bonus saying to them gtfo. Th/Ki are 75% of the damages on killboards with Exp coming third just because of drones, so it seems EM/Exp need to be chosen a lot more, no ?
Amar don't have the choice, their damage is EM + ... I just don't understand the Minnie boost coming with the Amarr boost but why not :) At least ppl would say "why not Amarr, or why not Minnie" at the character creation page.
Why CCP didn't just gave 10% more on each EM damage ?
That's easy, lol. That should be "Each type of damage * 10" then "Each people's HP * 10", then add 10% to EM damage, then revamp the modules... It's a nightmare I think.
Amarr need a specialty anyway. Because the nos nerf was deadly for them. So maybe something should be done to Amarr's capacitors... 2isk
|
Rells
Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:24:00 -
[84]
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
Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken! |
Olavane Riftsnake
Clan Shadow Wolf Sylph Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:25:00 -
[85]
Quote:
The Tech 2 Minmatar ships that have enjoyed a 92.5% EM resistance on armor will now have to make do with 90%
Thanks god I'm not flying T2 minnie ships!!!
|
LordVodka
Earned In Blood
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:26:00 -
[86]
Changing the amarr again... hmm. Well I have ben 100% amarr PvP for 2 years now, and I'd say I know the race pretty inside and out from the capital Revelation to the favorite little frigate the punisher.
What I've noticed in my time Pvp'ing is that Amarr is hardly as bad as people have made it out to be, Although I would never say it was as easy to fight with as the Gallante ships were, but after the latest nerfs, I'm not complaining.
If there are any changes to the race I'd love to see a cap use change on amarr guns more then anything, Amarr ships are known for there great capacitors, issue being we strap some lasers on and that caps gonna run dry faster then any race hehe. So imo, number one change should be cap use, number two I'd say lower the powergrid usage on the battleship class beam lasers, and the third priority I'd say would be a increse to the thermal damage on crystals.
Despite my amarr ships lacking 4 mids on most occasions, I'd hate to give up a low or high tbh, I like the unique layout of the amarr ships over the other races, and truely feel this should not be changed.
More then anything here I don't want to see amarr boosted to a point where everyone screams for a amarr nerf so, when you think amarr boost just think cap reduction in energy turrets =-).
-LordVodka
|
Ishina Fel
Caldari Synergy. Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:27:00 -
[87]
Well, it certainly does help Minmatar a lot! Oh wait...
Seriously though, I think that this may help Amarr a bit. It does however have the side effect of affecting Minmatar significantly - lowered resistances against both explosive and EM, which they deal together with their most damaging ammo - lasers only get resistances to one of their two damage types lowered. I'm not saying that's bad, I just hope you are aware of this and have tested the effects of a Minmatar DPS increase on the game balance. Who knows, I don't fly Minmatar ships, it might even be good?
Mind, I would have taken a wholly different approach on the EM resistance issue... there was the possibility of just adding extra EM damage to laser crystals across the board. Like, Multifrequency S currently does 7 EM 5 Therm, it could be changed to do 9 EM 5 Therm. That would mean EM damage is still massively resisted, but Amarr ships (and only Amarr ships) would be dispensing a higher raw amount of it. It would further play into the theory that lasers are the strongest, but most cap-hungry and fitting intensive weapons (currently they are merely the most cap-hungry and fitting intensive ones).
Aside from that - have fun rebalancing the Apoc, it needs it desperately.
Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today! |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:29:00 -
[88]
If you did that, Ishina, then you would probably make them do too much dps against shields.
|
Kazuo Ishiguro
House of Marbles Zzz
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:29:00 -
[89]
Originally by: Disteeler Lowering EM armor resistances coupled with raising EM shield resistances seems to me more reasonable and more into Occam's razor style. Maybe, of course :)
It'd be even simpler just to leave shield tanks as they are at the moment rather than either buffing or nerfing them; as Goumindong and others have pointed out, this has wide-ranging repercussions on other races' ships & weapons and has no direct impact on the effectiveness of lasers. The value of a midslot is such that it would make sense to many people for shield tanks to be more effective, though.
If it's possible to fix this issue without making sweeping changes just by rebalancing the worst of the Amarr ships, that would be preferable to changing every ship in the entire game. Doing both might also work.
Another idea, while I'm here: how about giving Amarr ships large EM-only turret damage bonuses, to mirror the Caldari ships with kinetic damage bonuses? My research services Spreadsheets: Top speed calculation - Halo Implant stats |
LordVodka
Earned In Blood
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:31:00 -
[90]
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! |
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:33:00 -
[91]
No, it does have a direct impact on the effectiveness of lasers, it just doesnt necessarily have the right impact on the effectiveness of lasers.
There is no way you could lower EM resists on ships and not have an impact on the effectiveness of lasers.
|
smoogie
Minmatar Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:34:00 -
[92]
Edited by: smoogie on 30/01/2008 19:34:41 What about the Apoc?
|
BlackHorizon
Caldari Dark Knights of Deneb Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:36:00 -
[93]
Please don't forget to fix the cap usage on Mega Beams, since correctly, Tachyons are more damage/cap efficient, even though they're a higher tier weapon.
|
Poister
Amarr THEM. Praesidium Libertatis
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:40:00 -
[94]
This is what you call Dev Loving?
Amarr R.I.P.
|
Hun Jakuza
Imperium Galactica Omega Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:42:00 -
[95]
Explosive Laser ? :D Lol, what a ridiculous idea. I think this development idiotic again.
|
Rells
Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:42:00 -
[96]
Originally by: LordVodka Changing the amarr again... hmm. Well I have ben 100% amarr PvP for 2 years now, and I'd say I know the race pretty inside and out from the capital Revelation to the favorite little frigate the punisher.
What I've noticed in my time Pvp'ing is that Amarr is hardly as bad as people have made it out to be, Although I would never say it was as easy to fight with as the Gallante ships were, but after the latest nerfs, I'm not complaining.
If there are any changes to the race I'd love to see a cap use change on amarr guns more then anything, Amarr ships are known for there great capacitors, issue being we strap some lasers on and that caps gonna run dry faster then any race hehe. So imo, number one change should be cap use, number two I'd say lower the powergrid usage on the battleship class beam lasers, and the third priority I'd say would be a increse to the thermal damage on crystals.
Despite my amarr ships lacking 4 mids on most occasions, I'd hate to give up a low or high tbh, I like the unique layout of the amarr ships over the other races, and truely feel this should not be changed.
More then anything here I don't want to see amarr boosted to a point where everyone screams for a amarr nerf so, when you think amarr boost just think cap reduction in energy turrets =-).
-LordVodka
If we didnt have to fit solid cap gear in the mids to run just our guns, it would be a lot easier to reclaim that slot for something else.
Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken! |
Faye Valerii
Caldari Exeunt Omnes
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:46:00 -
[97]
Fixing Amarr by nerfing shields ?!
Shield tanking in pvp is horrible enough as is, the only saving grace is good explosive resists.
Taking 10% resists off shields and claiming it's in line with the armor loss is quite daft. They are effectively removing 1/12th of total shield resists while only removing 1/14th armor resists.
Not to mention the insulting irony of shieldtankers losing yet again to fix the EM problem, while shields get 0% EM resist.
Sigh.
|
Crazy Renegade
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:48:00 -
[98]
Edited by: Crazy Renegade on 30/01/2008 19:50:08 Good to see that the amarr wont remain the red headed step child of eve. Now how about some info about what is going on regarding the graphics glitches and other equally if not more important bug issues. Like the ones with the graphics cards. I just shelled out $200.00 on a card that I was told through the eve website under requirements would work. Yet when I ask Why I cant run 2 accounts at the same time like before I updated the client and graphics card. I seem to get the cold shoulder treatment. I know Im not the only person having this problem and I know it isnt my comp. Some kind of reply on this subject from the bug team or who ever deals with this stuff would be nice. Respecfully, Crazy Renegade.
|
Auron Shadowbane
Pelennor Swarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:52:00 -
[99]
dont like the change. and thats for I fly minmatar and it will increase my damage by at least 20% (emp rounds ftw ^^). it just makes everything too homogene. why not simple cut em and explosive damage and turn them into thermal/kinetic only. and if we are at that we might as well skip damage types compeltely and use a more wow-ish systhem oh health, mana and armor classing... prolly introduce levels too isntead of sp? and what about feats? dont forget them!
|
Bane Glorious
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:55:00 -
[100]
Originally by: Bane Glorious
Would it be possible to consider reducing EM and maybe EXP resistances on NPC pirates as well? Nearly 3/4 of EVE has rats that have high EM resistances, which makes making money as a new Amarr player difficult and drives people to cross-train for a Dominix or Raven.
EVE would be more interesting if there were more options for NPCer, and more variety of targets for pirates that hunt NPCers.
please don't forget about this :'(((((((((( |
|
LordVodka
Earned In Blood
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:56:00 -
[101]
Originally by: Auron Shadowbane dont like the change. and thats for I fly minmatar and it will increase my damage by at least 20% (emp rounds ftw ^^). it just makes everything too homogene. why not simple cut em and explosive damage and turn them into thermal/kinetic only. and if we are at that we might as well skip damage types compeltely and use a more wow-ish systhem oh health, mana and armor classing... prolly introduce levels too isntead of sp? and what about feats? dont forget them!
Go run around with the cuddly rabbits on WoW and stop polluting eve.
|
Haradgrim
The Wild Bunch INTERDICTION
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 19:57:00 -
[102]
Originally by: Faye Valerii Fixing Amarr by nerfing shields ?!
Shield tanking in pvp is horrible enough as is, the only saving grace is good explosive resists.
Taking 10% resists off shields and claiming it's in line with the armor loss is quite daft. They are effectively removing 1/12th of total shield resists while only removing 1/14th armor resists.
Not to mention the insulting irony of shieldtankers losing yet again to fix the EM problem, while shields get 0% EM resist.
Sigh.
QFT, I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one that thinks reducing shield resists in any way is absolutely INSANE!!!!
Originally by: CCP Oveur ...every forum whine feels like a baby pony is getting killed
|
ghosttr
Amarr ARK-CORP RONA Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 20:10:00 -
[103]
What about the missing amarr frigate? Will we ever be seeing that?
A bigger eve Annndd..Player Factions |
Reto
The Last Resort
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 20:10:00 -
[104]
CCP while u look at amarr ships take a GOOD look into reconships. i dont cry nerf here but only request that u guys check whether giving recons and eas imunity vs EW while benefit em with various uncounterable weapon combinations is a good approach.
Originally by: s4mp3r0r "Hey man, you're mom has a cruise missile".
|
xHalcyonx
Amarr Wreckless Abandon
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 20:11:00 -
[105]
Edited by: xHalcyonx on 30/01/2008 20:11:14
Wow, CCP actually looked at my idea to introduce the Balze crystal (expl damage). So apparently, the devs do read the ships and mods forum.
I still want Blaze to be introduced though.
Dropping resistances on all ships should be a good change for amarr, though many lower end amarr ships need to be looked into fitting wise.
Now, I just want 5 turrets (plus grid, cpu, and cap to match) on the Zealot or a +25m3 dronebay with 25 bandwidth. Also, a 4th mid on the Absolution + more grid/cpu to fit the 4 PvP essentials. ------------------- ნỊs uʍop əpỊsdn Support the introduction of Blaze M crystals for Amarr! |
MITSUK0
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 20:18:00 -
[106]
Are ccp incapable of balancing the game via any means except nerfing?
Lasers needed help, EM missiles and drones? EMP/Barrage/hail and explosive missiles/drones? not so much.
Overall not happy at the latest trend of balancing with nukes rather than scalpels. Hopefully the ship based changes are an improvement...
|
Emperor D'Hoffryn
No Quarter. Vae Victis.
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 20:19:00 -
[107]
This change is a nice first step...
But I do fear that it boosts minmitar more than Amarr, what with EMP doing EM and EXP damage.
Also, minnie t2 ships going from 92.5% EM on armor to 90% EM on armor? big flipping deal. T2 minnie ships will still be invulnerable to Amarr ships, while Amarr ships are completely vulnerable to Minnie ships. (phased plasma)
For the whole med slot stuff, Im fine with Amarr ships being solid Rods of Gold if we could actually fill that role, tanking and ganking with good damage. Our weapons suck cap, so we cannot tank, we cannot just fire our weapons either.
Hopefully This will finally give us the advantage all our disadvantages are supposed to balance: Good Damage.
Originally by: Meridius Dex I could actually fit a Thorax WITH LASERS and get better DPS, better speed, better tank and - wait for it - better cap stability
|
HatfulOfHollow
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 20:27:00 -
[108]
Edited by: HatfulOfHollow on 30/01/2008 20:27:57 Little to no mention of difficult to fit modules, outrageous cap use, or the absolute uselessnes of the Amarr recons. Once again, I feel the need to ask, "Do CCP even play their own game outside of the test server?" You've completely avoided the heart of the actual issues and instead pinpointed some sort of illusory cause that seems to be screwing everything up. Using this sort of logic, I can only assume that your "logical" solution in dealing with the next game balance problem that presents itself would be to nerf the crap out of everything except the one thing that was causing the problem.
How does "fixing laser damage" equal "screw up EM resists for every other race?" Also I'm glad you chose to use an Assault Frigate in your example, which just goes to show how truly out of touch you are. Assault Frigates, if you weren't aware, are terrible and there is absolutely no reason to fly one over a T1 cruiser.
The absolute heart of some of the main issues with Amarr can be seen by looking at cap usage and fittings issues. Alleviating both of these issues frees up mids and lows for tanking, thus fixing issues with midslots and the ability to tank. Fix those things before you start chasing ghosts.
I'd really like to provide constructive feedback but all you do is prove time and time again that you have no clue when it comes to game balance issues.
I really look forward to seeing how you screw things up even more.
|
Tareen Kashaar
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 20:29:00 -
[109]
Some random thoughts that might be worth considering:
- What about a cap reduction to armor repairers instead of one to Lasers? It's a boost to active tanking, but not to the extreme.
- 4th mid on the Absolution, hell yes. Just take the Harbingers 4th mid and give it to the Absolution, it's much more deserving :P
- Pilgrim does need serious looking at. As does the Apoc. But you guys said you are aware of individual ships needing love, so I'll just leave this entrusted to your skillful hands.
--- WTS: Forum Signatures, price negotiable. Evemail me!
|
TigerWoman
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 20:29:00 -
[110]
Quote: The more midslots argument doesn't have any one answer. The Amarr are the tanking and ganking floating rods of gold
ORLY? tanking and ganking? haha shure
|
|
Ishina Fel
Caldari Synergy. Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 20:31:00 -
[111]
Originally by: Goumindong If you did that, Ishina, then you would probably make them do too much dps against shields.
I see nothing wrong with that, if they suck vs. armor at the same time. More diversity! Besides, I was just giving arbitrary numbers there.
Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today! |
Tareen Kashaar
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 20:31:00 -
[112]
And of course I totally forgot to say: I love the proposed change. It makes all ships, everywhere, more likely to explode faster than before. It's the ultimate boost to my invention business! :D --- WTS: Forum Signatures, price negotiable. Evemail me!
|
Hie Loe
Gallente Intergalactic Science LLC
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 20:35:00 -
[113]
I guess I just don't understand the philosophy of making something better by making something else worse. Although you call this a boost to Amarr, what it really is a reduction in the capabilities of all ships. Maybe I'm dense, but to me in a game that is supposed to be fun and that we all pay for, the only direction you should move is up when it comes to balancing.
HL
I want a better signature. |
Corrupt Panda
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 20:44:00 -
[114]
So ... in this Amarr fix:
Caldari get a 10% boost to EM and Exp damage with missiles. Gallente get a 10% boost to EM and Exp damage with drones. Minmatar get a 10% boost to EM and Exp damage with ... everything. 20% if you count EMP ammo. Amarr get a 10% boost to EM damage with lasers.
This is not an Amarr fix. This is a stealth Minmatar boost.
|
Gypsio III
Darkness Inc. Blood Blind
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 20:45:00 -
[115]
Quote: The blog on ship changes will come soon.
While you're looking at ships, have a quick look at the powergrid of the Nighthawk please Specifically, should a standard PVP fit including Gang Mod, T2 HAMs, T2 MWD, T2 Large Shield Booster and Medium Electrochemical Cap Booster really require 3x RCU IIs and a PDS II?
Requiring 1 or 2 fitting mods is reasonable. Requiring 4 is just crazy.
|
Arkady Sadik
Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 20:47:00 -
[116]
(In case people wonder: We fight a war with PIE Inc. and Vigilia Valeria, amarrian loyalist groups that exclusively uses amarrian ships. So I do happen to think I have some experience fighting amarrian ships flown by competent pilots, and I also claim to be a somewhat competent PvP pilot myself. But I only fly Minmatar ships up to BC myself, so I won't comment on other races or BS.)
Great change, thanks! The extreme resists of armor vs. EM and shield vs. Exp was a good thing to fix for various reasons, not just because of the Amarrian reliance on EM damage. Streamlining the resistances a bit is very nice.
This is also a well-needed boost to EMP ammo. It was somewhat weird that usually, Phased Plasma was preferable vs. shield tankers due to the high explosive damage done by EMP.
As for your upcoming blog on ships: The Amarrian missile and drone boats are good as they are now. They fulfill a role, they are good at that role. It was the laser boats that were the problem for Amarr, and this change will boost laser boats quite a bit. I'm not sure which laser boats exactly will require more tweaking to make them competetive, or what tweaking they need, but I want to mention a few things.
1) Harbinger. This is right now a very competetive tier 2 battlecruiser. If fitted right (that is, dual web, ganky, useful tank; yes, such fits exist), for example, the only option I have with a Hurricane is to leave. Luckily, I do have that option, which is the main reason I do not cry "nerf!" The slot layout (exactly the same as a Hurricane) makes it a very versatile and useful battlecruiser (even nano-harbi works and is quite competetive).
2) Crusader. With beams, this is already among the best intercepters out there, as it is one of the fastest. (Also, Claw needs love :-/)
3) Capitals. Amarrian capitals are currently the best. Period. Tankiness is just the most deceiding factor for capital ships, and the Archon even gets very, very useful logistics bonuses in addition to being the best tanker. Try not to boost them.
4) Pulses vs. Autocannons. (Note I'm mainly talking about the Harbinger in the following, possibly also Crusader, Coercer and Zealot; most laser boats need some loving)
The big advantage of autocannons is the range, which ACs get at a huge loss of dps (close to 50% at normal combat distances). Due to range and speed, Minmatar ships can leave an unfavorable fight. Against pulse lasers after the tracking boost, that advantage is gone, as pulse lasers do more dps at better ranges than ACs, and have comparable tracking (Barrage reduces tracking). Equivalent Minmatar ships (tech 2 guns on both etc.) can not do the "orbit at distance" trick anymore, as the Amarr ship will out-range, out-dps and out-tank them. The new trick is to get close in to use the enormous drop in dps due to tracking at very close ranges, which will affect pulses much more than ACs. If the Amarrian ship can get more webs on the target than that can get on the amarrian ship, the minnie ship will usually just die. Tech 2 ships are off slightly better here, tech 1 ships suffer greatly.
Summary.
There have been quite a few changes recently that affect amarrian ships. While some of them clearly need love (Omen, Maller and Apoc are the most obvious ones; Prophecy, too, but at least it's in line with the other tier 1 BCs except maybe for the Brutix in the fact that it's a bad ship ;-)), others (as mentioned above) are already very competetive, and will be even better after this change. It's quite normal for the player base to adjust slowly to changes, so you will hear cries for Amarr boost for a while even after they have been made competetive, and it will be very easy to overcompensate and make Amarr too powerful. It's a difficult balance.
But thank you for this change. I'm looking forward to test it
|
Andreask14
Alterum - Infinitus - Fabula Dragons Of Oceans
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 20:50:00 -
[117]
I am glad most, if not all, of the major issues with Amarr are at least looked at. The proposed change is a step in the right direction, tackling an issue that became apparent only after the demise of 8x HS nber-pulse geddon a few years ago. If the topic is given enough attention amarr players might finally have no more reason to write dozens of pages about lasers in general or certain ships in particular.
|
MacQueen
Amarr Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 20:51:00 -
[118]
Edited by: MacQueen on 30/01/2008 20:51:40 Thanks for taking a look at some of the issues and attempting to balance it up a bit :)
Any plans on making large BS size guns easier to fit and less cap intensive as well fixing up the pilgrim and giving it a neut cap use reduction bonus instead of tracking disruptor bonus?
|
J Valkor
Blackguard Brigade
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 20:53:00 -
[119]
Edited by: J Valkor on 30/01/2008 20:55:43
Originally by: Gypsio III
Quote: The blog on ship changes will come soon.
While you're looking at ships, have a quick look at the powergrid of the Nighthawk please Specifically, should a standard PVP fit including Gang Mod, T2 HAMs, T2 MWD, T2 Large Shield Booster and Medium Electrochemical Cap Booster really require 3x RCU IIs and a PDS II?
Requiring 1 or 2 fitting mods is reasonable. Requiring 4 is just crazy.
Why would Tech 2 HAM's be a standard pvp fit? What ******* standard?
As for these changes - Most users here have no ability with math. More so than anything else, the vast majority of you cannot do even the simplest calculations in your head.
92.5%->90% increases damage against Tech 2 Minnie by how much? If you do 100 points of damage base it goes from 7.5 to 10. Please, with a cherry on top, figure out how big of a boost that is. I'll give you a hint - it isn't 10%.
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 20:54:00 -
[120]
Edited by: Goumindong on 30/01/2008 20:55:28
Originally by: Gypsio III
Quote: The blog on ship changes will come soon.
While you're looking at ships, have a quick look at the powergrid of the Nighthawk please Specifically, should a standard PVP fit including Gang Mod, T2 HAMs, T2 MWD, T2 Large Shield Booster and Medium Electrochemical Cap Booster really require 3x RCU IIs and a PDS II?
Requiring 1 or 2 fitting mods is reasonable. Requiring 4 is just crazy.
This can easily be fixed by fixing the power grid of HAMs. Co-incidentally when i asked regarding this issue in the last live dev blog on module balance the devs clearly thought i was talking about torps[not that that wasnt the change torps needed all a long instead a damage boost, but hey what can you do besides getting hired].
Fixing HAM PG also fixes up a lot of other problems with other ships which have problems fitting HAMs or HAMs as supplimentary dps.
Originally by: J Valkor
Why would Tech 2 HAM's be a standard pvp fit? What ******* standard?
Because tech 2 short range weapons can be a standard pvp fit for every other field command ship.
|
|
TigerWoman
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 20:55:00 -
[121]
this is not enough but a start.
without the changes to the ships this is pretty much not worth testing.
ty - still loosing my faith.
|
Contralia
Destructive Influence Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 20:56:00 -
[122]
Of all ships, the Pilgrim and Curse definitely need some evaluation.
You've got a pair of ships whose bonuses and specialties go to drones (Characteristically un-Amarr) Nosferatu (Noticeably nerfed) and Tracking Disruption (50% nerfed by the scripts change) In the meantime, the bonuses on the Pilgrim and Curse have not been adjusted.
The Nos nerf was particularly cruel to the Amarr recons, becuase a sizable portion of their survivability was based on the nos serving in two roles simultaneously: First to help break the targets tank, and secondly to allow the Pilgrim to run a stronger than usual tank compared to the class, fed with energy taken from the hostile.
Most Pilrim pilots these days (and there are damn few of them left, after the changes) tend to run neuts now instead of nos, with the hope of at least having a chance of breaking the hostile tank, having giving up on tanking completely.
Another factor to consider is balance relative to the other recons. While at the initial release, the recons were well balanced, changes in the meantime have left the Amarr fallen far behind.
- Falcon: ECM was nerfed, but the Falcon was boosted to compensate. Still quite capable of taking 4-6 battleship class hostiles out of a fight.
- Rapier: No changes since release.
- Arazu: No changes since release.
- Pilgrim: Nos and TD nerfs, significantly affecting ability to break a hostile tank, maintain your own, and reduce hostile DPS on turret boats. No compensating boost or adjustment to the ship.
If you're calling the Amarr the no-midslot gank race in your dev blogs, perhaps that makes sense for these boats to be changed to more of a pure gank-recon setup. There are admittedly no ships currently filling that role.
One thought that comes to mind is something akin to marauder type bonuses -- Give the Pilgrim 2 turrets, doing the damage of 4, (or maybe 3 doing the damage of 5) and leaving room for 2 utility slots for a pair of neuts. The pilgrim in its intial version tended to run pure nos, no turrets, and relied on drones and a guaranteed non-tank on the hostile to get kills. This allows it to turn more to the traditional Amarr laser-beams-of-divine-justness role. Meanwhile, the Curse, as a Knanid boat, shifts even further toward missiles and damage and tank, akin to the Sacrilege and Damnation bonuses.
|
J Valkor
Blackguard Brigade
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 20:58:00 -
[123]
Originally by: Goumindong Because tech 2 short range weapons can be a standard pvp fit for every other field command ship.[/quote
I'm only making fun of him for claiming certain "standards." I do agree HAMs need their PG reduced.
|
Cpt Fina
Mutually Assured Distraction
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 20:58:00 -
[124]
These changes makes sense. And for once you guys are making changes with small steps at a time, just as you should do.
Good job zulu!
|
Malena
Shiva
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 21:02:00 -
[125]
Surely there is a better way to give Amarr some love other than to nerf the other races?
Just seems bass ackwards to me to take stuff AWAY from 3 other races in order to make one race "better" WTF? Why do all the races have to be the same?
When the shield tanking bonusses, especially the minmatar ones, sucked tail, did you nerf the other 3 races? No, you boosted the shield tank bonus itself from 5 to 7.5 or 10 to 12.5. Reduce the cap usage, or do something that is exclusive to Amarr.
How does reducing resists coincide with the desire to make combat last longer? By reducing resists, you are making combat even shorter.
|
TigerWoman
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 21:07:00 -
[126]
Edited by: TigerWoman on 30/01/2008 21:08:58 Edited by: TigerWoman on 30/01/2008 21:07:41
Quote:
Just seems bass ackwards to me to take stuff AWAY from 3 other races in order to make one race "better" WTF? Why do all the races have to be the same?
take stuff AWAY from 4 races in order to make one race "better" WTF? not only amarr do em damage.... matar emp ammo, em misslies.....
fixed
edited: typos, 1 add
|
Gypsio III
Darkness Inc. Blood Blind
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 21:09:00 -
[127]
Quote: This can easily be fixed by fixing the power grid of HAMs
I don't favour a HAM fitting reduction. I'm happy that HAMs should be harder to fit than HMLs, because they're "better" - hence their general superiority in PVP. AFAIK, the only real problems with fitting HAMs occurs on the Cerb and NH (and Drake, if you want an active tank), suggesting that the problem is really one of Caldari PG.
In any case, there is a reduced chance of "unintended" ramifications if we tweak a few ships, rather than tweaking a module which can be fitted to many ships. Also, even if you half the PG of HAMs, then the NH still has PG problems. I'm not too keen on the NH's missile precision bonus either - it's kinda pointless in PVP, a missile explosion velocity bonus might be an interesting alternative.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 21:11:00 -
[128]
I think this might be a good first step towards fixing amarr. I hope to see the upcoming amarr ship fix blog soon aswell.
/lyria
Amarr pvp Vids: Inq - I Inq - II |
Ulstan
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 21:14:00 -
[129]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Originally by: Caligulus Raven base resistances
- Before changes
Shields EM - 0%, Exp - 60%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 20% Armor EM - 60%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 45%
- After changes
Shields EM - 0%, Exp - 50%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 20% Armor EM - 50%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 45%
I fail to see how modifying the explosive damage resistance on the raven increases Amarr damage.
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.
Why would only taking away resistances from armor tip the scale quite a bit, when armor already has an extra 10% resistance in one category over shields?
Moreover, given that everyone uses armor tanking in PvP instead of shield tanks, don't you think this indicates that whatever the current balance is, it *needs* some tipping?
|
Nyxus
Amarr GALAXIAN
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 21:16:00 -
[130]
Zulu - have you guys tried something like:
1)Increase cpu and grid use on EANM IIs
2)Decrease CPU needs of active hardeners below that of EANM IIs.
3)Decrease cap use of active hardeners drastically to that of DCs.
4)PROFIT!!!!!!
A large part of the general Amarr damage issue surfaced when omni tanking became not only viable, but a better alternative to tri-hardened tanks. An adjustment making tri-hardened tanks more attractive than omnis would probably go a long way to making damage types more equitable and wouldn't be as drastic.
Nyxus
PS- PLEASE look at base racial resist bonuses. They currently add the resists to the base instead of taking a percentage like they should. Sig removed, lacks Eve-related content. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Cortes
The Gallente ideals of Freedom, Liberty and Equality will be met by the Amarr realities of Lasers, Armor and Battleships. |
|
Ulstan
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 21:18:00 -
[131]
Anyway, thanks for the blog and that you are looking at amarr issues. I eagerly await a futher blog where specific ship fixes are outlined.
In my opinion, the most 'gimped' ships in EVE are the omen, ferox, apoc, maller, moa, and prophecy. As you can see, they are all either amarr ships or the abject line of caladari split weapons systems ships.
Amarr ships are beautiful they should fight well also. ;)
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 21:18:00 -
[132]
EANMs being the basic armor tank isnt a bad thing. Granted, it would be nice if hardeners were easier to fit, but lasers being bad against general armor is not terrible[due to the areas in which they shine being gang warfare where EHP mattters most]
|
Fourthorseman Griefer
VersaTech Interstellar Ltd. SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 21:20:00 -
[133]
Love for Amarr is great and all that but can I just have my sig image back?
.....
|
Cailais
Amarr VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 21:20:00 -
[134]
Oh look...another nerf to the Curse.
Brilliant. Well done.
C.
Improved Low Sec Idea!! |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 21:21:00 -
[135]
Originally by: Gypsio III
Quote: This can easily be fixed by fixing the power grid of HAMs
I don't favour a HAM fitting reduction. I'm happy that HAMs should be harder to fit than HMLs, because they're "better" - hence their general superiority in PVP. AFAIK, the only real problems with fitting HAMs occurs on the Cerb and NH (and Drake, if you want an active tank), suggesting that the problem is really one of Caldari PG.
In any case, there is a reduced chance of "unintended" ramifications if we tweak a few ships, rather than tweaking a module which can be fitted to many ships. Also, even if you half the PG of HAMs, then the NH still has PG problems. I'm not too keen on the NH's missile precision bonus either - it's kinda pointless in PVP, a missile explosion velocity bonus might be an interesting alternative.
Yea, the thing is that HAMs arent generally better than HMLs in pvp. But this isnt the thread to discuss that.
|
R0ot
Eternity INC. Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 21:25:00 -
[136]
Originally by: Alski
Originally by: R0ot Wtf, please explain how you come about with the thought of lasers doing explosive damage, HOW?!
A Laser hitting a solid material will vaporise the material into gas, the laser then has to pass through the gas to hit its target, in the process creating more gas and energizing the gas into a plasma, the plasma becomes superheated and rapidly expands causing an explosion. </geek>
Well by that justification all missiles should do explosive damage, since when they hit the target they explode. And all lasers would do it to, not just explosive crystals. What i'm saying is the idea of an specific "explosive crystal" is just stupid. ------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Vadimik
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 21:27:00 -
[137]
Pilgrim is in dire need of tender loving.
If you ask me:
Give pilgrim +20%/level to nos/neut range.
|
Roy Batty68
Caldari Immortal Dead
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 21:27:00 -
[138]
This is a bad idea. You're proposing to "fix" one race by changing every ship in the game?
Sorry to be a harsh critic, but it seems like someone did some risk analysis and then chose the option with the least benefit and the most risk. Supposed to be the other way around fellas.
In my limited experience with amarr, it's about fitting issues and cap use. I'd start there.
Nerf shields and boost minmatar more than you boost amarr?? How do you guys come up with this stuff?
But of course now you're just reading my sig... |
darkmancer
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 21:28:00 -
[139]
To solve the amarr problem your boosting explosive?
T1 shield already have 20 less resistance, making 10 "points" of resistance much more valuable to shields than armour.
Instead of hitting base resistance, why not reduce the em bous on invuns or DCU's?
Remove the 12.5% em resist on the DCU 2 and stick 1% on the other 3.
Or take off 7.5% of invun fields so shield get an em hole unless an em specific hardner is fitted.
--------------------------------- There's a simple solution to every problem. It is always invariably wrong |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 21:30:00 -
[140]
Altering PG requirements of lasers, reducing them, boosting the cap regen rate on all Amarr ships and a slight increase in laser optimal range and dmg would be better IMO.
Just because a solution may seem elegant, doesn't mean it's a good solution.
The Real Space Initiative - V5 (Forum Link)
|
|
Caligulus
Legion of Lost Souls
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 21:38:00 -
[141]
Edited by: Caligulus on 30/01/2008 21:43:44 Edited by: Caligulus on 30/01/2008 21:41:03
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Originally by: Caligulus Raven base resistances
- Before changes
Shields EM - 0%, Exp - 60%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 20% Armor EM - 60%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 45%
- After changes
Shields EM - 0%, Exp - 50%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 20% Armor EM - 50%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 45%
I fail to see how modifying the explosive damage resistance on the raven increases Amarr damage.
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.
While in the spirit of balance in this particular aspect wouldn't it be wise to make shield base EM resistance 10%? Armor's explosive resistance (it's weakest stat) has this aspect.
I've had it explained to me that the initial reason for this (base EM stat being 0%) was based on the shield regeneration rate and shield boosting capabilities vs armor repping amount. If that's so isn't a 10% reduction out of line with that formulaic ratio?
Further more, shield tanking already suffers immensely in PvP combat based on the loss of propulsion warfare modules. I think you should consider that rational further. ------------------------------------------------- **** You're out of your mind!
**** Well that's between me and my mind. |
Ulstan
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 21:45:00 -
[142]
Quote: I'm happy that HAMs should be harder to fit than HMLs, because they're "better" - hence their general superiority in PVP. AFAIK, the only real problems with fitting HAMs occurs on the Cerb and NH (and Drake, if you want an active tank), suggesting that the problem is really one of Caldari PG.
I don't particularly care if the fix is to reduce HAM fitting costs or increase a select few caldari missile boats PG, but the inability of caldari missile boats to actually equip good missile setups for PvP annoys me.
|
Caligulus
Legion of Lost Souls
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 21:46:00 -
[143]
Originally by: Corrupt Panda So ... in this Amarr fix:
Caldari get a 10% boost to EM and Exp damage with missiles. Gallente get a 10% boost to EM and Exp damage with drones. Minmatar get a 10% boost to EM and Exp damage with ... everything. 20% if you count EMP ammo. Amarr get a 10% boost to EM damage with lasers.
This is not an Amarr fix. This is a stealth Minmatar boost.
This is another excellent point. This isn't assisting the Amarr issue at all. Explosive crystals of some sort would have been the easiest variable to manipulate without so many ignored ripple effects. ------------------------------------------------- **** You're out of your mind!
**** Well that's between me and my mind. |
ashura'ka
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 21:46:00 -
[144]
its taken you this long to come up with this? as others have said its fitting requirements on beams that i have an issue with . every other race i play i can fit both type of guns and not have much of an issue. as it is i have ships with empty mid slots because im out of grid trying to fit beams and a decent tank...notice i said decent tank. i cant even fit a mwd its so bad. i have awu lvl 3. i need lvl4 or 5 just to fit a half ass tank? forget that. i would of liked to have seen a reduction on fitting beams to start with on test server and go from there. instead we get this.
|
General StarScream
Borg Collective hive mind
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 21:49:00 -
[145]
ahahaa lol does the people that come up with this play the game? lol
i mean sheild tanking is alot better than armor tanking.
try to fit a best sheild tank with the most uber mods on a raven, and then do the same on a mega with armor.
ye you get like 50% better defence.
Gallente has been nerfed to hell, i dont see anyone whining about the drones not recharging there sheild when called back, but still your sheild gets fixed if you dock in the station.
Gallente only do Kin/Therm and most people have that at 80% and em at 70% tottal bs to even say that people tank for em.
Cap problems? lol what about gallente they use alot of cap as well for there wepons,
it seems that the fourm ******s that whine to boost there own race, do alot of dam to the game, since they all just say **** to improve there own race but not all the races
like Caldri was uber powerfull, for pvp befor the torp change now they just way overpowerd, with the any dam type most dam, and best tank,
and now they thinking about Imporving amarr wich is allready super good at most stuff.
when you hear people say give me exp on my beam. you hear em say give hybrids Exp or em dam?
no they dont say **** about that.
what about passive tanks, oh look my Hac can passive tank 2 full gank megas at range while not using any cap at all, weeee.
Those whom make thees changes should play the game. Please resize signature to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
General StarScream
Borg Collective hive mind
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 21:54:00 -
[146]
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.
Ahaha Zulupark, what ya fitt for a tank? not everyone use the retared omi tanks, alot of people fit active armor tanks, wich give a base line of 73% em wich will be the lowest of the res on the armor tank.
so now you give the best guns in eve more power?
do you even play anything else than a fully officer fitted Raven on the test server? Please resize signature to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 21:57:00 -
[147]
Originally by: General StarScream
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.
Ahaha Zulupark, what ya fitt for a tank? not everyone use the retared omi tanks, alot of people fit active armor tanks, wich give a base line of 73% em wich will be the lowest of the res on the armor tank.
so now you give the best guns in eve more power?
do you even play anything else than a fully officer fitted Raven on the test server?
Yes, a lot of people are idiots or fit specificially against enemies they know they will be fighting. You cant balance around idiots and good meta choices.
|
Captain Campion
Synergy. Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 21:57:00 -
[148]
cap is really the problem, I don't see any other races with the bonus:
"10% bonus to the length of time you can shoot"
because it's silly!!
|
Clinically
Gallente Cold-Fury Southern Cross Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 22:08:00 -
[149]
So nerf + boost at the same time: brilliant, that'll sort 'em out! ________________ Welcome to EvE Online Forums, would you like to:
[ ] Whine about ganking [ ] Complain about updates [ ] Post an anti-nerf petition [X] Remove your operating system |
Jaala Creed
Minmatar Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 22:11:00 -
[150]
If people would look at it from an objective standpoint:
1.) All armor tanks(incl Amarr's) are 10% nerfed vs EM damage. 2.) All shield tanks are 10% nerfed vs Explosive damage.
People forget that even though this is a DPS boost for Amarr, its also a nerf for them.
As such, these things shouldnt be called a nerf, more a re-balance of resistances.
|
|
General StarScream
Borg Collective hive mind
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 22:13:00 -
[151]
so the only race left out is gallente since they cant do any Em dam without drones? Please resize signature to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Ariel Dawn
Beets and Gravy Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 22:13:00 -
[152]
Originally by: Corrupt Panda So ... in this Amarr fix:
Caldari get a 10% boost to EM and Exp damage with missiles. Gallente get a 10% boost to EM and Exp damage with drones. Minmatar get a 10% boost to EM and Exp damage with ... everything. 20% if you count EMP ammo. Amarr get a 10% boost to EM damage with lasers.
This is not an Amarr fix. This is a stealth Minmatar boost.
Minmatar T2 ships also lost EM shield resists for some reason; from 70% to 62.5% in addition to the armor reduction.
Minmatar could use a bit more DPS anyway on close-range ammo. Currently Minmatar ships with a Damage/RoF bonus are outdamaged by Hybrids/Lasers used on ships with a single damage bonus and supporting tanking/cap/whatever bonus.
|
Captain Campion
Synergy. Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 22:14:00 -
[153]
got another one
tracking disruptor bonus
.... web/scram bonusses are useful against all ships .... jamming bonusses are useful against all ships .... dampening bonusses are useful against all ships
... tracking disruptors... only work on turret ships, which is like.. half of eve, or whatever those stats showed a while back.
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 22:15:00 -
[154]
OMG! 6 pages allready!!!
|
SonOTassadar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 22:17:00 -
[155]
Edited by: SonOTassadar on 30/01/2008 22:18:18 Wow. What a dumb change.
First off... how is it balanced that armor tankers have more overall base resistances than shield tankers?
Second, what was it? Last year people were complaining that combat was too short, so you sought to increase the amount of base armor/shields to ships. Now you're reducing resistances. If you followed the pattern that originally started with, you would simply increase resistances across the board except for EM on armor and explosive on shields. This would prolong combat (like you planned on doing last year) and bring everyone in line with Amarr.
I can't believe how totally off-base you are from the problem. I don't like the Amarr race; their lore, their ships, their guns -- it all is just unattractive to me, and I joke that because they're so low on the totem pole that CCP should just do away with them entirely. If you're going to balance them, then balance them. Amarr players didn't want rockets as a secondary weapon, but you gave it to them anyways. Now you're lowering resistances, when nobody, not the race that you're attempting to boost, and not the races that are receiving the nerf, want them.
This is a terrible idea. Go back to the drawing board and try again. -----
|
Aslann
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 22:19:00 -
[156]
Edited by: Aslann on 30/01/2008 22:19:51 Wee another stealth gallente nerf, blasters do neither EXP nor EM damage (everybody has drones). And blasters use almost the same amount of cap as lasers do (more even with ship skills at 5 I think), while having smaller cap pools. QQ amarr, QQ. ______________________
|
N1fty
Amarr Galactic Shipyards Inc HUZZAH FEDERATION
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 22:21:00 -
[157]
I remember the day when everyone would fit 3 hardners on armour and EM came out the weakest resist.
Good times... --
|
Ulstan
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 22:23:00 -
[158]
Quote: First off... how is it balanced that armor tankers have more overall base resistances than shield tankers?
I would like to see the reasoning on this too. I'm sure at one point (before the prevalence of eanm omni tanks) there was a good reason for it, but no longer. Shield tanks are underrepresented in pvp as it is. Everyone chooses armor tanks.
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 22:28:00 -
[159]
I was going to post a wall of text, but the forum ate my post.
In short:
This change = good. But is 10% enough, considering the proliferation of trimark-plated-omnitanks? On those tanks, EM and them are the highest resists. When you lready have 2 EANM II and a damage control, you don't fit an explosive hardener, it's not worth using a slot.
Also, a general issue that affect both amarr and gallente: the difference in active tanking sustainability between ships that use cap for their weapons and ships that don't is too great. Something in the order of 30-40%. A good way to reduce that difference would be to boost the controlled burst skill.
------------------------------------------
What is Oomph? It the sound Amarr players makes when they get kicked in the ribs. |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 22:31:00 -
[160]
Originally by: Aslann And blasters use almost the same amount of cap as lasers do (more even with ship skills at 5 I think), while having smaller cap pools. QQ amarr, QQ.
Im pretty sure you dont know what youre talking about. Gallente is more then fine and will still be fine after this. Amarr pvp Vids: Inq - I Inq - II |
|
Vanlade
Amarr Blood Holocaust
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 22:35:00 -
[161]
zuzuzuzla
|
Valadeya uthanaras
Killjoy.
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 22:36:00 -
[162]
FIRST of ALL
lots of <3 CCP , it was long due and as an amarr pilot, I can only be happy to see the ship I like getting a most deserved oomph!!!
this change is quite calculated, because it also give reason to use EM drone that were also badly broken.
For the people complaining about the nerf to exp in sheild...I dont see how that nerf amarr..... I dont sheild tank, but minmatarr and caldari do... and I was most required, mainly because EMP was indeed somewhat broken.
the nerf to my own EM resist.... do I really care!!!!! I am the one using EM damage the most, not the other, but other can also use it, and I agree I should take more damage from it......SIMPLY BECAUSE it now give other races reason to use EM damaging weaponry (Drone, missile....), and this 10% reduction involve a up to 20% boost to damage I will deal to some ship
aka minmatarr whiner, your 10% boost to EM resist was in reality a 20% boost......my 10% racial resit was NEVER balanced in comparison...and you will still have more EM resist on than anyone....
Great JOB CCP
Now this change does not fix the cap usage, when some guns, like mega pulse don't really need a huge bufff, some laser weaponry do, and Tachyon NEED IT!!! capping out in 2-3 mins does not make sence, but doing so in 10-15 mins, when minmatarr and caldari never cap out would be balanced....
And well, I wont say anything till I see the ship change, but here a list that most player think need help:
prophecy apocalypse abaddon(ONLY CAP USE)
retribution (does not compete in any way with other AF, lowest damage and lowest versatility!!!!)
zealot ( need a lot of love in dps department, other races tend to have a lot more DPS, when I do not get the versatility thay have.....aka vagabond/deimos/cerberus/eagle.... all have higher DPS capability and IT SHOULD NOT BE!!!!!)
absolution ( see above, mainly DPS VS CAP USE being a huge burden, compare to the other races)
CURSE/PILGRIM: Ewar bonus need a huge buff, a sleipnir with barrage tracking my 3km/s curse with 3 tracking disrtuptor II with full skill and tracking script on him IS WRONG!!!!
THX a lot CPP for this long need buff to EM damage
|
Ral Ulgur
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 22:38:00 -
[163]
I really hope the proposed suggestions will have the desired effects.
An eye should also be kept on the fact that there are players who don't pvp or whose role in PVP is not to do damage. These players all get the downsides of the resistance changes, none of the benefits: -PvE players recieve more damage while not doing more themselves (true for all races, not taking into account possible fitting changes for amarr) -Electronic warfare platforms become more vulnurable while not becoming more effective -Same for logistics
Other sideffects may include: -Boost of highsec ganking (targets have less effective hp) -Boost of speedtanking as speedtanks rarely rely on resistances (though they can still be helpful)
Also for CCP to consider: Amarr are missing a frig.
|
General StarScream
Borg Collective hive mind
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 22:40:00 -
[164]
i still dont see why thees changed are needed, or why amarr needs a boost at all, they are quite easy to fit. can change Range in 2 sec, great dam, good tracking, great tank, and uber gank,
try fighting a Ganka geddon with 5 t2 drones on you.
its more powerfull than a mega since it will hit you hard for all the 24km in scram range, and this is just solo.
i would run and hide from a gang of such ships, they would meelt, armor and sheild tanks like a kake would go missing at a riki lake welcome party. Please resize signature to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Valadeya uthanaras
Killjoy.
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 22:42:00 -
[165]
Edited by: Valadeya uthanaras on 30/01/2008 22:56:13
Originally by: Ariel Dawn
Minmatar T2 ships also lost EM shield resists for some reason; from 70% to 62.5% in addition to the armor reduction.
Minmatar could use a bit more DPS anyway on close-range ammo. Currently Minmatar ships with a Damage/RoF bonus are outdamaged by Hybrids/Lasers used on ships with a single damage bonus and supporting tanking/cap/whatever bonus.
YES but your weapons DONT use capacitor at ALL!!!!!! never forget that
EDIT: ARIEL you are asking for a boost while you agree that its fine BECAUSE you have more speed, agility AND the ability to change damage type, even if it take some time. You should realise that your own tank IS SPEED on most ship, and that a tempest for exemple, have 22.975 effective slot:
11.975 high 5 med 6 low
MORE THAN any other ship in game..... as amarr I dont have a MWD on all my ship, I simply cant afford to fit one, but as minmatarr you fit one on all your ship and its good, that what they call balance mate.
you can use your weaponry while cap out, and they have a crazy high tracking. I sacrifice a INSANE amount of cap to have this soon to be(because of resist getting finally balanced) good damage, you give up DPS for your tracking and being capless
|
Ariel Dawn
Beets and Gravy Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 22:46:00 -
[166]
Originally by: Valadeya uthanaras
Originally by: Ariel Dawn
Minmatar could use a bit more DPS anyway on close-range ammo. Currently Minmatar ships with a Damage/RoF bonus are outdamaged by Hybrids/Lasers used on ships with a single damage bonus and supporting tanking/cap/whatever bonus.
YES but your weapons DONT use capacitor at ALL!!!!!! never forget that
Which is fine since Minmatar ships have the worst capacitor, lowest DPS and worst tanks out of all races. They are prevalent in PvP due to their speed and agility.
|
Frug
Zenithal Harvest
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 22:48:00 -
[167]
As a caldari pilot, I think these changes are trash.
The way I see it, you're making shield tanking in pvp a less viable option as your solution. Sure, lasers will be better, but you're ******* with the rest of the pvp dynamics to do this.
Garbage
- - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - - If you think I'm awesome, say BOOO BOOO!! - Ductoris Neat look what I found - Kreul Hey, my marbles |
Naim Stargazer
The Singularity Project Rare Faction
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 22:49:00 -
[168]
Finally. A decent change. It seems much more sensible than simply boosting just Amarr, or even changing ship bonuses.
However, it does seem that the Amarr ideology of tank'n'gank is somewhat outdated. The problem stems from the fact that tank'n'gank is a staple. Everyone needs to be able to do it, and be competitive at it.
This means that while Amarr are restricted to it like a racial (factional?) trait, other factions need to be able to do it equally as well (if they choose) while still retaining their own racial traits.
This change might bring EM damage (and thus Amarr given their damage type options) more inline with necessary damage output, but at its heart Amarr need one of two things:
1) Excel at tank'n'gank (to be the definitive word, as this is their racial trait) or 2) An additional trait (such as Caldari and EW, or Minnie's and speed/radius/flexibility)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:00:00 -
[169]
Originally by: Kweel Nakashyn
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Originally by: Caligulus Raven base resistances
- Before changes
Shields EM - 0%, Exp - 60%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 20% Armor EM - 60%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 45%
- After changes
Shields EM - 0%, Exp - 50%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 20% Armor EM - 50%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 45%
I fail to see how modifying the explosive damage resistance on the raven increases Amarr damage.
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.
I just don't understand : You remove 10% to EM AND remove 10% to Exp. It's not an Amarr boost, it's an Amarr/Minnie boost, no ?
no it depend what your tanking.
shield or armor.
|
Wizzkidy
Demonic Retribution Pure.
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:01:00 -
[170]
So you have decided to AT LEAST do something, well it was a long time coming!!!
Anyway this is a step in the right direction yet you are too panzy to commit to any REAL changes, I mean over all this change is tiny and although as I said a step in the right direction, cap usage is a problem.
Having a bonus that "reduces cap usage" is silly! how can you even call that a bonus its something u NEED to stay alive.
Unfortunatly this change will not bring me back to the game, until you commit yourself to some decent changes
|
|
General StarScream
Borg Collective hive mind
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:03:00 -
[171]
Well after some testing on the test server, the 10% fix seems to be a good option. even so but alot of the things mr Zulu said could make amarr to powerfull. like Cladri is.
but i guees you really need to skill for all races in eve.
SO maybe just cut down on the skill time, or make the diffrent skills to bs, more like t2.
like you have Amarr spec wich is needed to lvl 1-5 depending on wich ship you want, and you only need to train Cruiser to lvl5 once, then skill the diffrent races spec to be able to use there ships.
i think this would be better for people since we wont feel like we wasted 2 years skilling time when you change something.
Please resize signature to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Vrabac
Amarr BALKAN EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:04:00 -
[172]
Opened the blog full of hope, got greatly dissapointed...
I never ever had issues with damage as amarr. I'm always or almost always on top of killmails. Was hoping to see something about tracking disruptors and the way scripts ruined them, something about 80% of amarr t1 and 50% of t2 ships being utterly useless (as individual ships, not because of bloody EM dmg they do), about amarr recons... nothing. I don't think this will accomplish anything really. Amarr will suffer same as everyone else with resist reduction, just the same as they suffered after the fabled eanm nerf after which they became that one race that cant fit eanm any more, unlike the others who actually have cpu, thus becoming victims of their own "buff".
EM drones dont have the problem of doing EM damage, but the problem of doing so little of it. They are useless because of their unimaginably pathetic damage multiplier.
EM not being ideal against armor tanks? Bu-hu, big deal. Explosive isn't ideal against shield omnitank, kinetic either. Isn't that the point of having different damage types? To have diversity? Bu-hu the ohter guy has eanm and dc well guess what I've got plates and heatsinks and he still dies and i'm still top damage dealer. Also as you said Amarr sit there and hope god is on their side: they are if I understood correctly the "if brute force doesnt solve your problem, youre not using enough of it" race. His EM resist is high? Do more EM. So, how about leaving that as it is?
Please redirect the issue from EM damge to individual ships. Curse, pilgrim, sentinel, zealot, prophecy, omen, apocalypse, maller, arbitrator, work on them, they all suck not because of EM damage but becauses they simply suck as such.
Also, shouldnt the core of the problem be in the fact, that was mentioned in blog, that armor tank is so much more popular than shield in the first place? Maybe do something in that direction? Minmatar and Caldari as shield tanking races and Amarr and Gallente as armor should be the case and everything would be fine, unfortunately Minmatars are most of the time armor tankers just the same, despite the starting skillset their military characters get.
|
Confessor
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:05:00 -
[173]
Fix the Pilgrim for F...'s sake. I dunno, the empire sales orders for pilgrims should be enough to wake up ccp.
|
TigerWoman
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:08:00 -
[174]
Edited by: TigerWoman on 30/01/2008 23:08:02 somehow i have the feeling that this is all we will get. here is your peanut! now be silent for a year please!
this change is not enough at all since it doesn't even touch the mayor issues.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:12:00 -
[175]
Originally by: Vrabac
Please redirect the issue from EM damge to individual ships. Curse, pilgrim, sentinel, zealot, prophecy, omen, apocalypse, maller, arbitrator, work on them, they all suck not because of EM damage but becauses they simply suck as such.
Did you read the whole blog? There is another blog coming with changes to the broken amarr ships that you mention.
This change is good because there might be a reason to fit a maller with lasers eventhough it doesnt have a damage bonus.
Unbonused lasers should be inline with unbonused hybrid and projectiles. You get different drawbacks/advantages but one of them (like the laser) shouldnt suck so badly so that amarr ships start fitting other racial guns and need to train for them to use a crap ship. Amarr pvp Vids: Inq - I Inq - II |
Takeshi Yamato
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:13:00 -
[176]
Edited by: Takeshi Yamato on 30/01/2008 23:13:31 To be honest the changes to base armor and shield resistances will benefit Minmatar more than Amarr.
EMP ammo will hit harder on both shields and armor. T2 projectile ammo will hit harder on shields.
Lasers will just hit harder on armor.
Sorry, but there simply is no way to correctly adress this issue other than changing the laser damage types, anything else will affect other things than lasers as well.
|
Shaitis
Caldari Four Rings Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:15:00 -
[177]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Every race has "its" damage type. For Amarr that's EM. It just wouldn't make much sense to effectively remove one damage type from the game instead of trying to make it useful again. Also, what would then happen to EM drones and EM missiles?
Well, I dont fly Amarr but died to amarr ships many times and I dont think nerfing other ships to boost amarr is good idea, it will just make us die more often and faster to this matari fast hitting uncatchable speeedtanking ships. You should rather think about boosting damage output for Amarr even tho it will be also EM. Just add one more damage type to lasers/Amarr Drones (thermal - obviously) and everything will be fine. "What is funnier ? 20 Matari slaves pinned to one tree or 1 Matari slave pinned to 20 trees ?" |
Kazuo Ishiguro
House of Marbles Zzz
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:19:00 -
[178]
Originally by: Goumindong No, it does have a direct impact on the effectiveness of lasers, it just doesnt necessarily have the right impact on the effectiveness of lasers.
There is no way you could lower EM resists on ships and not have an impact on the effectiveness of lasers.
I was talking about lowering explosive resists on shields, not lowering EM resists on armour, though I appreciate that there was a slight ambiguity in what I wrote - I suppose you thought I meant to say that reducing EM resists wouldn't improve lasers.
I don't think there's any need to make shield tanking any more difficult than it already is. If there is, it's a separate problem. My research services Spreadsheets: Top speed calculation - Halo Implant stats |
Flamewave
Contempt.
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:20:00 -
[179]
Originally by: Bane Glorious Edited by: Bane Glorious on 30/01/2008 18:59:12 Would it be possible to consider reducing EM and maybe EXP resistances on NPC pirates as well? Nearly 3/4 of EVE has rats that have high EM resistances, which makes making money as a new Amarr player difficult and drives people to cross-train for a Dominix or Raven.
EVE would be more interesting if there were more options for NPCer, and more variety of targets for pirates that hunt NPCers.
I completely agree with this. Missions or 0.0 ratting for Amarr players is a nightmare compared to other races. __________
|
agent apple
Spartan Industries Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:22:00 -
[180]
Ill take some EM resists on T2 caldari ships (considering theyre the shield tanking masters lol)
and while your at it ill take crystals changed to HP increase with recharge reduction to give the same effect as slaves
Then they're might be a reason to not armour tank ravens, cheers
|
|
Pajamas Jack
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:27:00 -
[181]
Edited by: Pajamas Jack on 30/01/2008 23:27:09 Will someone please fire this Zulupark guy already. Hasn't he done enough damage already. When is it doing to stop...when he kills off the eve?
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue Sex Panthers
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:29:00 -
[182]
Originally by: Vrabac -good points-
Holy crap. I'm agreeing with Vrabac!
I agree 100%. The Amarr pilots that I know do *great* damage, regardless of what type of tank it is. Quite often the EM resists on my armor tanks are as low or lower than my explosive resists. Lasers have the best combo of raw damage/range in the game. Abaddons/Geddons easily compete with Megas/Hypes for DPS, and particularly so when you're in a gang situation and the targets are spread out.
All reducing Exp/EM damage does is make Eve into mush. Pretty soon everything will taste like oatmeal instead of having it's own unique flavor.
Every ship shouldn't be able to do every single job in Eve equally well. People just don't want to sacrifice anything. Shield tanks are great for PVP, just bring a tackler. There is nothing wrong with that. Each design has it's different capabilities/weaknesses. Pretty soon if low slot ECM and tackling and high slot whatever is introduced, all of Eve will be just one big homogeneous lump of crap with very little flavor.
Explosive crystals? Absurd. I'd like some explosive ammo for my blasters as well please. Reducing Exp/EM just buffs Minmatar. That isn't to say reduce EM only and not reduce shield explosive resists.
Changing the resists affects all ships and all combat, not just Amarr. Amarr needed to be tweaked a bit, but this is ridiculous. This is probably my first/last post on the matter, due simply to the fact that no amount of discussing it will affect a change anyway. I'm sure the Devs will manage to implement the worst possible options yet again.
Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y I I |
Elmicker
The Phoenix Rising FreeFall Securities
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:30:00 -
[183]
Sudden dev silence in this thread after so much direct interaction makes me apprehensive.
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue Sex Panthers
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:32:00 -
[184]
Originally by: Elmicker Sudden dev silence in this thread after so much direct interaction makes me apprehensive.
They went home from work?
Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y I I |
Terraisa Nichols
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:33:00 -
[185]
Does CCP only know how to nerf now? As so many of us have said, its human nature to like getting stuff and hate having it taken away. Therefore boost = good, nerf = bad.
How about you forget the whole nerf thing, which looks to cause a lot of trouble and doesn't seem to help Amarr much anyways, and boost Amarr by well... boosting Amarr?
What a concept!
|
Tzrailasa
Destructive Influence Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:37:00 -
[186]
Edited by: Tzrailasa on 30/01/2008 23:37:23 I fly Amarr exclusively on this character, and I've never thought that the damage was the major part of the problems with them.
The main problems, at least for the BS for me have been: 1. One of the bonus (cap reduction) being a necessity to actually fly the ship. For other races, it's a bonus. 2. The difficulty of fitting, and the reliance on one of the most expensive rigs to do so well.
Apart from that, I don't see much wrong. My favorite ships are the Harbinger and the Apoc. The Harbinger because it is a frig-shredder extra-ordinaire, and the Apoc because it deals decent damage and still never gets primaried
My views are my own. They do not represent the views of my corporation or alliance. |
DanMck
Amarr Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:38:00 -
[187]
thanks for looking into the issue
but please understand from my view we need...
em to thermal % adjusted (like when t2 crystals came out) less cap used per shot fired total cap increased slighty (cap kings ?) fitting reduced on beams cap bonus changed to tracking/neut cap use/drone range.. something else
please don't change everyship in the game to resolve the issue , there are very little whine therads on the other races compared to us.
you almost have the balance adjust us slighty ..leave everyone else alone.
use the force....
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:40:00 -
[188]
Edited by: Goumindong on 30/01/2008 23:41:20 I want to clarify what I am saying. I am not saying that a 10% resistance cut on armor and shield for em/ex respectivly is a bad idea or wont fix some problems. I havent really looked at that closely. What I am saying is that it isnt the change you should start with, and it isnt a "fix amarr" change. Its a general damage balancing change.
But its not a change that fixes amarr, its a change that fixes EM and EX damage. If there is a problem with EM or EX damage that this will fix, then by all means, make the changes necessary. But the change is much larger than just fixing Amarr and has many more repurcussions than a 10% damage increase against armor for ships that do ~50% em damage.
That is, change tanking if there is a problem with tanking and damage types. If there isnt, then there isnt. And if there is, i would love to see some numbers as to why such a change is a good idea.[it makes sense for sniping at least]
|
Waukesha
Amarr Extreme Addiction Atrum Tempestas Foedus
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:42:00 -
[189]
Quote:
Amarr need more midslots # Need more midslots to fit Ewar/tackling gear
The more midslots argument doesn't have any one answer. 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.
This justification for Amarrs lack of midslots is poor imh. I beg to differ on Amarr being the gods of tank and gank lol.
You forgot to mention Gallente have drones.. Why do they have extra mids? Minmatar have speed.. Why do they have extra mids?
If anything Amarr need more mids/all slots for cap mods...
Quote:
More damage # Remove the energy turret capacitor need bonus and replace it with more damage bonuses # Increase the base damage mod of energy weapons # Cap usage on Energy Weapons may be too high in some cases
I would say that not more damage is needed but more effective long lasting damage - cap is the problem here, you run out well before any equal opponent.
The cap bonus to ships as it stands now is leaving these ships with one less bonus, and I cant see how it can be viewed any other way...
Quote:
Fix crystals
The resist adjustings look good at first glance.
|
Takeshi Yamato
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:44:00 -
[190]
Did anyone work out how much this will boost laser damage in realistic scenarios and how much of a boost projectile ammo will gain?
|
|
Schani Kratnorr
Internal Revenue Service
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:48:00 -
[191]
Edited by: Schani Kratnorr on 30/01/2008 23:49:48 In response to the OP (blog really).
The "problem" is that Amarr ships have steadily declined in popularity since the increase to hitpoints was introduced. The resists are only a small part of why lasers suck.
Everyone would like their resists on both shields and armor to be as high as possible for all four types of damage. This gives them the best chance of beating an opponent regardles of what damage type(s) he does.
In the old days, Laserboats like the gankageddon were popular because they could roast a ship fast, before running out of cap. With increased hitpoints, lower cost on better modules, plus changes to damage controls, it now takes longer to finish off a ship.
I guess my point is this: I like the fact that you're trying to fix obviously broken ships, but at this stage any change to existing content serves only to create a new "most crappy race/ship".
Nerf/boost one thing, and another takes its place. As you pointed out, you (the devs) dont want resists to be too even, but that is exactly what players generally aim for when fitting a ship. We want high resists, lots of damage, massive hitpoint counts, super speed, at a low low cost.
Careful, or you might give us what we ask for and remove the challenge of the game
|
Kappas.
Galaxy Punks Black Core Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:50:00 -
[192]
Edited by: Kappas. on 30/01/2008 23:50:47 Tbh swapping the damage (mostly thermal, a little em) would be better than messing with ship resists, imo.
Edit: Also reducing cap need of lasers a little probably wouldn't go amiss from checking out the stats on EFT. __________________
|
Cailais
Amarr VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:53:00 -
[193]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Vrabac
Please redirect the issue from EM damge to individual ships. Curse, pilgrim, sentinel, zealot, prophecy, omen, apocalypse, maller, arbitrator, work on them, they all suck not because of EM damage but becauses they simply suck as such.
Did you read the whole blog? There is another blog coming with changes to the broken amarr ships that you mention.
This change is good because there might be a reason to fit a maller with lasers eventhough it doesnt have a damage bonus.
Unbonused lasers should be inline with unbonused hybrid and projectiles. You get different drawbacks/advantages but one of them (like the laser) shouldnt suck so badly so that amarr ships start fitting other racial guns and need to train for them to use a crap ship.
If the Curse and Pilgrim get buffed Ill eat my own hat.
C.
Improved Low Sec Idea!! |
PC5
Bermuda Syndrome C0VEN
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 23:58:00 -
[194]
Is it a joke? There are much serious problems with amarr than dmg types. Wake up there in CCP! Lets hope next patches will fix something at last.
PS. Fix the damn forums! How many times do i need login to post something!?
|
Paulson
The Fated Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 00:00:00 -
[195]
I fly the Pilgrim and Curse and feel these ships gain almost nothing from this suggested resist fix. considering these are amongst the most nerfed combat ships in the game lets give them some serious loving please.
Now from a shieldtanker point of view (as I happen to have been aroung long enough to fly most ships) the Explosive resist alteration is a little over the top. Fair enough you need to balance the resist drop on armour but why hammer shields even more when in PvP you have a choice of either a tank, tackle, ewar, speed mod. I like the idea suggested earlier of reducing the Exp resist on shield to 50% but have a corresponding boost to EM to 10%. Amarr will still do great damage and this will help balance the Minmatar No 1 close range ammo of choice EMP.
===============================================
Are we there yet? |
Jonny JoJo
Amarr The Imperial Guards
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 00:00:00 -
[196]
Edited by: Jonny JoJo on 31/01/2008 00:02:45 CCP, Please read this.
EM reistence was NEVER the issue on armour.
"Eh? JoJo Gone Nuts again?"
The problem with EM resist was always the Armour Compensation skills. Please CCP time travel back 1 day before RMR patch which introduced these broken skills.
Notice that there was NO EANM issue at all. (apart from Minmater 92.5)
The Reason why EM on armour is a issue is that Armour Compensation skills were prenerfed to effect only passive hardners and not active. If Armour compensation skills were not prenerfed - then everything owuld have been PERFECT - Yes, PERFECT as nobody would use EANMS at all and everyone would go back to active tanking.
Secondly - Amarr need 100% cap reduction on Lasers just like Minmatar got 100% cap reduction on their weapons a while ago. Lets not joke around this. Lasers are broken weapon concept in eve, as minmater dodnt need cap for projectiles, Gallente dont need cap for drones, Caldari dont need cap for missiles. Amarr are screwed in this respect, as all races have a 0 cap option for pvp.
Thirdly, Please fit a Amarr ship. BROKEN Fitting requirements means FAKE SLOTS.
A Amarr ship, such as a Sniper ship, looses 2-3 slotsfor RCU's, looses 2-3 slots for tracking mods to be able to compete with other races for sniping at 160km for the first minute of battle.
Amarr do 0dps after a few minutes due to no cap, and low damage due to hardly any heatsinks as they spend upto 5-10 slots(inc rigs) on cap mods
And I had a great new sig to show you as well, were it not locked :( Sig locked, lack of Eve content |
Phyridean
Lionsgate Ionic Dispersion
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 00:03:00 -
[197]
CCP Zulupark,
I fly Amarr a considerable amount of the time (all the way up to Command Ships), and have never found damage particularly lacking. Tanks are also quite good.
I would suggest, instead of reducing the resistances of ships throughout the universe, look at the individual ships first. As an Amarr pilot, I am all for boosting. However, before you boost the individual ships, you cannot know how a change of this magnitude will affect overall game balance. Will you swing the balance too far towards Amarr? We don't know until we see Amarr-specific changes, as these will ultimately define the race's advantages and disadvantages which may or may not need balance thereafter.
In the end, you may only find it necessary to modify some specific ships with regard to number of turret slots, capacitor usage, and bonuses (and not just on Amarr ships!), while the resistance change is unnecessary.
After all, if you're already fixing the ships in question specifically, there's no need to make general fixes, since ideally the specific changes to those ships will effect the proper balancing alone without needing to change all ships in the game. This is especially true since the proposed change creates faster combat because of decreased effective hit points (isn't PvP fast enough already?) which is something I believe few of us want.
|
ragewind
Caldari VersaTech Interstellar Ltd. SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 00:04:00 -
[198]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Originally by: Caligulus Raven base resistances
- Before changes
Shields EM - 0%, Exp - 60%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 20% Armor EM - 60%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 45%
- After changes
Shields EM - 0%, Exp - 50%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 20% Armor EM - 50%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 45%
I fail to see how modifying the explosive damage resistance on the raven increases Amarr damage.
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.
do you have a basic maths qualification???
here are the diferances in resistances as they stand no and after you changes shiulds have 3 resitances that are lower piriod and the final only matches the one of the arrmor. basically blob of goons in missiles ships kill shiuld tankers as they have less bases resistance over 3 damage types.
Shields Exp - 60%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 20%, EM - 0% Armor EM - 60%, Therm - 45%, Kin - 25%, Exp - 10%
same -5% -5% -10%
to me looks like you can quite easerly leave the 10% explosive and it isnt gimped or can we now gain em resisitance?
and as its mean to be fair and balanced can i get a 20% em on all T1 shields??? would be so nice if it was fair and equal
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 00:07:00 -
[199]
Originally by: ragewind
do you have a basic maths qualification???
here are the diferances in resistances as they stand no and after you changes shiulds have 3 resitances that are lower piriod and the final only matches the one of the arrmor. basically blob of goons in missiles ships kill shiuld tankers as they have less bases resistance over 3 damage types.
Shields Exp - 60%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 20%, EM - 0% Armor EM - 60%, Therm - 45%, Kin - 25%, Exp - 10%
same -5% -5% -10%
to me looks like you can quite easerly leave the 10% explosive and it isnt gimped or can we now gain em resisitance?
and as its mean to be fair and balanced can i get a 20% em on all T1 shields??? would be so nice if it was fair and equal
Your post is hard to understand. What are you saying exactly? Amarr pvp Vids: Inq - I Inq - II |
El Mauru
Amarr Nexus Analytics Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 00:08:00 -
[200]
Edited by: El Mauru on 31/01/2008 00:11:09 I really like the changes too- esp. making em drones and missiles more useful- and is perfectly fine to go live.
However, I think in the aftermath, some ships might need a look at:
Abaddon (eventually too much damage? Could be fixed by smaller cargo bay so pilot can not take along as many cap boosters anymore- this single stat will automatically influence the amount of damage/tanking any amarr ship does)
Harbinger (same)
Armageddon(?) (same)
That`s from an Amarr standpoint- at the same time the Omen, Zealot(?), Maller, Apocalypse, every other laser-based Amarr ship- will probably be fixed- which imho is an awesome turnout.
I can not talk from a Caldari standpoint unfortunately, but I can imagine that some ships might suffer from the explo resist kick-in. For whatever reason explosion damage seems to have done just fine until now.
Minmatar should be balanced out since when they want to use their EXPL ammo they usually end up in webbing range anyway, and all their ships where range would NOT matter as much (Tempest, the high tier BS) needed a slight boost anyway. MAYBE a range decrease on optimals is in order on explosive ammo...
However, I think that many people forget that EVERY ship uses shield and will be suffering the consequences so it might just work out perfectly.
IMHO, only testing in a "real-life" (tranquility) environment will show the true consequences. 10% might be too much... 8%, 9&, 5%? only time will tell. In that case-however, all the other laser-based Amarr ships will still need a look at.
All in all- let`s go with it and see if it makes people use EM damage again. It might all just balance out in the end...
-
|
|
Takeshi Yamato
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 00:10:00 -
[201]
The cap problem of lasers exists for these reasons:
- Hp was universally increased on all ships to prolong combat. Prolonged combat means more cap will be used, but there were no changes to laser cap usage.
- Rigs further increased combat duration, not everybody fits tanking rigs but on average ships are more durable since rigs have been introduced.
- Amarr ships tend to have a bigger capacitor than others, but the cap per second is exactly the same as everyone else. Since combat tends to last longer nowdays, the lasers drain so much that the any advantage is quickly gone and the total cap that was available to each pilot for the duration of the fight will be lowest for the amarr ship.
- T2 crystals are a bit too cap hungry.
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 00:12:00 -
[202]
Edited by: Goumindong on 31/01/2008 00:14:47
Originally by: Waukesha
This justification for Amarrs lack of midslots is poor imh. I beg to differ on Amarr being the gods of tank and gank lol.
No, its not. Laser ships tend towards a type of combat that favors three things.
1. DPS 2. Range 3. Effective Hit points
Tackling is less important, you only need a few. Buts important you get as many hit points and as much DPS out of your ships.
The high number of low slots Amarr have push Amarr easily towards this option. Because low slots are the slots that increase EHP the best[for battleships, its meds for cruisers, frigates, and possibly battlecruisers]. And low slots are the slots that increase DPS the best.
Combine that with the naturally high range of Pulse lasers and you have effective ships which do not need many med slots.
There are med slot problems with Amarr, but that is because those ships do not or cannot perform the standard laser role of having a bunch of hit points and doing a bunch of DPS.
ed: Oh, and another thing, EM drones would be used a whole bunch if they actually did more damage against shields than thermal drones do against shields. The reason they suck has nothing to do with Armor EM resistance, you could make armor EM resistance 0 and they would still suck. If EM drones did as much raw DPS as thermal or ex drones you would see them used instantly on the battlefield. Drone ships would carry EM drones against shields and then swap to EX drones for armor, while wanting to shoot thermal at structure.
|
DrAtomic
Atomic Heroes Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 00:13:00 -
[203]
All nice and dandy and so forth BUT will you look into missions, plexes and exploration sites using smartbomb and thor missile mechanics then as well... These are allready nearly suicide as is but will be close to undoable after this change is in. Mainly because the damage done by those smartbombs and thor missles are allready taking in account the high level of base EM resists.
For example: The Maze Guristas Military Base Dread Guristas Fleet Staging Point
I.e. do you have a way of lowering the EM base damage NPC's and NPC structures do by 25% as well? - - -
Originally by: CCP Wrangler If you can understand our goal, disagree with our solution and offer a solution that is equal or better your opinion has a better chance of being heard...
|
ragewind
Caldari VersaTech Interstellar Ltd. SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 00:18:00 -
[204]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Your post is hard to understand. What are you saying exactly?
i have poor english
basically shields have 20% lower resistance from base.
other that that id like to thank zulu for boosting the raven now a gang torp raven housing all damage types will now shoot through the shields and armor of any armarr ship without taking any additional damage same with any shield tanked mini ship way to boost all but the armarr.
that was the goal right give everyone damage a bonus but the amarr???
|
Jerusalem Eve
Amarr Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 00:21:00 -
[205]
Well this just maintains the status quo that armor tanking is better than shield tanking for pvp. I would think you would try and get more shield tanked ships out there for lasers to shoot at. More Shield tanks to shoot at = Amarr boost.
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.
|
Ishan Mons
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 00:26:00 -
[206]
Originally by: Jonny JoJo Edited by: Jonny JoJo on 31/01/2008 00:02:45 CCP, Please read this.
EM reistence was NEVER the issue on armour.
"Eh? JoJo Gone Nuts again?"
The problem with EM resist was always the Armour Compensation skills. Please CCP time travel back 1 day before RMR patch which introduced these broken skills.
Notice that there was NO EANM issue at all. (apart from Minmater 92.5)
The Reason why EM on armour is a issue is that Armour Compensation skills were prenerfed to effect only passive hardners and not active. If Armour compensation skills were not prenerfed - then everything owuld have been PERFECT - Yes, PERFECT as nobody would use EANMS at all and everyone would go back to active tanking.
Secondly - Amarr need 100% cap reduction on Lasers just like Minmatar got 100% cap reduction on their weapons a while ago. Lets not joke around this. Lasers are broken weapon concept in eve, as minmater dodnt need cap for projectiles, Gallente dont need cap for drones, Caldari dont need cap for missiles. Amarr are screwed in this respect, as all races have a 0 cap option for pvp.
Thirdly, Please fit a Amarr ship. BROKEN Fitting requirements means FAKE SLOTS.
A Amarr ship, such as a Sniper ship, looses 2-3 slotsfor RCU's, looses 2-3 slots for tracking mods to be able to compete with other races for sniping at 160km for the first minute of battle.
Amarr do 0dps after a few minutes due to no cap, and low damage due to hardly any heatsinks as they spend upto 5-10 slots(inc rigs) on cap mods
And I had a great new sig to show you as well, were it not locked :(
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 That being said I think cap use on lasers needs to be lowered(not hybrid low) but lowered somewhat
Assuming perfect skills: according to EFT a larger neutron blaster II using antimatter uses 3 cap/s and a mega pulse II fitted with mulifreq uses 6.5 cap/s(4.3 with a ship cap bonus) so maybe lower it so that with a ship cap bonus it uses 3 cap/s
but before you start crying about not being able to fit a full rack of your biggest guns without fitting mod... try fitting a hyperion sometime :p ------------------------ BOOST PATCH! BOOST PATCH! BOOST PATCH! BOOST PATCH! |
El Mauru
Amarr Nexus Analytics Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 00:26:00 -
[207]
Edited by: El Mauru on 31/01/2008 00:27:41 One thing to add- can you imagine what this will be a nerf to as well?
NANOS!
How? all those "pesky" (i.e. generally being whined about) ships usually use shieldtanks in the form of shield-extenders (midslots, leave lowslots for nano "SHTUFF", no resist mods)- in which case they will die more easily now (when getting hit).
Your 2pts damage on that vaga just got a hole lot more painful m8 :D -
|
Grytok
moon7empler Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 00:27:00 -
[208]
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 .
CCP gave us shiny new graphics. Too bad they removed Anti Aliasing for me :\ |
Jonny JoJo
Amarr The Imperial Guards
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 00:34:00 -
[209]
Originally by: Ishan Mons
Originally by: Jonny JoJo Edited by: Jonny JoJo on 31/01/2008 00:02:45 CCP, Please read this.
EM reistence was NEVER the issue on armour.
"Eh? JoJo Gone Nuts again?"
The problem with EM resist was always the Armour Compensation skills. Please CCP time travel back 1 day before RMR patch which introduced these broken skills.
Notice that there was NO EANM issue at all. (apart from Minmater 92.5)
The Reason why EM on armour is a issue is that Armour Compensation skills were prenerfed to effect only passive hardners and not active. If Armour compensation skills were not prenerfed - then everything owuld have been PERFECT - Yes, PERFECT as nobody would use EANMS at all and everyone would go back to active tanking.
Secondly - Amarr need 100% cap reduction on Lasers just like Minmatar got 100% cap reduction on their weapons a while ago. Lets not joke around this. Lasers are broken weapon concept in eve, as minmater dodnt need cap for projectiles, Gallente dont need cap for drones, Caldari dont need cap for missiles. Amarr are screwed in this respect, as all races have a 0 cap option for pvp.
Thirdly, Please fit a Amarr ship. BROKEN Fitting requirements means FAKE SLOTS.
A Amarr ship, such as a Sniper ship, looses 2-3 slotsfor RCU's, looses 2-3 slots for tracking mods to be able to compete with other races for sniping at 160km for the first minute of battle.
Amarr do 0dps after a few minutes due to no cap, and low damage due to hardly any heatsinks as they spend upto 5-10 slots(inc rigs) on cap mods
And I had a great new sig to show you as well, were it not locked :(
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 That being said I think cap use on lasers needs to be lowered(not hybrid low) but lowered somewhat
Assuming perfect skills: according to EFT a larger neutron blaster II using antimatter uses 3 cap/s and a mega pulse II fitted with mulifreq uses 6.5 cap/s(4.3 with a ship cap bonus) so maybe lower it so that with a ship cap bonus it uses 3 cap/s
but before you start crying about not being able to fit a full rack of your biggest guns without fitting mod... try fitting a hyperion sometime :p
Difference between 3 and 6.5 is 5 lost slots of cap mods. Tach II used 80 cap/sec drain on Abaddon. Thats like 8 heavy nos II drain!.
This is not about cap as I am Talking About EM resist. My case is clear and PROVEN - Armour Compensation Skills are Broken due to prenerf and CCP should un-nerf Armour Compensation Skills or just delete them. EANM issue fixed overnight.
CCP prenerfs one thing and then breaks anothering think thiniking it will fix the prenerf. Sig locked, lack of Eve content |
Karyuudo Tydraad
Caldari Whiskey Pete's Drycleaning Services
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 00:41:00 -
[210]
Beautiful. No complaints here. Some people are never happy. <3
|
|
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?
|
|
Treelox
Amarr Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 02:04:00 -
[241]
Originally by: jongalt 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.
his main ideas are on page 2-4, although he chimes in through the rest of the thread to repeat the theme. --
|
Dlardrageth
Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 02:06:00 -
[242]
Shouldn't this dev blog better have been released on 1st of April?
Now on a more serious note - nice you address "some points" you see that could be fixed with Amarr. Well, actually, let's go one step back and applaude you for realizing and admitting Amarr needs "rebalancing" or however you would like to call it. Took long enough in my humble opinion.
The problem now with those fixes for the, let's say "near future" is, they won't do much good for the average, as in "not bazillions of skillpoints" player. You know, these weird people who start playing EVE-O or started a while ago and totally failed to understand that choosing Amarr as player race means "Nightmare Mode". Because all those nice little changes you announce don't really do about anything for Amarr players who don't have the maxed or nearly maxed ship, cap-related, weapon and fitting skills you need to make some Amarr ships barely competitive with the comparable ones of other races.
And to try to sell the community this kind of stealth Caldari nerf (EXP shield resistances? I could care less as Amarr player...) as an Amarr buff... Anyway, buff or no buff, I cannot e.g. properly fit an Omen cruiser after this "rebalancing" if I couldn't before. I cannot e.g. fire even half my lasers on my battleship without capping myself out after a bit past these "fixes". Oh well, I guess I could fit medium turrets on a battleship, nowhere in the EULA there is a paragraph that states you have to be competitive when playing Amarr, eh? *snicker*
Another point of grievance - it's absolutely great you see the need to do something for Amarr in PvP matters. But... did it by chance occur to CCP that missioning in Amarr space, with an Amarr ship using lasers becomes quite tough when you get tons of Gurista missions? Compared to some other actually working configurations? Or are the PvE issues for Amarr no issue at all for CCP because it has never been stated Amarr can be competitive in PvE? Well, in that case let me please rephrase a line from the blog:
"...the Amarr simply sit there and charge their MINING lasers, secure in their knowledge that at least in mining they are for once not again inferior to all others in EVE-Online."
TBH, shows a lot of CCP's attitude towards the people in the player base who play Amarr to read the original phrase if you take into consideration how long the "fix" for Amarr is overdue now...
|
BABARR
PARABELUM-Project
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 02:09:00 -
[243]
Quote: The answer that pretty much covers the damage arguments is: By simply changing damage types or increasing raw DPS doesn't really fix the issue that EM damage is pretty much useless against armor tanking ships due to high natural resistances and the popularity of omni-tanking. We would still have EM drones and EM missiles being less useful than others if we just changed damage types on crystals or increased the damage on energy turrets.
Usually the EM resistance is not the higger on armor tanked ship. The EM resist is usually hight on amarr ship due to their bonus and adaptive tank. But take a lot of armor tanked ship and you will see the EM resist is not so hight. (and in some case is the worst, i think of the gallente HAC and co.)
Quote: We would still have EM drones and EM missiles being less useful than others if we just changed damage types on crystals or increased the damage on energy turrets.
OMG!! Do you really play the same game????? EM drone are not used a lot cause they have the LESS DPS OF ALL drone (and less HP), not cause they do EM damage !!!! Make some EM drone whith the dmg mod of the thermal one and you will see! And look at what kind of missile raven or typhoon use in pvp? they always got some EM, and there are some drake or cerberus who are using it a lot too.
Maybe amarr need some adjustement, like the apocalypse in a missile boat like the sacrilege. But stop say everywhere the EM resist is the highest on the armor tanked ship and it's cheated. All ship tanked whith 3xhardener + 1xadaptive don't going to have a very uber EM resist. ...
"Si vis pacem, parabellum" |
DisGuyzCrAzY
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 02:11:00 -
[244]
Pardon me if this has been mentioned before (hard reading 9 pages or irate posts)
But the reduction in resists seems more like a boost to explosive damage than to em. i need to do some testing, but it seems like the em resists would be easier to raise than the explosive resists on shields at least on the setups i see/use. while i personally would like a resists nerf of some sort i dont think doing it to "boost" lasers is the way to go. if you wanted to boost EM damage, couldn't you just add a few points em on all the crystals?
i just know that if these changes go live i'm going to be fitting more explosive drones/damage and catching people who don't compensate for this in their setups
|
Praxis1452
The Bastards
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 02:12:00 -
[245]
What this will do:
1) Make omni-tanks more prevalent 2) Reduce Gallente repping ability-Gallente specifically because they get a repping bonus 3) Give amarr more dps in general 4) Give minmatar the ability to attack what may be the two lowest resists if anyone actually uses active hardeners which you were promoting
What it will not do: 1) Make bad ships ok 2) Make EM drones useful* 3) Make more people shield tank 4) Fix shield tanking 5) Fix minmatar t2 ships resist boni.
*=could be wrong
**It obviously depends but now buffer tanks, the more popular types of tank on gank boats, will at 3 midslots probably use DCU, EANM, explosive hard/EANM. If the explosive hard is used Gallente get a slight boost dealing neither EM no Explosive. /btw, wtf amarr explosive crystals? NO!/ If the second EANM still prevails it is a boost to minmatar.
***If active hards are used well guess what? You now need 5 slots. It used to be ok with 4 but this will only really increase the number of slots needed. Omni tanks will still be easier to fit and to use. T2 ships may still use certain hardeners to cover holes but overall a rarity in armor tanking. Gallente get an explosive hole so it's always explosive and amarr is pretty decently balanced for armor with thermic being the least, but it's still higher than explosive is. ôHe who must expend his life to prolong life cannot enjoy it, and he who is still seeking for his life does not have it and can as little enjoy it.ö
|
Wrayeth
Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 02:14:00 -
[246]
Edited by: Wrayeth on 31/01/2008 02:15:50 Zulupark,
For the most part, I like the changes...
...however (and you knew there was going to be a "however" )...
...I do have a quibble with your statement about a raven's standard omni tank of two invulnerability fields and a photon scattering field. Simply put, the raven cannot fit this.
Raven mids:
1 MWD 1 XL booster 1 boost amp 2 invuln 1 cap injector
As you can see, there's no room for the third hardener needed to make it an omni tank, leaving a gigantic resist hole. I thought I might bring this to your attention in the hope that you might see your way clear to give the raven a little bit of love in that regard.
Thanks.
P.S. Please also note the lack of a disruptor. The highslot warp scrambler suggested by another poster (and originally suggested by me...two years ago ) would go a long way to making Caldari more viable in PvP. -Wrayeth n00b Extraordinaire "Look, pa! I just contributed absolutely nothing to this thread!" |
RossP Zoyka
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 02:16:00 -
[247]
I think that Zulu has already explained that this is not entirely an Amarr Boost but an "EM damage boost" that will directly affect the Amarr.
The specific Amarr Ship boost is coming in a separate blog. All of the suggestions regarding ships and modules that have been posted so far are entirely unrelated to the Dev Blog in question ... unless they are in discussion of EM damage type.
Thank you, Rossp
|
Random Womble
Minmatar Master Miners
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 02:16:00 -
[248]
To be perfectly honest i really dont think amarr need much of a boost myself anyway, if you know how to fit them amarr ships allready are pretty damn good even with omni tanks the 2 exceptions in my veiw are the zealot and the absolution which really go against certain normal characteristics of ships, in general amarr ships tend to have the most turrets yet the zealot and absolution have the least in their respective classes for dedicate turret boats and really suffer because of it adding in an extra turret to both would balance things with respect to other ships in their class. Having said that even as they are those 2 ships are pretty good.
Also refering to the minmatar T2 armor resistances so often is really pointless when over half of all minmatar T2 ships are shield tanked and those that are not generally dont get used with tanked setups because their overall resistances for armor are so bad.
|
BABARR
PARABELUM-Project
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 02:20:00 -
[249]
Quote: To be perfectly honest i really dont think amarr need much of a boost myself anyway, if you know how to fit them amarr ships allready are pretty damn good even with omni tanks the 2 exceptions in my veiw are the zealot and the absolution which really go against certain normal characteristics of ships, in general amarr ships tend to have the most turrets yet the zealot and absolution have the least in their respective classes for dedicate turret boats and really suffer because of it adding in an extra turret to both would balance things with respect to other ships in their class. Having said that even as they are those 2 ships are pretty good.
+1, i love you :).
The main problem for amarr actually is not the pvp, it's the pve cause they can't change the king of damage. I think the apocalypse in missile boat could be very good for the missione runner, and not bad in pvp, cause actually i don't see a lot of apocalypse user. ...
"Si vis pacem, parabellum" |
RossP Zoyka
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 02:21:00 -
[250]
Originally by: Praxis1452 What this will do:
1) Make omni-tanks more prevalent 2) Reduce Gallente repping ability-Gallente specifically because they get a repping bonus 3) Give amarr more dps in general 4) Give minmatar the ability to attack what may be the two lowest resists if anyone actually uses active hardeners which you were promoting
What it will not do: 1) Make bad ships ok 2) Make EM drones useful* 3) Make more people shield tank 4) Fix shield tanking 5) Fix minmatar t2 ships resist boni.
*=could be wrong
**It obviously depends but now buffer tanks, the more popular types of tank on gank boats, will at 3 midslots probably use DCU, EANM, explosive hard/EANM. If the explosive hard is used Gallente get a slight boost dealing neither EM no Explosive. /btw, wtf amarr explosive crystals? NO!/ If the second EANM still prevails it is a boost to minmatar.
***If active hards are used well guess what? You now need 5 slots. It used to be ok with 4 but this will only really increase the number of slots needed. Omni tanks will still be easier to fit and to use. T2 ships may still use certain hardeners to cover holes but overall a rarity in armor tanking. Gallente get an explosive hole so it's always explosive and amarr is pretty decently balanced for armor with thermic being the least, but it's still higher than explosive is.
Why would this "reduce Gallente repping ability"?
|
|
Praxis1452
The Bastards
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 02:22:00 -
[251]
Originally by: RossP Zoyka I think that Zulu has already explained that this is not entirely an Amarr Boost but an "EM damage boost" that will directly affect the Amarr.
The specific Amarr Ship boost is coming in a separate blog. All of the suggestions regarding ships and modules that have been posted so far are entirely unrelated to the Dev Blog in question ... unless they are in discussion of EM damage type.
Thank you, Rossp
Yeah... it's not entirely an amarr boost. That's why it's wrong. Why nerf tanks overall? Why??????
They stated this as an amarr boost. It's only an amarr boost because it's a tanking nerf. ôHe who must expend his life to prolong life cannot enjoy it, and he who is still seeking for his life does not have it and can as little enjoy it.ö
|
Cpt Fina
Mutually Assured Distraction
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 02:24:00 -
[252]
Edited by: Cpt Fina on 31/01/2008 02:24:11 Wow, I never imagined the eve-community being this ********. Seems like 75% of the people posting in this thread don't even think it's necessary to read the blog before complaining about it.
|
Camilo Cienfuegos
Earned In Blood
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 02:28:00 -
[253]
Proposed changes will not effect Amarr in comparison to the other racial ships: Caldari and Minmatar can do as much EM damage as Amarr do, and they also deal explosive damage meaning that this works in their favour more than it does Amarr.
I don't disagree with this however, as Caldari and Minmatar are generally considered inferior to Gallente and as such this narrows that margin considerably and should be considered a "good thing". Let's be honest about this here, what is proposed is not a boost to Amarr nor necessarily Caldari nor Minmatar, but a nerf to Gallente in general. It's a trend I must say I do quite like, but some honesty in this regard would be appreciated.
The only fix that will help Amarr relates to their capacitor. Once this fact is realised, the issue will be resolved. It may take some time to balance the different ships (for example, the Abaddon requires much more of a cap boost than the Armageddon does).
Perhaps I'm going about my suggestions the wrong way: perhaps the logical choice is to increase the cap consumption of all other weapons in line with that of lasers!
Hardpoint Rigs |
Frater Perdurabo
Amarr The Ancient Illuminated Seers of Bavaria
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 02:29:00 -
[254]
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.
I think your the one in error here tbh, the problem is not that base armour EM res is too high; its that in pvp the vast majority of people use omni armour tanks.
Moving on from that, this dev blog started off so well with these two lines:
-Cap usage on Energy Weapons may be too high in some cases -Fitting requirements on some Energy Weapons need adjusting
Yup, thats exactly what needs to be done, with the addition of modifying some of the more useless amarr ships (Omen, Apoc, maybe give them that frigate they been missing for ever?!)
If you wanted to roll out a few changes to see how they go, do that first. Instead your proposing changing a rather major game mechanic first, and then possibly a reworking of lasers and amarr ships later.
So yeah, to my mind what your doing seems unneccesary, your trying to fix an imaginary problem that only appears to exist because of the prevalence of omni armour tanks in pvp.
This change will effect everything in eve, and seems to me to not really go anywhere in addressing the amarr, where a simple 'lets buff amarr ships and lasors' fix... seems by far the more sensible suggestion. Sig->
Good isnt it.
|
Janu Hull
Caldari Terra Incognita Dark Matter Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 02:37:00 -
[255]
Originally by: Pheonix Kanan 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?)
Seriously, they build a race that is reliant on NOS, even the occassional buff to NOS performance, then they nerf NOS into practical oblivion, and wonder why no one flies Amarr?
In the event of an emergency, my ego may be used as a floatation device. |
HatfulOfHollow
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 02:42:00 -
[256]
If you fix cap usage and fitting requirements, the rest of the problems address themselves. Some of the ships still suck, but those can be addressed later. The main problem is cap usage and fitting.
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 02:44:00 -
[257]
This is not the fix you are looking for.
The Real Space Initiative - V5 (Forum Link)
|
Wu Jiun
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 02:56:00 -
[258]
I am happy to see that you finally reached the drawing board state. Thats a nice boost for laser damage and i won't exactly complain.
Still here are some points to be considered(probably posted serveral times already but what can i do):
- You mention the amarr problem as if this blog and the changes were aimed specifically at amarr. Yet it is indeed a general boost of exp/em as damage types. As amarr don't really do exp on their laser ships (short of drones) you could also call it a minmatar or caldari or even a gallente drone boat boost.
This isn't necessarily bad. On the other hand a ravens siege launcher already outdamage megapulses from 0 to 45km(med range=supposed laser specialty...). Now they can do 100% em or 100% exp and as such they profit actually much more from these changes as say a geddon that has basically about 50:50 or about 80:20 em/therm fixed. Same for minnie ships ofc although they don't have these kind of "gank" dmg and are still bound to specific damage type ratios.
- A tri hardener + dc tank already had em resistance quite low. Now it gets even less em resistance. On the other hand the kin/therm/exp hitpoints don't really improve significantly against combinations of eanm/dc and plates. And on top of that active hardeners are harder to fit.
In my opinion a tank combination that usually uses 1 less slot, less cpu and less (=no) cap should be inferior at least in some considerable situations.
- Decreasing the shield resistance is consistent. On the other hand i have never seen a minmatar complaining about high exp resistances. Of course if shieldtanks ever become more common in pvp this problem might have been more apparent.
But the fundamental difference is that minnies can adjust their dmg to more reasonable combinations. This has drawbacks but its different from a situation where you are just stuck with the dmg you do. Ravens and other missile platforms get a plain boost from this although dmg types are obviously much less of a problem there. So i am still not convinced that applying the same logic to both dmg types is anything more than consistent.
It reminds me of the script introduction where lots of modules got the same treatmeant totally unrelated in any way to the usefulness and or popularity of specific mods.
- What really is important now is looking at specific ships that need help. I know you are going to do this and i hope you will come up with good fixes. Ships to be looked at(imo):
Apoc - Maller - Omen - Prophecy - Pilgrim - Punisher
After looking at these ships the according t2 hulls that are laser ships need to be revised too obviously. Some ships like the Omen mostly need fitting while others like the Apoc or Maller have bad fitting too but whats more important they lack a role. "Tank" is not a role for a cruiser because of how cruiser combat works. And being the only ship that can use your racial sniping weapons for more than 1.5minutes isn't one either.
- Giving amarr ships distinct roles is imo the hardest but most important point. Ships should have their own special flavour besides lower cost and a little bit more drone dmg instead of gun damage here and there (like with geddon vs. abaddon). Amarr ships finally need some 2nd bonuses. For this the cap reduction bonus needs to go. I know this is lots of work and its difficult because some ships could become "too good". So its really a matter of going through the ships one by one and looking specifically what it needs without making it "pwn".
I think this is extremely important. The original motivation for extra high cap usage and the inherent cap bonus was that lasers were just plain better than other weapon systems.
This is no longer true for some time now.
Tuxford once (long time ago) said lasers should in theory be superior to all other weapons. Today they are better sometimes and sometimes worse. Like all other weapons. They shouldn't have the drawbacks of "superweapons" then either.
|
Mack Dorgeans
Camelot Innovations
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 03:02:00 -
[259]
Edited by: Mack Dorgeans on 31/01/2008 03:15:15
Here's something I've never understood. Why does armor have 20% extra resists on baseline T1 compared to shields?
Seems to me that if armor wasn't so clearly the best choice for tanking, there would be more shield tankers, making Amarr and their EM damage much more useful. Instead of lowering explosive resists on shields, why not keep them the same, to close the gap between shield and armor effectiveness. Armor would still have 10% more total resists baseline than shields.
I also think there should be more high-slot electronic warfare options than cap draining. If people could use spare high slots on something cheaper to fit but still effective in PvP, it would free up more medium power slots for shield tanking. Again, the end result would be more usefulness for Amarr ships.
Plus, it puts more unpredictability in PvP, since you can't assume that you'll need to set up for breaking armor tanks more often than shield tanks.
As for what to do for a high-slot EWAR module, how about something that takes advantage of the "heat" system in the game that's currently underused? Make a targeted module that induces feedback on an enemy's active modules, dealing heat damage to them and possibly even rolling for a chance to knock an active module offline, requiring the targeted pilot to online the module again, which costs time and cap. Or, split those ideas into two different modules. As another boost to Amarr, fix their EWAR ships so they also get a bonus to operating such modules.
You'd also need to add some anti-feedback defensive modules and rigs, as well as skills for offensive and defensive feedback systems.
Maybe that's too much to change, but I prefer building the game up rather than nerfing. Nerfs tend to just make games seem more vanilla, leaving everyone unhappy.
|
Steve Clone
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 03:12:00 -
[260]
Part 1:
OLD Minmatar Rifter:
OLD Shield 0% EM, 20% TH, 40% KIN, 60% EXP OLD Armor 70% EM, 35% TH, 25% KIN, 10% EXP
OLD Minmatar Jaguar:
OLD Shield 75% EM, 60% TH, 40% KIN, 60% EXP OLD Armor 92.5% EM, 67.5% TH, 25% KIN, 10% EXP
NEW Minmatar Rifter:
NEW Shield 0% EM, 20% TH, 40% KIN, 50% EXP NEW Armor 60% EM, 35% TH, 25% KIN, 10% EXP
NEW Minmatar Jaguar:
NEW Shield 75% EM, 60% TH, 40% KIN, 50% EXP NEW Armor 90% EM, 67.5% TH, 25% KIN, 10% EXP
DEDUCTION ONE:
OLD Jaguar has no change in OLD EXP Shield but an increase of 22.5% in OLD EM Armor when compared to OLD Rifter. NEW Jaguar has no change in NEW EXP Shield but an increase of 30% in NEW EM Armor when compared to NEW Rifter. From OLD to NEW, the Jaguar has lost 10% in EXP Shield and has lost 2.5% in EM Armor.
|
|
Steve Clone
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 03:12:00 -
[261]
Part 2:
OLD Amarr Punisher:
OLD Shield 0% EM, 20% TH, 40% KIN, 60% EXP OLD Armor 60% EM, 35% TH, 25% KIN, 20% EXP
OLD Amarr Vengeance:
OLD Shield 0% EM, 20% TH, 70% KIN, 90% EXP OLD Armor 60% EM, 35% TH, 62.5% KIN, 80% EXP
Comparing between OLD and NEW Zealot, I assumed the same changes in resistance (i.e -10% in EXP Shield and -10% in EM Armor) should apply to the Punisher since base resistance of Punisher/Vengeance is exactly the same as Omen/Zealot respectively.
Assumed NEW Amarr Punisher:
NEW Shield 0% EM, 20% TH, 40% KIN, 50% EXP NEW Armor 50% EM, 35% TH, 25% KIN, 20% EXP
Assumed NEW Amarr Vengeance:
NEW Shield 0% EM, 20% TH, 70% KIN, 80% EXP NEW Armor 50% EM, 35% TH, 62.5% KIN, 80% EXP
DEDUCTIONS:
OLD Vengeance has an increase of 30% in OLD EXP Shield but no change in OLD EM Armor when compared to OLD Punisher. NEW Vengeance has an increase of 30% in NEW EXP Shield but no change in OLD EM Armor when compared to NEW Punisher. From OLD to NEW, the Vengeance has lost 10% in EXP Shield and has lost 10% in EM Armor.
Part 3:
CONCLUSION ONE:
Is the racial resistance bonus for T2 ships fair?
P.S: DonÆt get confused. A 40% difference in the TH Shield of Jaguar (when compared to the Rifter) is similar to the Rifter fitting a 50% TH Shield Hardener.
In brief, the NEW Jaguar has a 75% EM and 50% TH Shield AND Armor hardeners fitted compared to a Rifter.
The NEW Vengeance has a 50% KIN shield and 50 % KIN Armor Hardeners BUT only a 60 % EXP Shield and 75% EXP Armor Hardeners fitted compared to a Punisher.
After BOOST patch, racial resistances of Minmatar > racial resistances of Amarr.
CONCLUSION TWO:
Is the boost patch fair?
BOTH the NEW Jaguar and NEW Vengeance lost 10% EXP Shield. Additionally, NEW Vengeance lost ANOTHER 10% EM Armor while the NEW Jaguar lost only 2.5% EM Armor.
Again after boost patch, final resistances of Minmatar > final resistances of Amarr.
CCP your NUMBERS are NOT fairà
|
Vestus Regula
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 03:24:00 -
[262]
Edited by: Vestus Regula on 31/01/2008 03:25:31 First and foremost, I fly Gallente, Caldari and Amarr ships; having said that, here's my take on the issue:
EM resist reduction on armor resists: Overall, not a useless idea; it boosts amarr drones (which, at the moment, suck), emp ammo and EM missiles. While the damage output x gank capabilities are 'ok' for missile and drone boats as well as matari ships, it's a nerf, nonetheless to hybrid-boats.
Of those, the blasterboats seem to be the least affected as, while they lose a portion of their tank, they can soften the changes by employing the right type of drones.
EX resist reduction on shield resists: I quote:
Originally by: Jerusalem Eve Well this just maintains the status quo that armor tanking is better than shield tanking for pvp. I would think you would try and get more shield tanked ships out there for lasers to shoot at. More Shield tanks to shoot at = Amarr boost.
Now, here we have a very serious issue. Shield tanking is already gimped: of course, you can tank higher dps but you lack efficiency, lack versatility, compromises a lot of slots / cpu / powergrid (at least when it comes to active shield tanking - heavily cap-reliant - since it's likely you'll need a cap booster).
Also, this further gimps hybrid long range platforms, as they can't switch damage types (much like amarr) and at least one battleship, the rokh, suffers yet another blow.
The ones who really benefit the most from these changes ara matari ships, seeing as they can employ (with significant levels of proficiency) all branches of weapons. Not only that, EMP, which is now on pair with antimatter becomes much more powerful, with both types of damage getting a substantial boost, while not using cap, having better effective range, etc, etc, ad nauseum.
And no, minie ships don't need any more dps than they currently have.
With all that in mind, some unfinished thoughts: - Keep the EM resist nerf; - Instead of reducing EX resist on shields, boost it; I KNOW THIS WILL SOUND OUTRAGEOUS, but here's the reasoning behind it:
The boost will only affect explosive damage on shield tankers (that is, mainly caldari ships with explosive missiles or matari gunships versus, once again, caldari and matari ships). Shield tanks are already skill intensive, use many mid-slots (which are in short supply in most pvp ships) and should, hence (in my opinion) be slightly more powerful. Not only that, Minmatar ships' boost to EM damage (in a couple types of ammo) will make up for the lost EX damage.
Of course, the resists themselves won't solve amarr issues, but it's a solid step in the right direction, even if the initial take was a bit farfetched.
|
Concordokken Plox
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 03:30:00 -
[263]
CAN CALDARI PLOX GET MORE MIDSLOTS SO WE CAN FIT EWAR ON OUR SHIPS?
|
Ulstan
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 03:39:00 -
[264]
Quote: Here's something I've never understood. Why does armor have 20% extra resists on baseline T1 compared to shields?
I wonder this as well. Given the preponderance of armor tankers in PvP compared to shield tankers, I would think the situation should be reversed.
|
SirFett
Omni-Core Freedom Fighters Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 04:01:00 -
[265]
Hmm interesting boost/nerf Some quick points Positive
Boosts EM Damage Boosts EXP Damage
But the negative side is
Nerfs Shield Tanking And it doesnt quite fix the out of whack EM Resists coupled with therm being high also on mini t2 ships... then again armor tanks on t2 minis arnt that comon in all honesty
So far for this (looks good) And now the points nobody is gona read or care about anyways Dare i say it boost some shield resistances on Shield tankers you took 10% exp now give something back idk 10% em or therm or something.. havent realy thought about it tbh (mainly caldari... dont think the minis need it )Dont forget to look at npc resists. If you do it for players do it for npcs aswell! still doesnt fix the more broken amarr ships!
And here is another suggestion of mine im gona be flamed for if anybody bothered to read : Moawr cap while keeping the recharge rate even less popular rise it above say gallente levels with just fireing guns. Cap warfare r us sotospeak. Amarr got an extra highslot might aswell use it for a neut without gimping yourself even further yes i know cap boosters are a mandatory fit ... flame away in anycase
|
Rat Scout
Gallente Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 04:03:00 -
[266]
This is from the devblog:
"There have been plenty of ideas for a fix put out there and I'm going to count out a few of them:
Fix crystals # Adjust the ratio of EM/Thermal in crystals to be Thermal heavier or at least 50/50 split # Introduce Explosive damage crystals # Reduce the cap penalty on the high damage crystals "
It's nice to see some that you guys are trying to fix some issues, but I have some concerns regarding the possible changes to laser. I can understand why they need some explosive charges, after all those pesky Gallente all have a weakness for it. But if Ammar get explosive, is it possible that maybe Gallente could have some as well? Wouldn't be fair if the gunboats get some explosive charges?
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
|
Shepard Book
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 04:06:00 -
[267]
Did I miss where they said the pilgrim has alot and I mean alot of posts about the nos/neuts range bonus needs to be boosted in line with the rest of the recons bonuses? Please do not dodge this.
|
Mort Salazar
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 04:16:00 -
[268]
Edited by: Mort Salazar on 31/01/2008 04:20:23 minmatar boost + sheild tanking nerf... whats not to like =)
On a side note, whats an amarr?
(and even if these amarr things did exist, all their issues will be resolved now that sheild tanking is even less relevant...)
|
Law Enforcer
Deadly Addiction
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 04:18:00 -
[269]
Edited by: Law Enforcer on 31/01/2008 04:18:34 I agree with all the changes although I think T2 mimatar ships need a greater EM nerf. 90 percent is still insane. a cap reduction on lasers would be nice as well. at least we wouldn't feel as "gimped" by our cap reduction bonus then.
|
Kon sama
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 04:21:00 -
[270]
so amarr needed more dps so they nerfed all tanks. Kinda weird way to fix it. Giving amarr more dps wouldnt help the em missiles and drones?? Did people complain about EM missiles and drones?
its like me complaining to the city about a holes in the road and they close all the draining wholes as wel. so it would eventually fload when it rains alot
|
|
Dlardrageth
Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 04:21:00 -
[271]
Originally by: Rat Scout [...] I can understand why they need some explosive charges, after all those pesky Gallente all have a weakness for it. But if Ammar get explosive, is it possible that maybe Gallente could have some as well? Wouldn't be fair if the gunboats get some explosive charges?
I guess if lasers are so totally overpowered with explosive damage you could easily crosstrain from hybrids to lasers and use them on your Gallente ships?
No, wait... there is this totally unresolved cap issue still, might be you cap out yourself after 30 seconds of firing. Darn!
Yeah, I remember that being the reason why we strongly suggest to many newer Amarr players to crosstrain for projectile weapons ASAP. Thus a buff for projectile DPS kinda makes sense as a boost for Amarr... if we frequently use the Minmatar racial weapons platform anyway and all missiles get a buff from decreased resists anyway... That just makes buffing missiles and projectiles mainly more of a reasonable solution. If we could now please get a bonus for projectile weapons on Amarr ships we might be quite happy. I mean, we prolly could live quite well without anyone in EVE-O using lasers any more, can we?
|
Wheya
Amarr Bruderschaft des Wahrhaftigen
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 04:26:00 -
[272]
I think the new resistances are a first step into the right direction.
Short summery of the things I wrote below - look at overpowered armor plates and shield extenders - add high slot scrambler and webifier
Many people have different opinions. This is because different playstyles lead to different experiences. Not every ship is the best option for every situation. Most of all I am interested in 1:1 combat.
With this in mind I think the overall huge boost to HP was a bad idea. In ganking situations a ship today lasts 10 seconds while in the past it lasted 5 seconds. Hardly an improvement when it comes to game experience of the victim no matter if that was a 100% boost. Solo combat - which usually happens at gates or stations - became much harder. It is almost a must to outnumber your enemy either in quality or in quantity to achieve something. I would not mind if devs would re-check some combat timers, too.
The HP boost to ships wasn't all. Damage controls, invulnerability fields, ean (+armor compensation skills) and greatly boosted HP on shield extenders and armor plates came, too. All this together make the cap recharge rate per second much more imporant than it was in the past. All ships suffered in their solo combat abilities because of the HP changes but Amarr suffered the most when it comes to capacitor and to resistance.
Overpowered armor plates: a 1600mm plate gives 5250 additional HP.
A Maller goes from 2343 to 7593 armor HP, 3 times more A Harbinger goes from 6836 to 12086 armor HP, 2 times more An Abaddon goes from 10625 to 15875 armor HP, 50% more
With a base armor resistance of 60 / 35 / 25 / 10 you need to do 13.125 em dmg (10.500 with a 50% resistance) or 8.077 th dmg or 7.000 ki dmg or 5.833 ex damage
In other words currently ki damage is almost twice as effective against armor than em damage. Explosive damage is even more effective. In future explosive damage is 'only' twice effective compared to em damage. Damage controls and ean are just multipliers for this issue. (I know this statement is somewhat flawed). The 10% decrease on armor em resistance is only a small step into the right direction but by far not sufficient. Of course I completely ignore the usage of active hardeners in this example and the effect of stacking. So my example is a bit exaggerated.
Nevertheless on passive tanks plates are by far superior - especially with an oversized plate - compared to hardeners, no matter if specialized hardeners or omni hardeners. And em damage suffers the most from this problem.
Solution: I think some changes to plates and shield extenders must be done. I would like to see a 'greatly reduced HP boost' (a great new expression to ask for a nerf) when I think about 1:1 combat.
Another additional option are inbuild resistances on armor plates and shield extenders which alter the base resistance of the ship after being fitted. Let me explain: base armor resistance is 60/35/25/10 with an average of 32,5% resistance.
Let's assume a ship has 2000 armor HP with base resistance and a plate has 1000HP with inbuild 32.5% resistance towards all damage types.
After fitting one plate to this ship the em resistance of the ship would change to (2000*60 + 1000*32,5) / (2000 +1000) = 50,83%. Explosive resistance would change to (2000*10 + 1000*32,5) / 3000 = 17,5%.
After fitting one 1600mm plate to an Abaddon (ignoring the ship and race bonus) em resistance: (10625*60 + 5250*32,5) / (10625 + 5250) = 50,9% ex resistance: (10625*10 + 5250*32,5) / 15875 = 17,44%.
The original idea of high armor em resistance and low ex resistance would not change that much with a single plate with the correct size. It would have a similar effect as the base idea of the dev blog.
|
Wheya
Amarr Bruderschaft des Wahrhaftigen
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 04:26:00 -
[273]
With oversized plates or with more than one plate on battleships things look different, though. A Maller (again ignoring ship bonus and race bonus) with a 1600mm plate would have a em resistance: (1875*60 + 5250*32,5) / (1875+5250) = 24.1% ex resistance: (1875*10 + 5250*32,5) / 7125 = 26.57%
Basicly armor plates and extenders would work as some kind of equalizers on resistance. As more HP comes from those modules instead from the ship itself as more the effect of equalizing towards the base resistance of the armor plate/extender. I would not mind if the inbuild resistance of this modules would be much lower to reduce their superiority compared to hardeners instead of just decreasing their current HP. Then add a new skill that increases the inbuild resistance of plates and extenders in a future patch and I will be happy to have another usefull skill to train. A reduced resistance effect would discourage people from fitting oversized extenders/plates while the usage of the correct size wouldn't have such drastic effect. Now I am waiting for flames from passive shield tank lovers...
Omni tanks: With such changes implemented the issue of invulnerability fields and ean is a complete different situation. I have complained about their implementation in the past. Today I have trained all compensation skills to 5 and I would cry to see them useless today. Plates and extenders are the bigger issue.
Shield tanking and med slots: Now to the topic of shield tanking: shield tanking is already superior to armor tanking. It doesn't need a boost. The reason why people don't use shield tanks that often are clear. Too many modules which are essential for PvP, especially for 1:1 combat, need med slots. Most important modules are scramblers and webbers followed by all kinds of EW and modules fitted for sniping. That's the reason why Minmatar prefer armor tanks and why so many Caldari complain about not having good pvp ships. I am very much for additional high slot scramblers and webbers leaving the player to choose if he wants to sacrifice a med slot or a high slot for this kind of modules.
Weapon upgrades: Looking at weapon upgrades would be a good idea, too. Remove the RoF bonus and compensate with more damage bonus. This would help a bit with cap problems and your server might like it, too.
|
Mort Salazar
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 04:37:00 -
[274]
Originally by: Wheya I think the new resistances are a first step into the right direction.
Short summery of the things I wrote below - look at overpowered armor plates and shield extenders- add high slot scrambler and webifier
MOAR SHEILD NERFS!!11oneeleven
But seriously, if all your changes are implemented (which might balance combat some) It would be a pretty drastic change in how the game is played I think...and do we really want more changes that are going to make everyone re-learn how to fit a pvp ship for all teh different races? There has got to be a less drastic way to fix it...
|
Kon sama
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 04:47:00 -
[275]
Edited by: Kon sama on 31/01/2008 04:48:30 how about taking the Caldari's crappy kinetic missile bonus away and make it an overal damage bonus??
Maybe more EM missiles will be used
|
Kon sama
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 04:48:00 -
[276]
Edited by: Kon sama on 31/01/2008 04:48:07 .
|
Inevitability
Caldari Clown Punchers Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 04:51:00 -
[277]
Yeah...let's just nerf the Caldari some more. Caldari is the master race! Quit jacking with the shield tankers and and do something for the caldari for a change!
Boost the shield tanks or make it so we can choose to either tank shields or armor and do so successfully!
Now Taking Freighter Service Contracts |
Cosmo Raata
Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 04:58:00 -
[278]
I like the idea, but the execution is poor. You are boosting Minmitar more than you are boosting amarr with this change.
Minmitar becomes the least effected by this change and they get more damage dealt now as well.
This hurts amarr defense just as much as it helps offense, so in turn this change becomes exactly like the EAN nerf, which did absolutely nothing.
You need to do the other changes period, this isn't going to cut it at all. You seem to know the problems so just go and fix them.
This EM would be more effective if the EM was dropped by 20% on minmitar or more. 10% on already stupid amounts of resistance isn't going to help.
Don't Ban me for my Love of Amarr! |
Durao
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 05:00:00 -
[279]
Edited by: Durao on 31/01/2008 05:01:29
Originally by: Sean Drake
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
Hey, I wouldn't mind if Minmatar get a small boost to one of their ammo types as long as Amarr get a boost to...well...their only damage types
Originally by: Mort Salazar
But seriously, if all your changes are implemented (which might balance combat some) It would be a pretty drastic change in how the game is played I think...and do we really want more changes that are going to make everyone re-learn how to fit a pvp ship for all teh different races? There has got to be a less drastic way to fix it...
A lot of people are afraid of change. Besides, it's not asking too much for people to think about fitting an EM mod in their armor tanks. |
Pithecanthropus
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 05:02:00 -
[280]
You want us to test a boost to Amarr, by flying ships that you nerfed on the test server? BOOST FRIGGIN AMARR! That's a plain and simple statement... jeez.
All I see is you reducing resists... wtf is that? now you just screwed all ships in contact with all ships. You didn't fix Amarr, because now Caldari, Minmat, and Gallente are all going to have to deal with new problems even if there's not an Amarr ship in all of the Eve universe!
This is dumber than the whole Cargo Exp II upgrade.
why not just add a low slot conversion mod that transforms thermal damage to explo on laser crystals? And don't give me crap about lasers not being able to produce explo damage, cuz they are beams of light. this is Eve... and you don't need C4 to split an atom or cause a nuclear explosion.
|
|
Frankschtaldt
Icarus' Wings
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 05:09:00 -
[281]
OK, so from what I understand the two things Amarr complain about most is lack of diversity of damage types they can deal and lack of e-war...... hmmmm last I checked the race that does both of these things better than anyone else was Caldari who are (generally) considered the worst pvper's in the game....... Following that logic I would suggest that those two limitations aren't the problem.
A quote from a friend in an e-mail when I told him about this thread... "lol tis funny. . . . . . . . . . The people that learn to use the Amarr ships don't really seem to cry too much. . . . . as yeah i have my little winge every now and again. But for the most part i love the Amarr and have been surviving well with them since i started. . . They do crazy damage. . . ya just need to learn how to juggle the cap :P "
So there you have it, spend more time learning how to use your ships and less time complaining on the forums and you'll do just fine.....
|
James Grand
Arcana Imperii Ltd. Chaos Incarnate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 05:29:00 -
[282]
Hey guys, Amarrians whined so we're going to make massive changes that will have far reaching implications for the game in general, not just the viability of Amarrian ships in PvP. Oh, and our change won't actually help that much.
Honestly, do you guys even think before releasing changes or do you just throw them into the game without even considering the possible ramifications? That's a real question. I am legitimately curious.
-------------------------------------------------- The opinions expressed in my posts are entirely my own. |
Ariel Dawn
Beets and Gravy Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 05:52:00 -
[283]
I'd just like to point out to those talking about EMP that as the high-end DPS ammo it helps bring it more in line with the other racial versions.
EMP L = 44 total damage Antimatter L = 48 total damage Multifrequency L = 48 total damage
Also, using small/medium EMP over Barrage means getting into web range to do any sort of significant DPS. Obviously a fair bit more powerful against those who don't fit webs, but it still is a very situational ammo.
To those up in arms about these changes; boosts and nerfs come and go. Anything that reduces tanking is a good thing and encourages small gang play (being able to burn down a target before help arrives). CCP isn't throwing these ideas out willy-nilly and any negative changes to the game will quickly get looked at.
Plus, this is the first in a series it seems of devblogs oriented towards solving the 'amarrian (whining) problem'. Let them show us the whole picture before starting an angry revolt on this serious business internet spaceship game.
|
Dlardrageth
Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 05:54:00 -
[284]
Originally by: Frankschtaldt OK, so from what I understand the two things Amarr complain about most is lack of diversity of damage types they can deal and lack of e-war...
Nope. Sorry. Failure at understanding. Did you care to check what most Amarr pilots (the other race's "Buff me!" whiners I discount) asked for? Cap issues, to give you a clue...
Most Amarr would be willing to have lasers reduced to doing only EM damage in fact, if that damage dealt was competitive. I'd wager most would be willing to accept to be thus even more specialized, if that damage would not be uber-tanked by standard omni-tanks plus being sustained over more than just a few minutes with maxed-out skills (which ofc everyone in EVE-O has, yeah, duh...).
Ever tried a bunch of Gurista missions in a laserboat (NOT a battleship to make it more interesting)? The versatility of damage types could be taken as a given with the "Khanid Mk. II" changes. On a side note, this gave Amarr rockets and HAMs as secondary weapons systems, for which noone asked in advance. No Amarr at least I know of. But it got dumped on us so we have "more diverse damage" types, hah! Too bad it affected not even half of our ships.
E-War... well... I'm willing to bet that even before the recent script nerf Tracking Disruptors were the least used EW type. Nowadays... laughing stock prolly. I don't know it for sure, mind me, because after a second look at them I decided it is pretty useless to waste any skillpoints apart from a mere single alibi level on Amarr EW. Waste of training time IMO. And the main complaint is not the whole EW thing, but the general midslot issue. Try PvP with the number of midslots many Amarr ships have. The ones with three midslots are already the nice ones. I mean, hey, MWD, web and scram are all you need, right? Who on earth needs a cap booster or a recharger or even a Tracking Comp or an ECCM module these days in PvP?
On a minor note about all these fictional people in E-Mails stating how great Amarr ships and flying them is. Nice that they seem to have max. skills to make this work on their hundreds of Abbadons. But guess what, it becomes pretty boring to hear again and again the Abbadon is a fine ship, prolly best tier-3 battleship of them all. And face the silence about the smaller size ones. And if those lasers were sooooo great, one has to wonder why Amarr players are the fewest in EVE and why not every other Caldari, Minmatar or Gallente pilot crosstrains and uses them regularily. Strange, huh? Instead lots of Amarr pilots crosstrain for other weapon systems like projectiles... go figure...
Moreover, it is commendable that Zulupark stated there will be another dev blog about Amarr ship changes. I miss a perspective there time-wise, sadly. Until then, I won't hold my breath until I see that one and especially what the "rebalancing" there will be.
|
Roemy Schneider
BINFORD Solidus Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 05:55:00 -
[285]
excuse me...? 25% more armor damage for EM? 33% vs minnies? lol, sure, whatever. with those "omni tanks" presented there, i guess you'd need such a change. it's not like EM missles are the most popular already...
just because people don't take the half hour to read and comprehend the tracking guide doesn't mean lasers suck. especially not with the usually higher amount of turret slots.
what's next? gallente complaining about everybody fitting thermal resistances and two races having t2 resistances against it?
don't get me wrong; i'd love my emp projectile ammo to kick more ass but this 'solution' is just... weak. it may muffle the number crunchers (although they're not the ones complaining) but at the end of the day, we'll still hear the moans about invariable damage blahblahblah.
basically all it does is minnies getting more fragile and more powerful at the same time. - putting the gist back into logistics |
Sniggerdly Hater
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 06:17:00 -
[286]
Originally by: Contralia
Another factor to consider is balance relative to the other recons. While at the initial release, the recons were well balanced, changes in the meantime have left the Amarr fallen far behind. [ [snip] Rapier: No changes since release.
Ah, so you say that the amarr ships have fallen behind due to the NOS changes, and yet apparently the rapier has been left unchanged. Yes. I hear dampening rapiers are quite effective at the moment. And that the web-kill drone thing is as easy as always. After all if they can field more waves of drones it surely gives more to shoot.
|
Nigal Tufnel
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 06:19:00 -
[287]
Good to see this whine being addressed.
The 10% resistance change seems to help out some other races. Thought this was supposed to be a Amarr boost?
This change does not make me want to fly an Amarr ship. That is the problem.
|
SickSeven
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 06:30:00 -
[288]
Ok, I'm still new to eve, but here goes:
How was there a problem with EM damage? and why are we only talking about Armor tankers? Isn't the high EM resist of armor balanced by the 0 (i repeat: ZERO) EM resists of shields?
There are a lot of mission runners (including myself) that are using shield tanks and now are shields are weaker for what reason?
and, mr zulupark. You title your blog "Amarr oomph" then directly say that the resist nerf is not about Amarr at all but about fixing EM damage? Well wich is it?
All I'm seeing is Amarr pilots complain about cap use and PG. The few months I've been playing (yea yea, it aint much) but no one ever informed me of the great imbalance of EM damage. Sure, it's great against shields but crappy against armor, well damn, that sounds pretty damn balanced to me. And if you feel amarr are restricted by doing EM damage primarily (exclusively?) then freaking give them some options!! Caldari and Minnie can shoot whatever they feel like, so are we now going to take away ammo options from caldari and minni pilots?
|
Deva Blackfire
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 06:34:00 -
[289]
All cool and dandy (i like the idea) but you dont think thats all of the problems? Ill help you:
- apocalypse - t1 ships w/o laser damage bonus (mounting ACs will still be better than using lasers) - AFs
|
Sniggerdly Hater
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 06:34:00 -
[290]
Originally by: Jonny JoJo
Amarr do 0dps after a few minutes due to no cap, and low damage due to hardly any heatsinks as they spend upto 5-10 slots(inc rigs) on cap mods
Minmatar do 0dps after a few minutes due to no ship, and low damage due to "versatility" as they cannot excel in anything so the only way of not getting blown up is not being there which is getting more and more nerfed. And a tempest is hard to hide. Range? Not anymore. Speed? Everybody and their mom has a nanoable ship and there are more and more long range webs around. Interceptors are slower or heavier in the name of versatility. Artillery is outalphaed and outranged in the name of versatility.
It's not good when you are only slightly more popular than a bunch of religious zealots which everyone laughs at. Buff or no buff.
We are next in the laughing line tho
|
|
Julius Romanus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 06:44:00 -
[291]
Lowering EM resist on armor: Good Lowering EXP resist on shield: Not as good
And to the above mission runner, you dont understand. Try shooting a plated rax with Em dammage, now try it with anything else. Now realise scorch, and any of the T1 ranged ammo's fire mostly em. Giving amarr some new dammage type is less of a good idea than fixing em resists on armor.
And guess what, sansha's will be hitting me harder too. Gotta make money somehow.
|
Mad Ilya
principle of motion Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 06:58:00 -
[292]
Wow 10 pages..
Personally, I would think even 5% drop on resists would be good boost to amarr - 25% more damage seems quite... drastic. I haven't had the chance to test it tho so..
Minnie T2 ships are not that good example of armor tanking EM damage as most of them do way better with (passive) shield tank. Relying on speedtank you have armor hp of a frigate.
So it's also rocking the boat so that Minmatar can break shield tanks more easier but also that Minmatar is weaker to their own damage type. I think lower all-around resists also encourage ppl to use more omni-tanks.
Interesting to see.
Yes, I am Minmatar.
|
Wu Jiun
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 06:58:00 -
[293]
Edited by: Wu Jiun on 31/01/2008 07:05:07 Edited by: Wu Jiun on 31/01/2008 07:00:36
Originally by: Roemy Schneider especially not with the usually higher amount of turret slots.
Higher amount of slots compared to what exactly?
Some ships and that come to mind (if there are more hardpoints that hislots i give only one of the possible configurations that uses all hislots):
Punisher 3t - Rifter 3t + 1l - incursus 3t
Maller 5t - Thorax 5t - Rupture 4t + 2l - Caracal 5l
Zealot 4t - Deimos 5t - Muninn 5t + 2l for example - Eagle 4t + 2l
Prophecy 6t + 1l - Brutix 7t - Ferox 5t + 2l for example - Cyclone 5t + 3l
Geddon 7t - Domi 6t - Scorp 4l+4t - Phoon 4l + 4t
Apoc 8 - Megathron 7t + 1l - Tempest 6t + 2l - Raven 6l
Abaddon 8t - Hyperion 8t - Maelstrom 8t - Rokh 8t
So what we see here is that amarr can usually mount the same number of weapons as everyone else. They are more focused towards turrets than say Minmatar or Caldari obviously though. Gallente usually have the same or more turrets.
So judging from this (of course one would have to look at more ships but i am lazy) amarr are more in the middle. And given that they mostly have no launchers at all it appears only reasonable that they have more turret slots than minmatar.
Furthermore if we accounted for the different damage bonuses (or lack of) on the ships we'd see the numbers being more in favourite of the other races generally speaking.
Of course some of these ships aren't comparable at all and thus its pretty inappropriate to compare their weapon hardpoints. However after this quick (thus superficial) comparison i'd really like to know which ships you talk about specifically.
|
Zana Nayik
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 07:14:00 -
[294]
Hi,
Did you consider the adverse effect this has on those of us who use railguns in - kick me i'm a carebear - missions ? More pain (from reduced resistances on our tanks, be it armor or shields), no gain (even if as I understand NPC resistances go down the same as player ones, kin/th damage does not change). I'm not gonna whine endlessly if this side-nerf goes through, just thought i'd drop the thought.
Apologies if this was already mentioned, reading all that thread would make me late for work
|
Dezzereth
Two Swords Guild
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 07:29:00 -
[295]
Unbelieveable.
I have feard exactly this. I thought the day CCP will cave in to the (imo ungrounded) whines about Amarr will be the day they screw up not only Amarr even more. So sad to be right. CCP, people (again, not me among them) asked for a change of AMARR ships, and you go off and you actually boost Minmatar. I mean, WTF?
I see nothing wrong with Amarr, they dont need ammo, they do good damage agaisnt shileld tankers. Didn't it occur to anyone that this is a MMO and that ships actually should have their specialities, so that there is a reason for people to team up?
CCP, you will again, like in the MK2 changes homogenize ships again, which is happening with each patch more and more. Soon, we will really have only one ship of each type and one weapon system. On second thought, let's remove armor tanking and only use shield tanking, give all ships a higher med slot count and I bet evne then people will whine about some **** that isn't "balanced"
My suggestion to you CCP: Ignore the whiners please, because if that leads to halfarsed changes like this, we are better off without them.
P.S.: When will we see finally a more readable font?
|
Jonny JoJo
Amarr The Imperial Guards
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 08:14:00 -
[296]
Originally by: Sprobe 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.
Amarr are the only race to have to train another race to pvp.
Also, this Em fix is not Amarr fix. Repeat - this is not Amarr fix and all it is going to do is just break the game further.
Problem is Amarr and that needs to be fixed. Sig locked, lack of Eve content |
Inflexible
Shokei
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 08:18:00 -
[297]
Didn't read all 11 pages so it is probably mentioned somewhere: lowering highest resist is in fact evening of resists - and it encourages use of omnitanking modules. Most broken are minmatar T2 ships IMO, because they simply use only invuls.
Good example is comparison of Onyx and Broadsword - ships with same slot layout. Ability of broadsword to fit invul instead of EM resist gives it significant advantage in both DPS tanked and in EHP.
|
Zeminy
Minmatar The Knights Templar Pure.
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 08:18:00 -
[298]
I understand the change and its logic and where the thinking comes from. However, I have also heard talks of making PvP last longer. I believe I remember a patch or so ago where a lot of ships got more hit points for this very reason. If we want to make amarr more effective, how would doing a revers type of boost rather than a nerf affect things. I mean, instead of decreasing the EM resists, how about boosting the resists of the other 3 for the ships, thus reducing the effectiveness of all the other damage types to bring them in line with the amarr. I think you would make people happier because everyone loves boosts. PvP can then last longer as is desired and the amarr guns are just as effective (they all become ineffective) as the other races then?
~ * ~
~ * ~ |
Yakez
Xenobytes Stain Empire
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 08:26:00 -
[299]
Armor tank nerf? Minmatar boost? Gallente becoming more useless? Problems with tanking Sanshas? Thats really sux... And only last of all that is small amarr boost.
|
Cpt Cosmic
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 08:27:00 -
[300]
Edited by: Cpt Cosmic on 31/01/2008 08:34:31 this change is an epic fail if it goes on tranqu, I mean reduced EM resis on armor and EXP resis on shields on all ships results in: 1. Minmatar do more dmg with.... everything on anyone 2. Amarr do more dmg to armor. tackling abilities and dmg still (omni tankts ftw, therm heavier lasers lol) still will be the same like before. 3. Gallente stays the same 4. Caldari shield tanks got a nerf which are already useless in pvp. tackling abilities and dmg still will be the same like before.
that results in: 1. since tanks on all ships are weaker and minmatar got the biggest boost with this, they will got much better then any other race, its not like no one uses them right? 2. amarr will be inline with gallente except in ewar capabilities which still puts gallente over amarr. 3. amarr will still have some problems with cap and fittings 4. caldari are the biggest loosers now because they cant tackle and tank at the same time and they dont have the speed of minmatar ships to avoid the others running away. their tanks will be even reduced now and their use kinetic/therm like gallente most of the time which means the reduced resis wont change a thing. only thing they can do now is ecm.
that means: 1. every one will use minmatar for dmg and mobility 2. caldari will be only an ecm biatch 3. gallente stays like it is now, high dps, versatile 4. amarr will be still behind everything 5. this does not fix the problem that many amarr ships are still better off equipping projectiles or the fact the the rax do more dmg with lasers then every other amarr cruiser. 6. nothing got changed except caldari are now even worse in pvp.
my suggestions: 1. instead of reducing the explo resis on shield tanks move the 10% from explo to em 2. maybe increase shield overall resis because armor has more to balance it out in pvp and nerf crystal set a bit. 3. do something against cap/fitting problems of amarr ships and npcing problems.
|
|
Viashivan
Dark Centuri Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 08:28:00 -
[301]
While this nerf is not a bad idea, I don't see it fixing the major problems with amarr. Its just one reason more to fit 2 eanm and a dc.
But if this change is for the boost patch, I'm really anxious about the other boosts.
Via
|
Sinder Ohm
Infinite Improbability Inc Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 08:29:00 -
[302]
well you are changing the base resists of EVERY ship in the game so ammar could do abit more damage fine by me I will starts stocking up on faction EMP ammo.
PS: zulupark if this go through I will forgive you for the unnecessary dictor speed nerf |
Cpt Cosmic
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 08:41:00 -
[303]
Originally by: Sinder Ohm well you are changing the base resists of EVERY ship in the game so ammar could do abit more damage fine by me I will starts stocking up on faction EMP ammo.
PS: zulupark if this go through I will forgive you for the unnecessary dictor speed nerf
yay CCP fixed Amarr by making PROJECTILES on Amarr ships EVEN more attractive! lol time to fit autocannons!
|
Ancy Denaries
Caldari Under Heavy Fire
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 08:42:00 -
[304]
I fully intended to read thru this thread from beginning to end, but the colossal amount of whine and asshattery has stopped me. Reading thru the first 10 pages, I've noticed a few things.
1. Very few people bothered to read the Dev Blog. They saw "reduced resistances" and went haywire, crying "NERF!!" or "WTF about the ships>????". Bloody idiots.
2. Most people are incapable of understanding that this is a TEST! TEST to see if it works. Nothing is final. The ships WILL get looked at.
I'm honestly disappointed. The EVE community seemed like a more mature one than most MMOGs, but apparently not. You're just a bunch of spoilt kids.
Kiddies: "Waaaah! Boost us! NERF THEM! WAAAAAH!" CCP: "Right, so we'll look into this. Try this out and see how it works. We'll look at the ships soon." Kiddies: "WTF! OMG U NREFED RES!!??! WTF CCP U SUXX! WAHT BOUT THE SHIPS WTF??! WAAAAAAAAH!" CCP: "... Look, we said try it out. It's not done yet. Try it, and we ARE looking at the ships." Kiddies: "OMGWFT!!!" *wrists*
Seriously...are you capable of anything but a massive whine?
Originally by: "GM Tacgnol" Oveur descended from the heavens (also known as the second floor) and beat us all with his nerfbat.
|
Druadan
Institute of Fungineering
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 08:42:00 -
[305]
Jesus H. Christ this is just... what!?
This is not a step in the right direction. This is not a good start.
This is one step in the right direction, and three steps in the wrong direction. This is one good start, and three awful.
There are two primary problems with Amarr:
- Their primary damage type is the most resisted
- They have the most ships that have serious fitting problems.
The latter is the biggest problem as it renders many of their ships unreasonable choices. So look at those ships and fix them. You broke the Pilgrim and, to a lesser extent, the Curse, so fix those. Then look at the Zealot's lack of DPS and fix that. There are a few of their ships that could use an additional midslot, as has been mentioned in this thread. Look into all of this before you completely change an aspect of the game without giving thought to the knock-on effects.
-Dru
|
Cpt Cosmic
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 08:48:00 -
[306]
Edited by: Cpt Cosmic on 31/01/2008 08:49:09
Originally by: Ancy Denaries I am a troll
said the troll, either you are blind or you cant see that the problem was not the EM resistance but the fitting/cap problems.
|
ZerKar
Caldari Zen'Tar
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 08:51:00 -
[307]
Considering that Shield Tankers are already worthless in PvP and by extention Caldari ships are next to pointless to fly in PvP unless you attempt to Armor Tank them which will now be even harder I do not see a reason you need to touch Shield Tankers at all. They are already at an immense disadvantage of not being able to fit MWD, Sensor Boosters, Webs, and Warp Jammers while still having any tank at all. They do not have a Passive Omni Tank option like Armor Tankers do and so their Shield Boosters end up eating their Cap much faster than Armor Repairers do and if they fit a Cap Booster then they have lost even MORE tank.
So the Explosive Damage Resist for Shields part is really just an unneeded additional nerf to Shield Tankers that should be thrown right out.
Even the Damage Bonus against Armor Tankers from the EM Damage is not that useful to Amarr in general. Missiles and Drones will be more likely to see the full benefit of that change as well as Minmatar EM Ammunition.
What the Amarr REALLY need is stronger Capaciters and weaker Fitting Requirements for their Lasers so that they can fit some Damage Mods and run their Tanks for more than 5 Seconds while shooting.
Caldari aside, I have no trouble fitting up my Maelstrom with the best Big Guns and a full Tank ontop of it, but the Amarr struggle badly to fit their supposedly superior ships. I mean they have been at making these things the longest, I would think they would know how to make really good Capacitors to facilitate the use of their Lasers and keep their Reppers running long and hard.
I know this is just in testing but please reconsider how you are going about this buff to Amarr because it does not really address their needs as much as it sounds like it should while at the same time it weakens the already horribly nerfed Caldari and the Minmatar Shield Tanks. +++++++++++++++ I saw the Sign...!
O.o |
Minerva Vulcan
Caldari The Nexus Foundation Endless Horizon
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 08:53:00 -
[308]
Edited by: Minerva Vulcan on 31/01/2008 08:54:21 Remind me how removing shield explosive resists is helping Amarr?
Originally by: Zulupark This may seem drastic, but we've given it a lot of thought.
False. _______________________________ I need new voices in my head, To speak my secret evils with. I need new lovers in my bed, To be my friends and special pets. |
Saosuke
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 08:54:00 -
[309]
please CCP do not do this. All ur doing is boosting minmattar nerfing caldari, gallente and amarr because u also reduce the armor resists. sure amarr will do more dps but minmatar will pwn ALL with EMP.
how about u just change the amount of cap that is needed to fire those lasers. in my opinion amarr BS's are really not bad but they do run out of cap after a minute of shooting which totally sucks specially for fleets. go ahead with these changes but before doing so please turn all my amarr skillpoints into minmatar ones. TYVM.
I almost forgot one thing. What was the HP boost all about a few months back if ur just going to nerf resists now???? What was all that stuff u said before about wanting fights to last longer.??????
|
Vabjekf
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 09:00:00 -
[310]
Theres nothing wrong with lasers, by themselves. There is nothing wrong with amarr ships, by themselves.
The problem comes from the fact that:
1. Many Amarr ships are better off using projectiles than lasers. 2. Non amarr ships are sometimes better at using lasers than amarr ships 3. Amarr lack damage from lasers not because the resist, but because they have to waste slots fitting things just to make the lasers USABLE, on top of running out of cap too fast. For the few seconds the lasers are working right things are golden.
A buff to lasers does not address this, because the problem is a relative one.
Give all amarr ships a built in bonus that lowers the CPU and PG cost of fitting laser weapons by a small amount, and lowers the cap use of firing them by a large amount. Not a fake replacement bonus that some currently get for laser cap use, but a role bonus, as an amarr ship you get to not suck with lasers. Replace those current lower cap use bonuses with real ones like +damage or +rof, or even +range or tracking (this is intended not specifically to bring out much more damage, but just to make it 'better' than fitting an auto cannon - by mixing up the bonuses you replace the current lower cap cost of laser fire you can further flesh out and specialize the amarr ships and give them their own niches).
All this current buff does is make the laser thorax even more viable=p What needs to happen is lasers need to become more attractive to amarr ships and actually fit. Not that lasers need to become better across the board for everyone, and not that em ammo needs to become awesome for attacking armor.
|
|
ZerKar
Caldari Zen'Tar
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 09:02:00 -
[311]
Originally by: Jonny JoJo
Amarr are the only race to have to train another race to pvp.
*gestures you over to her* Want to say that to my Face? EXCUSE ME? The Amarr are the only ones who have to cross train huh? I guess that explains that ship bay full of Minmatar Ships I own, oh and all those Minmatar Blueprints. Riiight, think again. If the Caldari and the Amarr have a similarity it is that we both suck big time, but for different reasons and ours are worse. +++++++++++++++ I saw the Sign...!
O.o |
Madelchai
Gallente Stimulus
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 09:04:00 -
[312]
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.
Hi!
I enjoy playing EVE.
Perhaps sometime you can play too!
What was the point of the HP buff in Revelations if you're going to nerf resistances now?
Someone... anyone... Bueller? ------ Revolution. The only solution. |
Ralitge boyter
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 09:11:00 -
[313]
Hmm, having both a pure Ammar and a split Minmatar/Caldari character all I can say is Time for some testing I guess
I think it is good that you are working on making Ammar more competetive in PvP.
But in all honnesty a race that uses weapons that only uses the two damage forms that all races have the highest recistance against, be it on shields or armor can never be fully competative. Unless they manage to find a way to make them selfs less cap dependent.
------------------------------------------- Should you disagree with me, well I guess that is because I disagree with you. If you have a problem with that please feel free not to tell me. |
ExcellciuM
Exair Holding Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 09:12:00 -
[314]
Can we request to change the title to:
Zulupark Fails Again and similar words.
|
Lucius Flaccus
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 09:13:00 -
[315]
Originally by: Minerva Vulcan Edited by: Minerva Vulcan on 31/01/2008 08:56:57 Remind me how removing shield explosive resists is helping Amarr?
Its helping Amarr because it allows for the EM damage to come down. The devs have obviously decided a certain ratio between the strengths of armor/shield tanking have to be maintained. I'd like to point out here the sheer obviousness that changing an aspect of one form of tanking will affect the viability of the other form of tanking.
Furthermore, the explosive resists have not been removed per se. I'd offer up the term 'reduced'.
|
ExcellciuM
Exair Holding Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 09:15:00 -
[316]
Originally by: Lucius Flaccus
Originally by: Minerva Vulcan Edited by: Minerva Vulcan on 31/01/2008 08:56:57 Remind me how removing shield explosive resists is helping Amarr?
Its helping Amarr because it allows for the EM damage to come down. The devs have obviously decided a certain ratio between the strengths of armor/shield tanking have to be maintained. I'd like to point out here the sheer obviousness that changing an aspect of one form of tanking will affect the viability of the other form of tanking.
Furthermore, the explosive resists have not been removed per se. I'd offer up the term 'reduced'.
Sheilds already have 10 points less resistances than armour so it damages shield tanks even more.
|
Gozmoth
Amarr Altera Odyssea Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 09:18:00 -
[317]
Thanks for the blog.
Please do not forget another problem : tracking disruption being the weakest form of ewar !
|
|
CCP Zulupark
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 09:37:00 -
[318]
Ok, back up. Now to answer some questions:
Quote:
Here's something I've never understood. Why does armor have 20% extra resists on baseline T1 compared to shields?
Shields compensate for armor extra resistances by always having a natural recharge rate.
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.
Quote:
What about the ships?
We're working on a devblog about ship changes that we've been playing around with and will post it soon (hopefully before the weekend)
Quote:
You're nerfing shield tankers!
I don't see we're nerfing anyone over anyone else. We've simply re-balanced a basic part of the game and the effects of that will touch on all ships in EVE.
Quote:
This isn't the Amarr boost you promised!
This is a part of it. There are also some ship changes to come and a boost to the Amarr Ewar has also been formed. We'll post about that as soon as possible.
We don't want to change too much, we understand people also want cap use reduction and less powergrid requirements and we're not saying that won't happen. Just that we don't want to do everything at the same time.
That said, I urge you all to go on SISI, test the changes out for yourselves. Please keep posting comments and ideas :)
|
|
Merfio
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 09:40:00 -
[319]
Edited by: Merfio on 31/01/2008 09:40:51 Lulz, everyone was crying for an Amaar Boost. Now it isnt needed anymore or it just should be affecting PVE? The people get what they deservere. Its a whining nightmare.....
As said above, plz consider the NPC changes.
|
Wizzkidy
Demonic Retribution Pure.
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 09:41:00 -
[320]
Yet your too scread to make any decent changes, this change is quite small if you look at the big picture of the problem with amarr
|
|
Lucius Flaccus
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 09:44:00 -
[321]
Originally by: ExcellciuM
Sheilds already have 10 points less resistances than armour so it damages shield tanks even more.
Not necessarily. It depends on the actual resistance before/after. Going by the devblog, they've just taken a straight 10% off the base resist in many cases. So going from 60% down to 50% is a lot different to going from say 90% down to 80% (see Zealot explosive in the devblog).
|
Laechyd Eldgorn
Caldari Karjala Inc. Atrum Tempestas Foedus
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 09:46:00 -
[322]
This whole thing just makes shield tanking even worse, especially for caldari who have 0 EM resist on any ship. Doesn't hurt minmatar so much since they have very good omnitank on shields by default on t2 ships...
Now the EMP ammo is quite much most effective ammo in pvp because no one is really focusing their resists on EM/EXP tanking. It's even worse for caldari when you have to start from 0 point base resist on EM so if you want to have even decent EM resist you have to use several EM resist modules. That means most of your other resistances will suck, especially explosive. This whole nerf would make shield tanking much more difficult than it already is.
And like said armor tank is better than shield tanking already in many ways, more than just having tackling modules in mid slots.
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.
|
Itcharo Wu
Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 09:53:00 -
[323]
So in order to "fix" Amarr, you nerf everyone, including Amarr. What's the logic in that?
Yea I know, it's just part of the big picture and in the end we will have refurbished Amarr ships and the slavers will live happily ever after then. But before you do this, you stab everyone in the face with a pretty drastic nerf.
You know there are Amarr running missions in Amarr ships for the Amarr Navy? You know that common enemies in those missions are Blood Raiders and Sanshas, which deal EM/Therm damage? Those will get harder to tank then. Unless you are a Caldari and sit in your Raven, where this will not affect you.
Great job altogether.
|
Shevar
Minmatar A.W.M Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 09:53:00 -
[324]
This might solve the DPS issues, although i would have prefered a solution which tackled the cap issues and would actually give a decent second bonus.
That being said this change won't fix the following;
Every laser using t1 frigate will still suck.
Every laser using t1 cruiser will still suck.
Abbadon will still run out of cap within 20 seconds.
Apoc still doesn't have any role.
--- -The only real drug problem is scoring real good drugs |
ExcellciuM
Exair Holding Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 09:54:00 -
[325]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark Ok, back up. Now to answer some questions:
Quote:
Here's something I've never understood. Why does armor have 20% extra resists on baseline T1 compared to shields?
Shields compensate for armor extra resistances by always having a natural recharge rate.
What about in the situations when the shield recharge is so negligable a 10% extra resist would be better? The abilty to choose whether you would like either the resistances or the recharge might be something to think about. Im sure a story can be through up and it could be added.
Just as an example, imagine an active shield tank, or the tank of a carrier/dread, they have such a large amount of sheilds and low recharge rate, wouldn't the abilty to have an extra 10% resisatnaces benifit them more than say, 2 shield points per second?
|
Hober Hardin
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 09:59:00 -
[326]
Edited by: Hober Hardin on 31/01/2008 10:01:58
Quote: Remove 10% off the EM resistance on all Tech 1 ships and re-calculate the racial bonuses for the Tech 2 ships from there.
I'm a bit sceptical about this, it seems quite a sweeping change to apply this to all ships, changing the attributes of so many ships by what is quite a large amount is going to hit some ships hard.. ..take the Jaguar used in the blog example (Gloss over the fact its an Assault Frigate and pretty much useless anyway, you'll still get the point)
Jaguar base resistances
- Before changes Shields EM - 75%, Exp - 60%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 60% Armor EM - 92.5%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 67.5%
- After changes Shields EM - 75%, Exp - 50%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 60% Armor EM - 90%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 67.5
One of the most popular setups for this ship is to fit a passive shield tank based on a Medium Shield Extender or two.. ..reducing the explosive resistance by 10% has a quite a big effect on this, what was bearly a decent shield tank will be liable to break quicker and exposes paper thin armour which has a poultry 2.5% less EM resistance than currently.
I'm all for thinking up new setups, but this is a ship that has 4 Mid Slots and 3 Lows.. ..the passive tank setup was based on the high natural shield resistances, there isn't enough room on the ship to introduce a shield hardening module to cater for the change without making a change for the worse somewhere else.. ..with the base armour points, resistances and only 3 low slots theres little chance of fitting an armour tank, nor's there a chance of getting a decent speed or ew tank, so in all likelyhood pilots will end up fitting the same passive tank unable to do anything about the changes making a bearly passable shield tank even weaker.
So taking this into consideration this ends up as quite a nerf for the poor old Jaguar which isn't the best of ships anyway.. ..some ships are quite finely balanced, surely instead of sweeping changes across the board this should be based on reviewing and making changes to every ship individually?
|
Charlie Seriya
Gallente Eve Defence Force Insurgency
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 10:00:00 -
[327]
A good first step! I'm a little annoyed at some of the ungrateful responses, there's no question to my mind that this will help at least a bit, and I understand the need not to change too much at once. Keep up the good work!
Has low-slot propulsion jamming been considered to push shield tanking? Unfortunately a Warp Disruptor on every ship is considered mandetory in an awful lot of PVP. Lowslots have no such perceived mandetory use. 'Different' propulsion jamming might be viable, for example a warp disruptor with a long duration that affects you as well as your target, or a web with effectiveness linked to sig radius, etc.
|
Mag's
MASS Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 10:10:00 -
[328]
So to boost Amarr, you double boost Minmatar?
I've looked at your numbers and the numbers of others and I fail to see how this 'Boost' helps. You've completely missed the issues suffered by Amarr and placed in a stealth 'Boost' nerf in your upcoming 'Boost' patch.
wow just wow.
Mag's
Originally by: Avernus One of these days, the realization that MASS is no longer significant will catch up with you. |
Tzrailasa
Destructive Influence Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 10:12:00 -
[329]
This:
Originally by: Takeshi Yamato The cap problem of lasers exists for these reasons:
- Hp was universally increased on all ships to prolong combat. Prolonged combat means more cap will be used, but there were no changes to laser cap usage.
- Rigs further increased combat duration, not everybody fits tanking rigs but on average ships are more durable since rigs have been introduced.
- Amarr ships tend to have a bigger capacitor than others, but the cap per second is exactly the same as everyone else. Since combat tends to last longer nowdays, the lasers drain so much that the any advantage is quickly gone and the total cap that was available to each pilot for the duration of the fight will be lowest for the amarr ship.
...and this:
Originally by: Eclip CAP use CAP use CAP use is all i really need to say. Amarr ships are good, they have damage and they can melt a shield tank like it wasnt there. even on armor they do good damage. but they cap out or run so low on cap that they cant active tank even for a little while so if ur getting shot at you have to switch off ur guns so ur cap ca be used for tanking. Give them slightly bigger capacitors as they are surpose to be the cap warfare race. hell increase capacity by 10-15% on BS's and 5-10% on cruisers and BC
...and I'm even agreeing with a goon:
Originally by: If you fix cap usage and fitting requirements, the rest of the problems address themselves. Some of the ships still suck, but those can be addressed later. The main problem is cap usage and fitting.
You're solving the wrong problem......
My views are my own. They do not represent the views of my corporation or alliance. |
Poister
Amarr THEM. Praesidium Libertatis
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 10:20:00 -
[330]
In order for these changes to be effective, my nice shiny Amarr ship needs enough PG to fit the lasers, sustainable cap to run the lasers and most importantly have the correct distance and tracking to actually hit the target.
Do you really think these changes will bring laser ships to frontline PvP ?
|
|
Dragy
Caldari Royal Hiigaran Navy
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 10:24:00 -
[331]
Now this change is being pathetic. First you boost the armor HP twice to make the battles take longer. Ganking nerfed. Then you nerf the NOS 'cause it's the most important gear with so much HP. Everything was for the so called heat system that in the final phase we could target some subsystems like in startrek like disabling the reactors or other stuff.
Imo this concept was a failure from the very start. Eve is eve, not some star trek.
And now what are you doing ? Getting resistances down so that amarr can deal more dmg, ok. But while you're at it you decrease explosive resistance on shields ... this is being irrational 'cause overall shield resistance hitpoints were always smaller than armor and the recharge rate just does not recompensate this.
The more i think about it, the more i come to a conclusion. Amarr is amarr. Their characteristic is simple. Not many mid slots, great ranges with mega pulses and still good damage. My ceo with good amarr skills can defeat almost everyone in bs 1v1.
Explosive crystals would be a good idea if you only grasp the problem. But when you investigate it deeply, you'll notice that the gallente race will stay only with 2 damage types.
And what's more, every race has "favourite" damage dealed. Amarr is EM caldari is kinetic gallente is thermal and minmatar is explosive. If you implemend the explosive crystals, everything what you've been trying to do with the backstory etc will just fail. Just change the em/thermal damage that is dealed by the crystals, but still i think that it's not a good idea overall.
CLIENT BUG - CCP PLZ FIX THIS !
|
Meiyang Lee
Gallente Azteca Transportation Unlimited Gunboat Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 10:28:00 -
[332]
Edited by: Meiyang Lee on 31/01/2008 10:29:59 I don't really mind the resist lowering, its not a major change in that sense. With a full omni-tank the drop in resists will be minimal, but it does increase the EM damage taken substantially. (ie it wasn't all that much, now its slightly more, but the percent increase is pretty high) the Explosive resistance decrease on shields is simply to compensate for the 10% drop, and taking it from the highest resistance will have the smallest backlash overal.
Does this kill shield tanks for PvP? No, because those are more or less dead as it is.
The only ships capable of getting away with a shield tank in PvP are either to fast to hit properly or are T2 Minmatar, which have such high base EM resistance and still good Explosive resistance it will make very little difference, and are usually to fast to hit properly anyway.
And for all those Cap-usage whiners:
Originally by: CCP Zulupark # Some ships could need lovin' # Cap usage on Energy Weapons may be too high in some cases # Fitting requirements on some Energy Weapons need adjusting # Base EM resistances on armor are very high
They're looking into that aswell, so give them the chance to present those changes too and then judge. Not the other way around.
|
Eldon Rosen
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 10:29:00 -
[333]
Edited by: Eldon Rosen on 31/01/2008 10:30:47
Quote:
Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The solution we've been looking at to fix this is quite simple and straight forward. Remove 10% off the EM resistance on all Tech 1 ships and re-calculate the racial bonuses for the Tech 2 ships from there. To maintain a correct ratio between shield tanking and armor tanking we'd also remove 10% from the explosive resistances on shields. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm a bit sceptical about this, it seems quite a sweeping change to apply this to all ships, changing the attributes of so many ships by what is quite a large amount is going to hit some ships hard.. ..for instance, take the Jaguar used in the blog example (Gloss over the fact its an Assault Frigate and pretty much useless anyway, you'll still get the point)
Jaguar base resistances
- Before changes Shields EM - 75%, Exp - 60%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 60% Armor EM - 92.5%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 67.5%
- After changes Shields EM - 75%, Exp - 50%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 60% Armor EM - 90%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 67.5
One of the most popular setups for this ship is to fit a passive shield tank based on a Medium Shield Extender or two.. ..reducing the explosive resistance by 10% has a quite a big effect on this, what was bearly a decent shield tank will be liable to break quicker and exposes paper thin armour which has a poultry 2.5% less EM resistance than now.
I'm all for thinking up new setups, but this is a ship that has 4 Mid Slots and 3 Lows.. ..the passive tank setup was based on the high natural shield resistances, there isn't enough room on the ship to introduce a shield hardening module to cater for the change without making a change for the worse somewhere else.. ..with the base armour points, resistances and only 3 low slots theres little chance of fitting an armour tank, nor's there a chance of getting a decent speed or ew tank, so in all likelyhood pilots will end up fitting the same passive tank unable to do anything about the changes making a bearly passable shield tank even weaker.
So taking this into consideration this ends up as not only a boost for Amarr it's a boost for anything attacking the poor old Jaguar (which was never the best of ships anyway).. ..it's seems far from simple or straight forward, some ships are quite finely balanced, surely instead of sweeping changes across the board this should be based on reviewing and making changes to every ship individually?
I think what this chap say is pretty valid.. ..my own view on all this, is the Amarr aren't all that deserving of a boost anyway, it seems as always, people are as always just looking to continue the ongoing boost and bust cycle and looking to get their own character boosted, it'll be back to Gallente next.. ..if Amarr are really that bad how come every fecker on the trade forum wants one??
|
Lucidia fern
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 10:32:00 -
[334]
can every dev redirect their browsers to http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=681487 and realise jsut by nurfing other races tank that dosnt fit many of the long list of amarr FAIL...*cough* retribution one mid *cough* amarr damage = low amarr tank for which they are suposed to be known = fail
fix the problems dont jsut give us the flannel
|
Ethidium Bromide
ZEALOT WARRIORS AGAINST TERRORISTS Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 10:35:00 -
[335]
Originally by: Tzrailasa This:
Originally by: Takeshi Yamato The cap problem of lasers exists for these reasons:
- Hp was universally increased on all ships to prolong combat. Prolonged combat means more cap will be used, but there were no changes to laser cap usage.
- Rigs further increased combat duration, not everybody fits tanking rigs but on average ships are more durable since rigs have been introduced.
- Amarr ships tend to have a bigger capacitor than others, but the cap per second is exactly the same as everyone else. Since combat tends to last longer nowdays, the lasers drain so much that the any advantage is quickly gone and the total cap that was available to each pilot for the duration of the fight will be lowest for the amarr ship.
...and this:
Originally by: Eclip CAP use CAP use CAP use is all i really need to say. Amarr ships are good, they have damage and they can melt a shield tank like it wasnt there. even on armor they do good damage. but they cap out or run so low on cap that they cant active tank even for a little while so if ur getting shot at you have to switch off ur guns so ur cap ca be used for tanking. Give them slightly bigger capacitors as they are surpose to be the cap warfare race. hell increase capacity by 10-15% on BS's and 5-10% on cruisers and BC
...and I'm even agreeing with a goon:
Originally by: If you fix cap usage and fitting requirements, the rest of the problems address themselves. Some of the ships still suck, but those can be addressed later. The main problem is cap usage and fitting.
You're solving the wrong problem......
this says it pretty much all.
but then you guys gave it a lot of thought and i'm sure you allready played around with it. lets see what happens.
Originally by: George Petsch Nochricht: Dei schwarer StroinlSser trifftn Karli[Baatzis] und ruiniert erm so richtig de Dosn, 1343.7 schhodn, oida.
|
Kuolematon
Space Perverts and Forum Warriors United Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 10:36:00 -
[336]
Oh dear lord! Are you people stupid?! Both of you! CCP and players who SUPPORT this idea!!
This is WORST idea ever because EM resists isn't problem right now.. it's those useless ships we have.
Don't do this, seriously. Put that keyboard down, step back from the computer and go to bar or stuff. Come back when your not sober!!!
"The Amarr are the tanking and ganking floating rods of gold"
|
Ishina Fel
Caldari Synergy. Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 10:36:00 -
[337]
Actually, the idea of not taking away resistances from shields, which makes shield tanks stronger, which may compel a few more people to shield tank in PvP, which gives a more target-rich environment for EM weapons is something that sounds pretty good. It would give Amarr ships a niche role of taking out shield tankers.
Not that it would sway the balance much, anyway... active shield tanks are pretty good, but not really viable in PvP due to the speed with which they burn through cap, and unless you have a full crystal set in your clone, they're always inferior to the same number of slots dedicated to EW instead. So people either fit passive shield tanks or armor tanks. Active shield tanks are merely the rare exception that confirms the rule.
Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today! |
Itcharo Wu
Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 10:41:00 -
[338]
Now my constructive proposal:
Make the 25% cap bonus of the APOC inherit to every single Amarr ship, therefore boosting both maximum cap and peak cap regeneration by these 25%.
Give the APOC instead a 25% bonus to either ROF or damage on large lasers.
The Abaddon will benefit by its increased cap but will still suffer a lot from high laser cap usage and no bonus to that. Maybe it could use a fifth med slot, but I do not see this as completely necessary.
This way Amarr ships would be able to sustain their weapons (right now, the only BS that can is the APOC unless you fit lots and lots of cap mods) and no other race would be nerfed by this.
|
Mrski Okupator
Amarr The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 10:43:00 -
[339]
Originally by: Shevar This might solve the DPS issues, although i would have prefered a solution which tackled the cap issues and would actually give a decent second bonus.
That being said this change won't fix the following;
Every laser using t1 frigate will still suck.
Every laser using t1 cruiser will still suck.
Abbadon will still run out of cap within 20 seconds.
Apoc still doesn't have any role.
^^ This needed reposting. To teh bone.
And I would add fitting requirements for beams tachs are twice their competitions'. Meaning 2x RCU2 instead of one or 1xRCU2 instead of none. ___
|
Traeon
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 10:54:00 -
[340]
In response to the blog:
Honestly, you're making a wide change, do you realize the extent of the consequences?
EMP ammo is the biggest winner. Minmatar just got even better, thanks The amarr doomsday device got even better as well. Not sure if this is necessary. Lasers are also better off, the change does help, but there are other big issues. Interestingly the amarr ships without a laser damage bonus are still better off fitting projectiles, even more than before since EMP ammo is better.
If you guys at CCP believe that base resistances needed some change, then I can understand, but to be honest it's not really an 'amarr oomp'.
There are specific issues with amarr ships and lasers. Improvements in these areas are welcome.
- Cap usage in general. A Heatsink II has a ROF bonus of 10,5%... and thus increases cap usage by the same amount. How about adding a cap usage reduction bonus to heatsinks?
Since fights last generally longer in todays EVE, the cap needed in the fight also increases. Yes, amarr ships tend to have bigger capacitors (but their cap gained per second is the same as everyone else) but it just isn't enough. I once calculated that it takes about 40 seconds for a Maller firing lasers to use up its cap advantage. After those 40 seconds it's the Maller that will have a cap disadvantage.
- The -50% cap usage bonus on amarr ships. This is where the big problem lies. We have two types of laser ships. The ones with a damage bonus who are relatively good, and the ones without a laser damage bonus which are terrible.
The ones with a damage boost are built to quickly end the fight, before cap becomes a problem. The cap usage bonus isn't strictly necessary, allthough it does help. The Abaddon is the perfect example.
The ones with no laser damage bonus are built for outlasting and have a tanking bonus, but outlasting simply doesn't work when your own weapons are a significant cap drain. That is why people put projectile turrets on these ships (and also because fitting requirements of lasers are a bit steep). Lasers won't be desirable on these ships untill the laser cap drain is completely offset. The only way to do this would be to give them 20% cap reduction bonus per level.
In my opinion, the solution would be: - Halve current cap usage of lasers. - Remove the -50% cap usage bonus from the 'gank' ships (omen, harbinger, geddon, absolution, and all the others) - Add a tracking bonus to some or all the 'gank' ships and/or an armor resist bonus to some or all the 'gank' ships. The tracking bonus will do very little to ships in webrange but will be very helpful against those outside of it, ie. in the midrange that amarr are supposed to excell at. - Give the 'tank' ships a -100% reduction on laser cap usage (punisher, maller, prophecy, apoc) - Consider changing the Apoc's 5% max cap bonus to something else. - Consider changing the armor resist bonus on (some/all) the 'tank' ships to a repair amount bonus, as this will be more useful to the strategy of outlasting the opponent. This isn't really necessary, it's just that I always believed amarr should be the best armor tankers, while in reality they are just the best at getting big hp buffers which aren't very useful if the ship can't do good damage.
|
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 11:02:00 -
[341]
I wil re post here waht i have posted elsewhere.
very bad move. Th eproblem was omni tanks. This changes only make omni tanks more prevalent over HArdeners tanks.
No one in their right mind will use 3 hardeners tanks now (and leave EM unboosted).
This changes simply stripes off one of the ways to fit your tank (the wrong one) and orce everyone into omni tank (what you wanted to solve). The result is that all shisp that used tri hardeners used to have EM as lowest ressit, not they wil use omni tank and will have HIGHER Em resist!
Do not do that! Do not limit even more the choices we have!! You shoudl be thinkign on ways to make peopel NOT omni tank! Like improving the Active hardenersa bit ( even a simple boost to their overheat capability might be enough).
The final resul of this change is that on smaller ships EM resist will owerr, but on biger ones that used Tripple hardeners EM resist will go UP now and the other resists wil go down.
I have both minamtar and an Amarr characters, and I can clearly see this as a boost to minmatar and gallente and a NERF to amarr!
Please rethignk this!! Much less disturbign woudl be to give 5% more damage to lasers and 5% more damage to em drones. Missiles don 't need change because they can change damage types at will.
------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Nathaniel Hall
Caldari Infinitus Odium
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 11:10:00 -
[342]
Thats a bad way to start dealing with the Amarr problem. Like many others said before, i think it would be best to replace the cap need bonus, have a look on cap recharge itself and on the fitting of ships.
If after that still a problem persists u can take it from there... Else i see the problem arising that if u change stuff later on aswell ur gonna overdo it and make Amarr unbalanced again.
And on the LaserCapNeed-Bonus on Amarr ships: Lets remember from what times they date back. In those days Lasers were THE Uber-Weapon. Pulse Lasers had insane Ranges, and u could boost ur dmg with 7 or 8 Heat-Sinks. So being able to use those weapons was well worth to give up a Ship-Bonus. Today thats not the case anymore => Reduce the Cap need on lasers and replace the CapNeed-Bonus with sth usefull.
Btw EM Missiles and Drones might not be very popular, but u can still use them vs Shield tanks, for NPC-Stuff and of course vs Amarr T2 Ships which usually have EM as lowest armor resist.
So leave the resists alone for now and dont boost the Sla... err... Minmatar plz.
|
Garia666
Amarr T.H.U.G L.I.F.E Mercenary Services
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 11:12:00 -
[343]
so did anyone actualy test it?
Quote: CCP Chronotis Amarr boost is coming in a future dev blog, lets keep this on topic
|
Richard Phallus
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 11:14:00 -
[344]
So when are they going to let ol' Zulupark actually play the game, they must be working him to death he's obviously never had a spare minute to log into the live game on tranquility. --
|
Darth Felin
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 11:16:00 -
[345]
This is a very good start for amarr boosting imho and they will be fine if you will pass some amarr ships boosting as well. But I foresee some possible big problems here. Some amarrs ship are good now: Harbringer, Armageddon, Abbadon. My biggest worries are geddon and abbadon - they are one of the best gang battleships in pulse configurations now and I fear their capabilities may become overpowered. Please take a look at them after every boost.
|
Dlardrageth
Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 11:16:00 -
[346]
Originally by: Itcharo Wu [...] You know there are Amarr running missions in Amarr ships for the Amarr Navy? You know that common enemies in those missions are Blood Raiders and Sanshas, which deal EM/Therm damage?[...]
I wished for it to be thus. Sadly the highest rat faction I encounter is Gurista. In Amarr space working for Amarr Navy. Guess what - I don't use an Amarr ship there, why should I?
After crunching some numbers and running through a few modified setups with the changes suggested by the blog I'm left with basically a shrug. Implement that buff/nerf/rebalancing or leave it, I'm pretty disinterested in it. For my Amarr ships it ain't really relevant because those which suck with lasers I don't fly anyway. Those I use with projectile weps get a little boost, though the comparable Minmatar ships will profit still more.
Looks like it will mainly affect shield tankers and Minmatar ammo-users, positive and negative elements will even out for most Amarr players, so not really our concern. Of course, ona second thought, having crosstrained Minmatar, I fully welcome this.
Just do your own credibility a favour and don't try to persuade the community it's an Amarr boost. That's laughable. You chose to rebalance the whole game (at least on SiSi), so be it. If it becomes implemented on Tranq, so be it. Now for the point that does interest me:
When is the real Amarr boost upcoming and will the pathetic laser cap usage bonuses be changed to projectile weapon bonuses?
On a foot note I'm wondering if the Amarr boost will adress some changes with Blood Raider faction ships, too, or if those will be overlooked. Wouldn't it be funny if the Ashimmu's laser cap bonus will remain as a reminder of a long-existing balance disaster?
|
Jonny JoJo
Amarr The Imperial Guards
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 11:18:00 -
[347]
Edited by: Jonny JoJo on 31/01/2008 11:21:55
Originally by: Garia666 so did anyone actualy test it?
Aparently, this is a massive boost to Amarr pilots using projectiles.
But Its the same old story currently. Laser Thorax still outclasses Laser omen in every single way. Laserships, other than Sansha ones, run out of cap after a few mins, thus do 0 dps while every other race has a 0 cap pvp option (e.g Caldari has missiles, Gallente has drones, Minmatar has every weapon system as 0 cap) etc etc Only Amarr suck because their weapon systems have to be lasers which are useless in todays cap world. Amarr lack mids & cargo to fit dual cap boosters so that is not feasable.
CCP the problem is that Horse & Cart is out of fasion in todays Fast Car world. Lasers need to use 0 cap just like you changed Minmatar weapons. Doing 0dps as you have no cap is stupid and every other races has pvp ships that can do damage with 0 cap. Sig locked, lack of Eve content |
Ancy Denaries
Caldari Under Heavy Fire
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 11:24:00 -
[348]
Originally by: Jonny JoJo Edited by: Jonny JoJo on 31/01/2008 11:21:55
Originally by: Garia666 so did anyone actualy test it?
Aparently, this is a massive boost to Amarr pilots using projectiles.
But Its the same old story currently. Laser Thorax still outclasses Laser omen in every single way. Laserships, other than Sansha ones, run out of cap after a few mins, thus do 0 dps while every other race has a 0 cap pvp option (e.g Caldari has missiles, Gallente has drones, Minmatar has every weapon system as 0 cap) etc etc Only Amarr suck because their weapon systems have to be lasers which are useless in todays cap world. Amarr lack mids & cargo to fit dual cap boosters so that is not feasable.
CCP the problem is that Horse & Cart is out of fasion in todays Fast Car world. Lasers need to use 0 cap just like you changed Minmatar weapons. Doing 0dps as you have no cap is stupid and every other races has pvp ships that can do damage with 0 cap.
I simply can't believe the stupidity boasted in this thread. Seriously, didn't you READ the dev blog? The ships ARE going to get fixed. Both fitting and cap wise. WTF is so hard with actually READING what he wrote instead of just whining?
Originally by: "GM Tacgnol" Oveur descended from the heavens (also known as the second floor) and beat us all with his nerfbat.
|
Salacir Khan
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 11:24:00 -
[349]
Originally by: Garia666 so did anyone actualy test it?
GOD! Your taking all the fun out of this Threat :(
Of Course we didnt Test it! We are too busy whining over here. Visions of the MMO Apocalypse thats going to happen due to the 10% Resitsance change.
And yet there is more to come. I cant wait for for the Caldari Community to burn Zulu alive when he announces that the Apoc will be able to kill BB and other Caldari Cruisers with the upcoming changes.
Finally the Issue about Amarr was adressed. Thx for that. Cant wait for the ship changes to be revealed. (Plz, Plz let the Pilgrim be on that List) :)
|
DeGrand
Darwin With Attitude oooh Shiny
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 11:28:00 -
[350]
Guess its been noted before that omni-armor tanks usually have EM as the lowest res, unless you go full EANM, but that screws up other resistances. And seeing how you dont often run into amarr ships, ppl tend to not go with full EANM, but rather a mix of actives and EANM.
Damage on a geddon for instance is not a problem at all, those things hurt as is...badly.
If you want more ppl to fly amarr, you`re better off changing their wrinkly old faces to something more appealing :D
Guess itll just happen anyway, and we may see the infamous gankageddon return to the scene.
|
|
DJTheBaron
Caldari FinFleet Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 11:29:00 -
[351]
Surley this patch is a minmitar boost also, sure they loostout on 2% tank in tech 2, but they now do 10% more damage by base?
Minmitar perform both em and explosive damage and get a damage modifier towards that end, the only other races that get a multispec damage type bonus are missile rof and drone dps ships, and except most drone dips are not viable for ranged combat, and most missile ships get a damage type bonus on top of any rof, limiting their scope.
Personally i think gallente are going to suffer in this patch with their already less sustainable tanks in favor of damage, as the only dps bonus they will get will be in using a limited amount of drones.
Amarr have the best armor tank in the game and no ammo costs or reloads during combat (lagg can take 5minuites+ to reload guns), surley if you wish to boost one race (amarr) then you adapt their ships or modules, or in the case of minmitar ships having too high resists, adapt minmitar ships tech 2 resists to be more adaptiable.
My soloution to amarr would be to stabalise their gun cap use so they can fit a damage modifier instead of a cap recharger when the situation suits it, or increase laser base dps.
"The Views & Opinions Expressed In This Post Represent Your Own, So Dont Bother Arguing" DJTheBaron: Diplomacy 4TW |
Gypsio III
Darkness Inc. Blood Blind
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 11:34:00 -
[352]
Quote:
Quote:
You're nerfing shield tankers!
I don't see we're nerfing anyone over anyone else. We've simply re-balanced a basic part of the game and the effects of that will touch on all ships in EVE.
OK, trust me on this one, this is an indirect relative nerf to shield tanking.
Armour-tanking is favoured because of slot distributions and the fitting requirements of essential pvp mods, and the CPU/grid requirements of active shield tanks. Hence, there is a currently an imbalance, where armour-tanking is generally superior. This is well known.
However, since such an imbalance exists, it cannot be assumed that similar changes to armour and shield tanks (10% off the highest resists) will maintain the current (im)balance between armour and shield tanking. And it does not - the change to shield Explo resists reduces the attractiveness of shield considerably more than the armour EM resist reduction reduces the attractiveness of armour tanking.
To put this principle in a simplistic numerical form, let us describe armour tanking as "8" and shield tanking as "7", where higher numbers are "better". Here, armour tanking is ~1.14 times "better" than shield tanking. If, however, we apply the same redution to both tanking forms, reducing their absolute values by one, giving armour tanking as "7" and shield tanking as "6", we see that the relative balance between the two forms of tanking does, in fact, change, with armour tanking now being ~1.17 times "better" than shield tanking. Hence, the same absolute change has different relative effects.
Also - although you are obviously correct to state that passive shield regen makes up for the generally lower shield resists, and fewer midslots, I would argue that that benefit is currently insufficient, and offer the dominance of armour-tanking in pvp as proof.
|
Traeon
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 11:40:00 -
[353]
So how would the ships end up like with my proposed changes?
Lasers cap usage in general would be reduced fairly significantly, and the ship bonuses would be changed somewhat.
The idea here is to create three different lines of ships: a purely offensive one (tracking and rof bonus) that is truly best in combat outside of webrange due to the tracking bonus, a middle ground that is good for gank/hp buffer setups (5% damage and armor resistance bonus) and a defensive one that is meant to be able to outlast the opponent by active tanking (-20% laser cap usage per level, armor repair bonus). Yes that's right, the defensive line would be able to fire lasers for no cap. That's a big change but the only thing that will stop people from using projectile weapons on these ships. Tanking and high cap usage weapons just doesn't work well.
- Punisher: -20% laser cap usage, 7.5% repair amount bonus (would be overpowered if the ship didn't have just 2 medslots, so I think it will be fine) - Omen: 7.5% tracking, 5% ROF. The ship also needs some more powergrid and cpu. - Maller: 5% damage, 5% armor res ship. The ship also needs a drone bay. - Prophecy: -20% laser cap usage, 7.5% repair amount bonus. - Harbinger: 5% damage, 5% armor resists - Geddon: 7.5% tracking, 5% ROF - Apoc: -20% cap usage, +7.5% repair amount bonus per level. - Abaddon: 5% damage, 5% armor resists. The total cap of the ship should probably be lowered a bit after this change. - Zealot: 7.5% tracking, 5% rof, 10% optimal, 5% damage. - Coercer: 17.5% tracking per level. Uhh. Extra tracking on top of the destroyer tracking bonus seems the only sensible thing. - Absolution: 7.5% tracking, 5% armor res, 5% rof, 5% damage - Devoter: -20% cap usage per level, 5% armor res per level - Crusader: 10% optimal, 5% damage, 7.5% tracking, -5% sig radius - Retribution: 7.5% tracking, 10% optimal, 5% damage and the usual AF res bonuses
There are more ships but it should be clear what the idea here is.
|
Mila Prestoc
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 11:41:00 -
[354]
Could you please answer this Zulupark, in your issues you say EM is to high on armour, when is EM to high with current real setups? -------------------------
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.
|
Leandro Salazar
Aeon Industries
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 11:47:00 -
[355]
I don't really see this fixing anything. We have three main damage types: Kin, EM and Exp. Therm is just the predominant secondary damage. Out of these three, both Exp and EM hit one top resistance, while kin never does (well never on T1 ships anyway). This makes kin weapons superior by default in PvP, and since exp ammo deal kin as secondary and few people shieldtank, exp is also way better than EM. And this change really doesn't change anything about this.
Better idea imho would be to make the T1 resists much more race specific than they currently are, so that at least some races have kin as top resistance, and some have EM as weakest. Somewhat similar to the resistances of the various pirate NPCs.
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 |
|
CCP Zulupark
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 11:48:00 -
[356]
Originally by: Mila Prestoc Could you please answer this Zulupark, in your issues you say EM is to high on armour, when is EM to high with current real setups?
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.
|
|
Wardeneo
Gallente N.E.O NEW EVE ORDER Knights Of Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 11:50:00 -
[357]
Originally by: R0ot Wtf, please explain how you come about with the thought of lasers doing explosive damage, HOW?!
well why shud minmitar use em? or thermal, caldari is mainly kin allthough all dmge types can be used, but for gellente its kin/therm and ammar atm is em/them so y shudnt all races get all dmge types? or at least 3 out of the 4
wardeneo
If brute force doesn't work..... your not using enough :) |
SturmBringer
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 11:51:00 -
[358]
The easiest and best fix is just to pull Amarr from the game , they all whine to much anyways !
|
Burlock Ironfist
M. Corp Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 11:55:00 -
[359]
another stealth nerf for caldri - makes me sad, amarr v caldri ships is not a problem so why do they have to suffer for it? why not just reduce em armour resists for everyone if thats the big problem shield and armour resists dont have to reflect each other that closely shield tanking in pvp is already hard enough with the lag situation.
Quote: correcting wrongs on the internet is like subtracting 1 from infinity
|
Bad Borris
Dragons Of Redemption Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 11:56:00 -
[360]
Im no expert on balancing but a little over a year ago we were given a ship hit-point boost across all ships. Now all ships are having base resists reduced. These two changes seem contradictory.
Also by looking at the new numbers, it seems as if shield tanks will be hit quite hard due to the fact that they are already em vulnerable... Anyone think that is a fair assertion?
|
|
Nofonno
Amarr Exploratio et Industria Morispatia
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 11:58:00 -
[361]
The blog was interesting to read, more so were the player replies.
First, I'll tend to the player replies that ditch the proposed change and/or whine: Imagine you're visiting a physician with an apparent problem with your hand (shaking and twitching). S/he examines you and gives you a dietary advice, plus some vitamins. Will you go shouting at your physician that s/he failed to do something about your twitching hand? Think again -- s/he surely has got more information about how a body works, may (and will) notice things you won't, because you don't see them as relevant (think along House M.D. TV show). The same is true about CCP and you. They got immense stores of data, way beyond your individual experience.
Now... You can either trust your physician or don't. Wait for the treatment to work its charm. If you're not feeling better, say it. Say it clearly and precisely. If you're then still not feeling better (remember, everything takes time, Rome wasn't built in a day), change your physician. You've always got a choice.
Second, to the Amarr boost. I frankly do not know. I'm reserving my judgement until I test it on SiSi with my mates. Since I don't know what is next, I will withold any flames and bile, too. There's just one question that lies still unattended by either this blog or other official CCP sources:
We're still led to believe that Amarr are the capacitor race, yet we do not see them excell in any way -- our weapons are most cap intensive, our cap recharges are nothing special... The question, doctor, is:
Will you address directly the capacitor issues?
A scientist must be an optimist at heart - to have the strength to rally against a chorus of voices saying "it cannot be done". |
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 11:59:00 -
[362]
Edited by: Shadowsword on 31/01/2008 11:59:21
CCP, while you're messing around with the base resists, it might be a good idea to put the racial base T1 resist bonus for caldari and minmatar ships on their shields, not their armor.
------------------------------------------
What is Oomph? It the sound Amarr players makes when they get kicked in the ribs. |
Jiks
Caldari Prophets of Doom
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:03:00 -
[363]
Edited by: Jiks on 31/01/2008 12:04:06 Again, yet again, the solution is a blanket nerf rather than specific actions that address the real problems.
I don't fly Amarr but anyone can see that race has issues, namely lack of damage type flexibility and fitting issues ... yes I know we are promised other stuff later but what we have here doesn't help.
Broad changes always have many unexpected affects ... some of the more obvious ones are probably - greater incentive to avoid NPC missions in Amarr or Minmatar space as kin and therm resists are not being reduced; Gallante being hurt as they cannot vary main damage output any more than Amarr can. I don't fly Gallante either but those guys have had enough of a kicking of late surely?
I don't think this Zuluism is as bad as the earlier carrier logistics or dictor survivability nerfs but again doesn't help the problem and just smacks of nerfbat waving as the only action.
Jiks
|
Viktor VonCarstein
Amarr Phoenix Industries Sylph Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:04:00 -
[364]
I am totally Amarr spec I have been since I started playing the game 3 years or so ago. I do not fly any other races ships.
I must admit I am surprised you went for a change that affects every other ship and race in the game. Surely that in itself opens a can of worms.
I would have thought that by changing individual ships first would be the way forward as it has less knock on effects that may not be obvious at first.
As an Amarr dedicated player I have always known that shields in general go donw fast but I am gonna need some time hacking through the armour. There is no issue with this.
The issue comes when I run out of cap long before I have broken through the armour, even with max cap skills, level 5 ship skills controlled bursts level 5. Cap is the real issue here and only on the laser turret ships.
I am an advocater of reducing cap use on lasers and removing the Ship Skill bonus for laser cap reduction and replacing it with something that increases damage, tank, range or tracking.
I understand what you you are trying to do with the EM problem which to be honest seems more focussed on em missiles and drones. It will not solve these problems in my opinion.
EM missiles are always unlikely to be the first choice in PvP because most common missile ships have a Kinetic bonus. Those that don't will still normally choose Kinetic or Thermal as EM and EXP will still be high on their respective tanks. Obviously unless you know exactly what you will be fighting.
The situation with drones is similar to that of the missiles but is further aggravated by differences in other attributes which simply make the Galllente or Minmatar drones more preferable in PvP. Even if you make all drones the same with differing damage types the problems will remain the same as the missiles. Obviously unless you know exactly what you will be fighting.
PVE missiles and drones are used as appropriate and is less of a problem. However reducing resistances may prove to have adverse affects on the difficulty of some missions has this also been tested. (I don't know)
Summary:
I think you have made the wrong choice starting with such a broad change that affects all ships and races.
I would have started with individual ship changes first and see how that pans out.
EM Drones and Missile usage will not drastically change.
Cap and Powergrid issues are higher priority problems for Amarr in my view. (Maybe we will see this altered with the ship revisions to come so we will see).
PS. I feel sorry for Zulupark he seems to be the one who has to post all the controversial Blogs as I am sure that there are numerous people behind this and the other ones.)
Phoenix Industries A Unique collection of Resource Links for Eve Online can be found here currently totalling over 120. |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:06:00 -
[365]
From the devblog, "However we don't want to change too much in one go so we're trying to pace ourselves and spread the changes over more than one patch."
So why are you guys changing a variable that will impact much more than a simple change to crystal consumption of cap or reducing PG requirements of some guns? Altering something that will have a large impact is bad trouble shooting methodology - start with the small things and work your way to the end goal, not the other way around.
The Real Space Initiative - V5 (Forum Link)
|
midge Mo'yb
R.U.S.T. Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:06:00 -
[366]
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!
agreed, to run a ful lrack of guns/tank on abaddon you need rigs and all your mids on cap recharge duty, and probably some CPR in the lows...
would be a welcome change. i may actually get some free med slots to play with :o
-----------------------------------------------
|
Shevar
Minmatar A.W.M Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:09:00 -
[367]
Originally by: Ancy Denaries
I simply can't believe the stupidity boasted in this thread. Seriously, didn't you READ the dev blog? The ships ARE going to get fixed. Both fitting and cap wise. WTF is so hard with actually READING what he wrote instead of just whining?
As much as I hate that jojo dude, you are just plain lying now.
Quote: # Some ships could need lovin' # Cap usage on Energy Weapons may be too high in some cases # Fitting requirements on some Energy Weapons need adjusting # Base EM resistances on armor are very high
Where does it say ships NEED lovin' and WILL be adjusted?
Where does it say cap useage IS to high and WILL be adjusted?
I'm sorry but "maybe to high in some cases", is something entirely diffrent as saying that there are problems and will be fixed as you claim. The only thing he says is that EM resistances are very high on armor, the rest are maybe's and perhaps... --- -The only real drug problem is scoring real good drugs |
Xanos Blackpaw
Amarr The Firestorm Cartel
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:09:00 -
[368]
actuly i think zulupark actuly play the game. he just fly mattar ships...
Playing minmatar is "like going down a flight of stairs in a office chair firing an Uzi". |
Nathaniel Hall
Caldari Infinitus Odium
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:11:00 -
[369]
Originally by: Viktor VonCarstein I am totally Amarr spec I have been since I started playing the game 3 years or so ago. I do not fly any other races ships.
I must admit I am surprised you went for a change that affects every other ship and race in the game. Surely that in itself opens a can of worms.
I would have thought that by changing individual ships first would be the way forward as it has less knock on effects that may not be obvious at first.
As an Amarr dedicated player I have always known that shields in general go donw fast but I am gonna need some time hacking through the armour. There is no issue with this.
The issue comes when I run out of cap long before I have broken through the armour, even with max cap skills, level 5 ship skills controlled bursts level 5. Cap is the real issue here and only on the laser turret ships.
I am an advocater of reducing cap use on lasers and removing the Ship Skill bonus for laser cap reduction and replacing it with something that increases damage, tank, range or tracking.
I understand what you you are trying to do with the EM problem which to be honest seems more focussed on em missiles and drones. It will not solve these problems in my opinion.
EM missiles are always unlikely to be the first choice in PvP because most common missile ships have a Kinetic bonus. Those that don't will still normally choose Kinetic or Thermal as EM and EXP will still be high on their respective tanks. Obviously unless you know exactly what you will be fighting.
The situation with drones is similar to that of the missiles but is further aggravated by differences in other attributes which simply make the Galllente or Minmatar drones more preferable in PvP. Even if you make all drones the same with differing damage types the problems will remain the same as the missiles. Obviously unless you know exactly what you will be fighting.
PVE missiles and drones are used as appropriate and is less of a problem. However reducing resistances may prove to have adverse affects on the difficulty of some missions has this also been tested. (I don't know)
Summary:
I think you have made the wrong choice starting with such a broad change that affects all ships and races.
I would have started with individual ship changes first and see how that pans out.
EM Drones and Missile usage will not drastically change.
Cap and Powergrid issues are higher priority problems for Amarr in my view. (Maybe we will see this altered with the ship revisions to come so we will see).
PS. I feel sorry for Zulupark he seems to be the one who has to post all the controversial Blogs as I am sure that there are numerous people behind this and the other ones.)
Signed
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:12:00 -
[370]
M R - Z U L U
Amarr players seem happy that you are taking seriously care about Amarr. I'm sure the ship review will be carefull and supply Amarr with some easier fittings and some versatility.
The solution to EM damage however is something you should really really look into.
I can understand dropping EM resist on armor might seem very reasonable - but if you absolutely have to nerf the shieldtanks (which in advance isn't used much in pvp) I believe 10% is a bit over the edge. Even if we have shield recharge I'd consider testing with only a 5%-point reduction... If anything shield tankers could need some shield regeneration to help compensate for the sudden lack of medslots when bringing a shield tanking ship into PvP.
Shield tanking doesn't need a nerf - Shield tankers gets whacked by amarr and minmatar already...
The only people enjoying the shield nerf is minmatar and explosive shield drone users (woohoo warriors)
I was a strong believer CCP wanted to enforce the use of shield tanks for PvP. The Siege and HAM being a decent reason for bringing caldari ships into play. Also the choice to give at least some Minmatar ships Shield bonus was also a good indicative.
- I'm a nice guy!!
But hook me up with some pew pew, because I'm really bored... |
|
Shevar
Minmatar A.W.M Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:15:00 -
[371]
Originally by: Nofonno The blog was interesting to read, more so were the player replies.
First, I'll tend to the player replies that ditch the proposed change and/or whine: Imagine you're visiting a physician with an apparent problem with your hand (shaking and twitching). S/he examines you and gives you a dietary advice, plus some vitamins. Will you go shouting at your physician that s/he failed to do something about your twitching hand? Think again -- s/he surely has got more information about how a body works, may (and will) notice things you won't, because you don't see them as relevant (think along House M.D. TV show). The same is true about CCP and you. They got immense stores of data, way beyond your individual experience.
Now... You can either trust your physician or don't. Wait for the treatment to work its charm. If you're not feeling better, say it. Say it clearly and precisely. If you're then still not feeling better (remember, everything takes time, Rome wasn't built in a day), change your physician. You've always got a choice.
Second, to the Amarr boost. I frankly do not know. I'm reserving my judgement until I test it on SiSi with my mates. Since I don't know what is next, I will withold any flames and bile, too. There's just one question that lies still unattended by either this blog or other official CCP sources:
We're still led to believe that Amarr are the capacitor race, yet we do not see them excell in any way -- our weapons are most cap intensive, our cap recharges are nothing special... The question, doctor, is:
Will you address directly the capacitor issues?
A better anology would be you goto a doctor with 1 hand cut of and bleeding and 1 hand shaking. And then the doctor prescribes some vitamins for the shaking hand and saying PERHAPS you can come back in a few months to have that hand that is cut of to be fixed.
The issues with Amarr are primarly cap problems and thus tank problems, total lack of distinction in the t1 shiplines (eg every ship has 1 role a turret boat, besides the inquistor and arbi), horrible fitting issues. After these problems comes the fact that effective DPS of amarr is indeed lower but quite frankly it isn't the biggest issue. --- -The only real drug problem is scoring real good drugs |
DDemon
The Order of Chivalry Nex Eternus
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:18:00 -
[372]
CCP Zulupark, play this game before changing it please.....
|
DiaBlo UK
North Siders Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:23:00 -
[373]
I need to go play wit hthe ships a bit, but what i see here from the info given, is that out of all this, caldari will be nerf'd the most, and minmatar boosted the most. IMO, the order of preferance for PvP ships atm is, min, gal, cald, amarr. There are a number of resons for this, but basically it comes down to cal being unable to form a decent tank while still having room for EW. Also the cald sniper will suffer because all other races will be getting a bonues to damage, where hybrids will not. Yes i know gal use hybrids too, but alot of their bonuses are to drones anyway, so its not a major effect. How often do you see a shield tank with 92%+ resist to exp, not very often, not if you want said ship to do anything else but sit there and get shot at. The only problem with resist is the armor and the EM resists, and this mainly on the minnie ships. I understand why you think armor needs the extra 10% resist to its tank, but i forward that having the base resists between shield and armor equal still leaves things balanced as armor will now suffer the same difficultiesd in fitting shields do. They have to make a trade off to whether they want that extra damage mod or the extra tank mod. With shields, you don't have that option, you either don't fit any EW/sensor boosts, or you tank. the ships hit the hardest by this change, Rokh, Eagle, Harpy, moa and feox (which sucks anyway).
What i think would be best for you to do now CCP. is implement the other changes to armarr first, and then if this still presents a problem, come back to it. I understand your need not to do too many changes at once. So start somewhere else. Come back here if things are still unbalanced.
---sig---nerf---starts---here--- |
Wizzkidy
Demonic Retribution Pure.
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:26:00 -
[374]
Zulu,
I have tested this change yet there isn't much to test concidering little has changed, I setup a abaddon myself with a mega pulse setup web/scream cap boosters.
Went to FFA one, started shooting a domi lost cap in 2 minutes considering i was being neuted (even with cap boosters) and popped.
The damage I was doing was hardly any differant
Please tell me the best way to test this change because I can see NO change thats helping amarr.
|
Ancy Denaries
Caldari Under Heavy Fire
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:27:00 -
[375]
Originally by: Viktor VonCarstein I am totally Amarr spec I have been since I started playing the game 3 years or so ago. I do not fly any other races ships.
I must admit I am surprised you went for a change that affects every other ship and race in the game. Surely that in itself opens a can of worms.
I would have thought that by changing individual ships first would be the way forward as it has less knock on effects that may not be obvious at first.
As an Amarr dedicated player I have always known that shields in general go donw fast but I am gonna need some time hacking through the armour. There is no issue with this.
The issue comes when I run out of cap long before I have broken through the armour, even with max cap skills, level 5 ship skills controlled bursts level 5. Cap is the real issue here and only on the laser turret ships.
I am an advocater of reducing cap use on lasers and removing the Ship Skill bonus for laser cap reduction and replacing it with something that increases damage, tank, range or tracking.
I understand what you you are trying to do with the EM problem which to be honest seems more focussed on em missiles and drones. It will not solve these problems in my opinion.
EM missiles are always unlikely to be the first choice in PvP because most common missile ships have a Kinetic bonus. Those that don't will still normally choose Kinetic or Thermal as EM and EXP will still be high on their respective tanks. Obviously unless you know exactly what you will be fighting.
The situation with drones is similar to that of the missiles but is further aggravated by differences in other attributes which simply make the Galllente or Minmatar drones more preferable in PvP. Even if you make all drones the same with differing damage types the problems will remain the same as the missiles. Obviously unless you know exactly what you will be fighting.
PVE missiles and drones are used as appropriate and is less of a problem. However reducing resistances may prove to have adverse affects on the difficulty of some missions has this also been tested. (I don't know)
Summary:
I think you have made the wrong choice starting with such a broad change that affects all ships and races.
I would have started with individual ship changes first and see how that pans out.
EM Drones and Missile usage will not drastically change.
Cap and Powergrid issues are higher priority problems for Amarr in my view. (Maybe we will see this altered with the ship revisions to come so we will see).
PS. I feel sorry for Zulupark he seems to be the one who has to post all the controversial Blogs as I am sure that there are numerous people behind this and the other ones.)
THIS is disagreement without whining. Good job fella! I wish everyone (including myself) could be as levelheaded as you.
Originally by: "GM Tacgnol" Oveur descended from the heavens (also known as the second floor) and beat us all with his nerfbat.
|
Ancy Denaries
Caldari Under Heavy Fire
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:29:00 -
[376]
Originally by: Shevar
Originally by: Ancy Denaries
I simply can't believe the stupidity boasted in this thread. Seriously, didn't you READ the dev blog? The ships ARE going to get fixed. Both fitting and cap wise. WTF is so hard with actually READING what he wrote instead of just whining?
As much as I hate that jojo dude, you are just plain lying now.
Quote: # Some ships could need lovin' # Cap usage on Energy Weapons may be too high in some cases # Fitting requirements on some Energy Weapons need adjusting # Base EM resistances on armor are very high
Where does it say ships NEED lovin' and WILL be adjusted?
Where does it say cap useage IS to high and WILL be adjusted?
I'm sorry but "maybe to high in some cases", is something entirely diffrent as saying that there are problems and will be fixed as you claim. The only thing he says is that EM resistances are very high on armor, the rest are maybe's and perhaps...
Right, got me there, I admit my error and I agree it isn't set in stone, but it is mentioned and as such I find it silly to whine about it.
Originally by: "GM Tacgnol" Oveur descended from the heavens (also known as the second floor) and beat us all with his nerfbat.
|
Miklas Laces
A.N.A.R.C.H.I.C.A Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:29:00 -
[377]
-10% em armor ? ok but bring back EANM T2 to 30ft CPU usage then
|
Anglo
Minmatar Astral Mexicans
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:30:00 -
[378]
use cap boosters as amarr lads..
make the b00st so u can fit more heatsinks on amarr race ships. and lets start kill again.. an easy thing to do... no need to fix any sort of res...
|
pershphanie
Deadly Addiction
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:33:00 -
[379]
Edited by: pershphanie on 31/01/2008 12:39:59
Originally by: DigitalCommunist
He did it because tweaking ships and guns doesn't bring about long term balance. It perpetuates FOTM. If there are any actual issues with Amarr ships and weapons, they are comparable in severity to, or inferior in severity to the issues present with ships and weapons from all other races.
You can't be serious. Ever thought to yourself "gee, i wish i had an apoc right now"? Yeah, me either.
The only amarr ships worth a damn damage wise (the dmg/rof bonus amarr ships) have such serious cap issues that you can't get them to do anything but fire their guns. That would be fine if lasers were high dmg weapons, but they arent. And then take ships like the apoc. It gives you 2 cap bonuses. You still need to fit multiple cap mods on your ship if you want to do something crazy like use guns AND a single armor rep. Honor tanking isn't as much fun as people make it out to be.
So tell me. What other race does it take two bonuses just to work the weapon systems?
|
Commander Awkward
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:34:00 -
[380]
Edited by: Commander Awkward on 31/01/2008 12:34:13
Originally by: Viktor VonCarstein I am totally Amarr spec I have been since I started playing the game 3 years or so ago. I do not fly any other races ships.
I must admit I am surprised you went for a change that affects every other ship and race in the game. Surely that in itself opens a can of worms.
I would have thought that by changing individual ships first would be the way forward as it has less knock on effects that may not be obvious at first.
As an Amarr dedicated player I have always known that shields in general go donw fast but I am gonna need some time hacking through the armour. There is no issue with this.
The issue comes when I run out of cap long before I have broken through the armour, even with max cap skills, level 5 ship skills controlled bursts level 5. Cap is the real issue here and only on the laser turret ships.
I am an advocater of reducing cap use on lasers and removing the Ship Skill bonus for laser cap reduction and replacing it with something that increases damage, tank, range or tracking.
I understand what you you are trying to do with the EM problem which to be honest seems more focussed on em missiles and drones. It will not solve these problems in my opinion.
EM missiles are always unlikely to be the first choice in PvP because most common missile ships have a Kinetic bonus. Those that don't will still normally choose Kinetic or Thermal as EM and EXP will still be high on their respective tanks. Obviously unless you know exactly what you will be fighting.
The situation with drones is similar to that of the missiles but is further aggravated by differences in other attributes which simply make the Galllente or Minmatar drones more preferable in PvP. Even if you make all drones the same with differing damage types the problems will remain the same as the missiles. Obviously unless you know exactly what you will be fighting.
PVE missiles and drones are used as appropriate and is less of a problem. However reducing resistances may prove to have adverse affects on the difficulty of some missions has this also been tested. (I don't know)
Summary:
I think you have made the wrong choice starting with such a broad change that affects all ships and races.
I would have started with individual ship changes first and see how that pans out.
EM Drones and Missile usage will not drastically change.
Cap and Powergrid issues are higher priority problems for Amarr in my view. (Maybe we will see this altered with the ship revisions to come so we will see).
PS. I feel sorry for Zulupark he seems to be the one who has to post all the controversial Blogs as I am sure that there are numerous people behind this and the other ones.)
This is a very sensible post. Especially the highlighted part.
Originally by: CCP Zulupark Introduce Explosive damage crystals
Lasers that do explosive? Sound really weird IMHO. What about a high dmg/low range 100% therm crystal?
Originally by: CCP Zulupark Amarr need more midslots. Need more midslots to fit Ewar/tackling gear
And shield tankers don't? Develop a system with highslot scramblers/webs. Problem solved. More people will fly shield tanked ships means more shields for amarr lasers to fry.
|
|
pershphanie
Deadly Addiction
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:36:00 -
[381]
Edited by: pershphanie on 31/01/2008 12:37:17
Originally by: Anglo use cap boosters as amarr lads..
Yeah. We get that. thx. Running cap boosters AND a few cap relays/cap rechargers amarr still have cap issues.
All other races can chose if they want to use one or the other. When you have to use both, it's something that needs fixing.
|
Grytok
moon7empler Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:38:00 -
[382]
I just compared the damage distribution of Multifrequency and EMP with the new resistances and guess what...
Multifrequency L: EM 28, Thermal 20 EMP L: EM 20, Kinetic 8, Explosive 16
Base Shield Damage (atm) Multifrequency L: 44 EMP L: 31,2
Base Shield Damage (after) Multifrequency L: 44 EMP L: 32,8 (5% increased)
Base Armor Damage (atm) Multifrequency L: 24,2 EMP L: 28,4
Base Armor Damage (after) Multifrequency L: 27 (11,5% increased) EMP L: 30,4 (7% increased)
So we increase the damage for shortest range crystals by 11.5% and the damage for shortest range projectiles by 12% overall.
MinMatar get's 0,5% more damageboost by this change then Amarr gets "oomph".
You really don't know what you're doing there CCP, do you? .
CCP gave us shiny new graphics. Too bad they removed Anti Aliasing for me :\ |
PeacefullNub
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:40:00 -
[383]
Edited by: PeacefullNub on 31/01/2008 12:41:05 CCP Zulupark here 2 things that you can fix right now without extra testing and data analisis:
1) Fix laser reload jamming bug (do you know what it is?) - give us ability to change crystalls witout 2-3 reloads on single turret
2) Add "reload all <ammo type>" option for all turrets and missiles - give us ability to use fast ammo switchind on ships bigger than frigat.
All races will benefit from this, and amarr players will have some working tactics in combat
|
Shevar
Minmatar A.W.M Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:41:00 -
[384]
Originally by: Ancy Denaries Right, got me there, I admit my error and I agree it isn't set in stone, but it is mentioned and as such I find it silly to whine about it.
Amarr being "weak" because of cap issues and fitting requirements has been acknowledged by the devs since, like, euhm, 3 years now (back when interceptors where hot spanking new!)?
Hence I find it rather acceptable to whine about the fact amarr is still the weakest race in general around. --- -The only real drug problem is scoring real good drugs |
Smertrios
Amarr Veto. Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:42:00 -
[385]
I donÆt think is a good solution to the ôproblemsö of Amarr laser boats.
First off, from my experience of flying with some very good Amarr pilots I really canÆt see a problem with the damage output of lasers. In these days of EFT figures itÆs very easy to forget that lasers get a significant dps increase because they do not have to reload during combat. They also have very good tracking which results in consistent, decent hits on a target. Amarr have some of the nastiest damage dealers in game, 2 of their BS can easily put out over 1000 dps and the absolution and zealot are also quite formidable in their damage output.
However that aside, you say the problem stems from the high natural resistances of armour to em damage. This may be the case on paper but the reality is that with omni armour tanks em is often one of the lower resistances. People tend to harden the other 3 damage types and just leave the em as its base and this means the em resistance on a well-tanked armour boat is very comparable to the other damage types.
Using Minmatar T2 armour resists in a comparison does not work either, as very few Minmatar T2 ships are ever armour tanked (Muminn and Wolf are really it)
Leaving the armour argument and looking and what Amarr is REALLY good at is hitting shields. By far the most common race is Caldari and Caldari have a serious weakness against lasers. We are seeing more and more Caldari ships used in pvp and really against shields lasers have no compare.
Now your changes do not fix any perceived problem with lasers on armour as they boost all races damage, particularly Minmatar. Lowing resistances is also a step backwards from the whole initiative to increase the length of a fight by giving us so many more hit point. In effect you are making omni armour tanks that much more difficult to balance (particularly in light of changes to CPU on EANM) and therefore effectively reducing the positive effects on fights of your hit point buff.
So in summary of my thoughts, I donÆt see the problems with Amarr being damage in any way whatsoever. There may certainly be fitting issues and balancing needed of cap use but Amarr not being able to do enough damage is simply not true. If their needs to be a buff in laser damage then reducing the tank of all ships is not the answer and certainly not when the biggest benefactor of the change will be a Minmatar pilot.
Oh btw I fly Minmatar so its really in my favour to keep this change but I have seen myself how well balanced all the races are in pvp and I think this is unnecessary and potentially damaging, hence I felt I had to give my 2 cents.
|
Commander Awkward
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:43:00 -
[386]
Originally by: PeacefullNub
Sensible stuff about reloading
What about a skill that lowers reloading times as well? Just a thought.
|
XXJackXX
Caldari Eternity INC. Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:43:00 -
[387]
Lets see amarr is worst race in this game and ccp thinging to fix this problem.And this is how it is.
-Give 3rd damage type to lasers.Hmm then only hybrit turrets left that cant hit different then 2 damage types.I guess we need a balance here.
-Lets give more damage to amarr and drop resistance from other races.On shield only some t2 ships got EM resistance but others got 0% resistance.And at armor yes EM resistance kinda high but think this how many people fits armor EM hardeners or rigs to armor i dont think some one gonna waste a low slot for this unless you are ratting.So at armor Em resistance most of the times are base resistance maybe EANM or DCU give little more.And lets drop this resistance also.
-Amarr dont got enough damage and lets change the cap reduction bonus to damage bonus on ships.Yes cap will be a issue on amarr ships but when you drop resistance from all races and give more damage and 3rd damage type to laser you will be not having a cap problem target ship will die before you run out of cap or cap boosters.
-Amarr got enough high and low slots hmm there is something missing lets put some med slots also and give able to do tank damage and tackle together.If u gonna drop resistance and you gonna make shield tank hard give some med slots to caldari and then think giving more med slots to other races.
-Gang mega is too scary nothing can tank that lots of people said that.And see the gang geddon maybe some of you gonna remember old gang geddon 10secs to any bs.Hey it is gonna be back yes you gonna have a cap issue maybe so fit cap boosters.
-I'm personalt using gallente and caldari race and having some fitting problem and i know amarr having a fitting problem also but they have enough slots to fix that and what is about gallente we have cpu and pg problem.
ok if you gonna do that it is a game but if you are asking my personal thinks fix lag first then add more new things or change
|
AFTRUNX
Human Liberty Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:45:00 -
[388]
Originally by: Grytok I just compared the damage distribution of Multifrequency and EMP with the new resistances and guess what...
Multifrequency L: EM 28, Thermal 20 EMP L: EM 20, Kinetic 8, Explosive 16
Base Shield Damage (atm) Multifrequency L: 44 EMP L: 31,2
Base Shield Damage (after) Multifrequency L: 44 EMP L: 32,8 (5% increased)
Base Armor Damage (atm) Multifrequency L: 24,2 EMP L: 28,4
Base Armor Damage (after) Multifrequency L: 27 (11,5% increased) EMP L: 30,4 (7% increased)
So we increase the damage for shortest range crystals by 11.5% and the damage for shortest range projectiles by 12% overall.
MinMatar get's 0,5% more damageboost by this change then Amarr gets "oomph".
You really don't know what you're doing there CCP, do you?
o/ Signed!
Indirect Minmatar Boost...
Reduce Cap need for guns and add crystals (28Therm 20Em) or only thermal for example.. or also Kinetic Crystal.. Exlo is not really realistic for a Laser i think :) --------------------------------------------
|
Gozmoth
Amarr Altera Odyssea Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:52:00 -
[389]
Originally by: Viktor VonCarstein I am totally Amarr spec I have been since I started playing the game 3 years or so ago. I do not fly any other races ships.
I must admit I am surprised you went for a change that affects every other ship and race in the game. Surely that in itself opens a can of worms.
I would have thought that by changing individual ships first would be the way forward as it has less knock on effects that may not be obvious at first.
As an Amarr dedicated player I have always known that shields in general go donw fast but I am gonna need some time hacking through the armour. There is no issue with this.
The issue comes when I run out of cap long before I have broken through the armour, even with max cap skills, level 5 ship skills controlled bursts level 5. Cap is the real issue here and only on the laser turret ships.
I am an advocater of reducing cap use on lasers and removing the Ship Skill bonus for laser cap reduction and replacing it with something that increases damage, tank, range or tracking.
I understand what you you are trying to do with the EM problem which to be honest seems more focussed on em missiles and drones. It will not solve these problems in my opinion.
EM missiles are always unlikely to be the first choice in PvP because most common missile ships have a Kinetic bonus. Those that don't will still normally choose Kinetic or Thermal as EM and EXP will still be high on their respective tanks. Obviously unless you know exactly what you will be fighting.
The situation with drones is similar to that of the missiles but is further aggravated by differences in other attributes which simply make the Galllente or Minmatar drones more preferable in PvP. Even if you make all drones the same with differing damage types the problems will remain the same as the missiles. Obviously unless you know exactly what you will be fighting.
PVE missiles and drones are used as appropriate and is less of a problem. However reducing resistances may prove to have adverse affects on the difficulty of some missions has this also been tested. (I don't know)
Summary:
I think you have made the wrong choice starting with such a broad change that affects all ships and races.
I would have started with individual ship changes first and see how that pans out.
EM Drones and Missile usage will not drastically change.
Cap and Powergrid issues are higher priority problems for Amarr in my view. (Maybe we will see this altered with the ship revisions to come so we will see).
PS. I feel sorry for Zulupark he seems to be the one who has to post all the controversial Blogs as I am sure that there are numerous people behind this and the other ones.)
That's it !
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:56:00 -
[390]
Talking about omni-tanks as something to be encouraged makes me a bit ill... really - most armor tankers use them, and maybe THAT is the true problem.
If the shields kept the explosive resists maybe more people would use shield tanks in pvp and lasers would be more usefull... Otherwise welcome to a game where people fit AutoCannons on all ships not having a specific bonus to other types
having the shield recharge as excuse for also taking away shield resist is not thought over well...
BUT people - please bear in mind the Amarr ships will get a little love themself.. The resist balance isn't everything. - I'm a nice guy!!
But hook me up with some pew pew, because I'm really bored... |
|
Njara Naoltaos
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 12:59:00 -
[391]
Edited by: Njara Naoltaos on 31/01/2008 13:04:11 Amarr needs some love - no doubt - but why does CCP hits again the caldari that hard?
We have the E-War stuff but need the mid slots for the shield.
CCP has to rework the Slot System on the ships - 3 Levels are just not enough anymore - specialist Slots are maybe a answer?
Slots where you only can configure shield or armor stuff, or e-war stuff....
|
Minerva Vulcan
Caldari The Nexus Foundation Endless Horizon
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 13:17:00 -
[392]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark This change boosts EM damage, no matter what faction is using it. Some Gallente ships get damage bonuses to EM drones, some Caldari ships get bonuses to EM missiles etc.
Um... Are you an idiot?
Last I checked Gallente ships get bonuses to all drones... certainly not just EM drone damage...
And Caldari bonuses go towards Kinetic missile damage.
Please play the game before making any more changes.
kthx. _______________________________ I need new voices in my head, To speak my secret evils with. I need new lovers in my bed, To be my friends and special pets. |
Sevro
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 13:18:00 -
[393]
Zulu, I'm glad to see that Amarr are finally getting some changes, especially to their laser boats. Its been a long time coming, but I'm just glad you guys are doing something about it.
I think a big problem here is that you should of released this blog "after" the Amarr specific blog that you said will be coming in the next couple/few days because, although EM damage is suffering from the problems you mentioned, most people who fly Amarr are more concerned with Amarrian specific problems such as the cap use on lasers, fitting reqs on all beams, and the apoc, prophecy, maller, omen, and zealot needing some love. Probably mainly fitting love which would be helped if the fitting reqs get lowered on lasers.
It'd probably be better to fix those specific things first and then start doing something about EM resistance rebalancing because those changes effect everyone rather than just Amarr.
I like the fact that Amarr drones would be worth using and training for if the proposed changes come about, but I think the low damage multiplier on Amarr drones also needs a small boost.
I'd love to see the apoc become a sniper boat for fleet combat. Geddon and baddon can do it, but with some tweaking I think the apoc could serve that role even better, and it would in turn give it a much needed role for fleet battles for Amarr BS's. The idea of the apoc becoming a missile boat or drone/neut boat just doesn't appeal to me. If the apoc was going to become a fleet BS it would need some extra fittings to be able to fit it with all tachs with the use of only 1 RCU II.
Although people are crying about the cap usage bonus on Amarr ships, I kind of like it. With a laser cap usage reduction and our already current bonuses, Amarr would become the cap kings for sure. It'd certainly help us in running an active armour tank and sustaining laser fire.
Amarr remind me of the word endurance. That means logistically also, so a bigger cargo bay would be nice so we could carry more cap charges.
Amarr are meant to have an advantage with quick crystal swapping, which is made somewhat redundant by the crystal reload bug and changing crystals one at a time. With that bug fixed and a reload all guns to XYZ ammo, Amarr would be able to take better advantage of this feature.
Anyway mate, you cop a lot of criticism but IMO, keep up the good work.
|
Chrysalis D'lilth
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 13:21:00 -
[394]
So let me get this right, the race who have the worst EM resist (caldari) end up getting nerfed more than any other racE?
|
Mila Prestoc
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 13:22:00 -
[395]
Edited by: Mila Prestoc on 31/01/2008 13:25:11
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Originally by: Mila Prestoc Could you please answer this Zulupark, in your issues you say EM is to high on armour, when is EM to high with current real setups?
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.
This raises a few more questions the main one being, do you believe that on t1 armour tanks, when fitting EXP, Kin and Therm active armour tanks EM is not low enough currently (lowest except on minmatar)?
This to me would mean due to EM being substancially lower than the other 3 resistances I would need a 4th specific resistance for EM (probably a EM rig) making active tanking take 4 modules. Doesn't this just make more people use EANM, maybe even 3x EANM + DC rather than 4 specific resistance mods/rigs? -------------------------
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.
|
Cpt Cosmic
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 13:23:00 -
[396]
Edited by: Cpt Cosmic on 31/01/2008 13:23:41
Originally by: Chrysalis D'lilth So let me get this right, the race who have the worst EM resist (caldari) end up getting nerfed more than any other racE?
because zulu thinks:
Originally by: CCP Zulupark This change boosts EM damage, no matter what faction is using it. Some Gallente ships get damage bonuses to EM drones, some Caldari ships get bonuses to EM missiles etc.
epic.....
...f**l! I mean last time I checked gallente gets dmg bonus to all drones.
|
Minerva Vulcan
Caldari The Nexus Foundation Endless Horizon
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 13:28:00 -
[397]
Originally by: Cpt Cosmic
Originally by: CCP Zulupark This change boosts EM damage, no matter what faction is using it. Some Gallente ships get damage bonuses to EM drones, some Caldari ships get bonuses to EM missiles etc.
epic.....
...f**l! I mean last time I checked gallente gets dmg bonus to all drones.
Already covered this...
Caldari also get bonuses to Kinetic missiles, not EM.
See my post a few above yours. _______________________________
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 |
Dav Varan
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 13:28:00 -
[398]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Originally by: Caligulus Raven base resistances
- Before changes
Shields EM - 0%, Exp - 60%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 20% Armor EM - 60%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 45%
- After changes
Shields EM - 0%, Exp - 50%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 20% Armor EM - 50%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 45%
I fail to see how modifying the explosive damage resistance on the raven increases Amarr damage.
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.
That would be great if you had a balance between shield tanking and armor tanking in the first place, which you dont. You said it yourselves in the very same blog , "The problem with amarr is because armor tanking is much more popular than shield tanking" , why do you think that is ?
Armor tanking works in PvP and shield tanking doesnt. Shield tanks have much smaller hp than armor tanks Shield tanks have lower base resists than armor tanks Shield tanks have fewer mod slots available than armor tanks. after you fit cap injector , scram and either web or mwd to a shield tanker what have you got left to tank with ?
You boost amarr by reducing em resists , then you boost everyone else who can choose exp damage by reducing exp resists , doesnt this leave amarr exactly where they started ?
keep the em resist changes, drop the exp shield changes. Make shield tanking a slightly more attractive option in the process of amarr boost. I'm sure amarr wont complain about there being more shield tanks out there for there lasers to rip through.
|
Entity
X-Factor Industries Synthetic Existence
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 13:29:00 -
[399]
Originally by: Chrysalis D'lilth So let me get this right, the race who have the worst EM resist (caldari) end up getting nerfed more than any other racE?
bzzzt.
The lower the resistance, the less bad taking off a fixed amount is: from 10% to 0% is nowhere near as bad as from 90% to 80% (to name a random extreme example)
_
Got Item? | EVE API? |
Borasao
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 13:31:00 -
[400]
Originally by: Elmicker Stealth minmatar boost.
Minmatar's most common damage type: Explosive.
Minmatar's most damaging ammo: EMP.
Won't help amarr much, though. They still can't fit ships worth a damn or fire for longer than a minute or two.
Yup... also, dropping from 92.5% to 90% resists is a 33% damage boost... which is completely relative... in class (AFs), that's going from effective dps of something like (assuming a 200dps AF) 18dps to 24dps... hardly something to write home about... meanwhile, that Minmatar you're fighting also gets a damage boost against you... seems like it's staying near the same overall.
|
|
Rastigan
Caldari Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 13:33:00 -
[401]
Originally by: DDemon CCP Zulupark, play this game before changing it please.....
He does, he obviously has alot of SP in Minmatar and Projectile weapons
I've never seen so much negative response so quickly to a proposed change, thats a pretty good indicator that you should rethink your decision...
|
Roy Batty68
Caldari Immortal Dead
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 13:37:00 -
[402]
Originally by: Minerva Vulcan
Already covered this...
Caldari also get bonuses to Kinetic missiles, not EM.
See my post a few above yours.
Kestrel Special Ability: 10% bonus to Kinetic missile damage and 5% bonus to EM, Explosive, and Thermal missile damage per level.
It made me curious why he'd say such a thing so I went looking. Its the only Caldari ship that I could find that has a bonus to something other than kinetic missile damage.
But of course now you're just reading my sig... |
XLord
Amarr De Valken BV Sylph Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 13:40:00 -
[403]
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.
why call it a amarr boost then?
|
Kaalise
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 13:40:00 -
[404]
Originally by: Minerva Vulcan
Originally by: CCP Zulupark This change boosts EM damage, no matter what faction is using it. Some Gallente ships get damage bonuses to EM drones, some Caldari ships get bonuses to EM missiles etc.
Um... Are you an idiot?
Last I checked Gallente ships get bonuses to all drones... certainly not just EM drone damage...
And Caldari bonuses go towards Kinetic missile damage.
Please play the game before making any more changes.
kthx.
You do realise that a boost to all damage types necessitates a boost to EM damage? |
Vaedian GER
Omega Fleet Enterprises Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 13:41:00 -
[405]
Edited by: Vaedian GER on 31/01/2008 13:42:13
Nice changes, I like them, but this is the real issue:
Quote: However we don't want to change too much in one go so we're trying to pace ourselves and spread the changes over more than one patch.
You guys are working soooo daaaaamnnnnn slooooooooooow. While other game studios are implementing changes almost on a weekly basis, we have to wait months if not years for something that even a blind and deaf Developer should see. Don't try to be perfect, you aren't, we all know that since the implementation of RMR. Try out new things on the live server, watch, observe, and take them back if they fail, but don't let us wait for years!
|
Lucidia fern
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 13:43:00 -
[406]
Originally by: XLord
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.
why call it a amarr boost then?
i agree i still say use the report http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=681487
as a refeerance for the problems amarr face
|
PeacefullNub
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 13:49:00 -
[407]
About blog:
Fix crystals Introduce Explosive damage crystals
blaze crystalls may be awesome - but gallente also need something like t2 EM ammo then - for ballance. Also t2 close range crystalls need fixing (now they useless)
More damage Remove the energy turret capacitor need bonus and replace it with more damage bonuses
Allmost all players agreed that we need this, but not with damage bonus (for some ships it may be too much) - with anything usefull depends on ship (dps, damagemod, drone space, tracking, optimal or fallof, speed, agility, nosf/neut boni, whatever) + reduce laser cap use by 40-50% (like 4-5 lvl prenerfed ship bonus) As a result - new life and fits for old ships. Lasers still use more cap than blasters but not 300%
Increase the base damage mod of energy weapons
No need for extra damagemod - all we need - solid dps at 10-15 minutes (like all other races).
Amarr need more midslots Need more midslots to fit Ewar/tackling gear
Wrong - we need more mid slots ONLY becouse they used for ewar/takling, capbooster and SB atm - if for example there will be low slots EW/webs or free high utility slots on amarr ships for nosf/neuts (and extra PG for them)... (BTW sanshas type fix (+100% laser dmgmod +1/2 turrets) may give amarrs free high slots - but it needs serious ship analizis and slot rebalance)
|
adriaans
Amarr Advanced Capital Ship Designs Hephaestus Rising
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 13:50:00 -
[408]
Originally by: Tzrailasa This:
Originally by: Takeshi Yamato The cap problem of lasers exists for these reasons:
- Hp was universally increased on all ships to prolong combat. Prolonged combat means more cap will be used, but there were no changes to laser cap usage.
- Rigs further increased combat duration, not everybody fits tanking rigs but on average ships are more durable since rigs have been introduced.
- Amarr ships tend to have a bigger capacitor than others, but the cap per second is exactly the same as everyone else. Since combat tends to last longer nowdays, the lasers drain so much that the any advantage is quickly gone and the total cap that was available to each pilot for the duration of the fight will be lowest for the amarr ship.
...and this:
Originally by: Eclip CAP use CAP use CAP use is all i really need to say. Amarr ships are good, they have damage and they can melt a shield tank like it wasnt there. even on armor they do good damage. but they cap out or run so low on cap that they cant active tank even for a little while so if ur getting shot at you have to switch off ur guns so ur cap ca be used for tanking. Give them slightly bigger capacitors as they are surpose to be the cap warfare race. hell increase capacity by 10-15% on BS's and 5-10% on cruisers and BC
...and I'm even agreeing with a goon:
Originally by: If you fix cap usage and fitting requirements, the rest of the problems address themselves. Some of the ships still suck, but those can be addressed later. The main problem is cap usage and fitting.
You're solving the wrong problem......
this.
-sig-
Support the introduction of Blaze M crystals for Amarr! (Or make Amarr the only race able to deal EM damage from turrets).
|
Minerva Vulcan
Caldari The Nexus Foundation Endless Horizon
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 13:51:00 -
[409]
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." _______________________________
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 |
Cordial Ripper
Minmatar g guild Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 13:55:00 -
[410]
First of all let me ask you guys at CCP something. how come when you guys pull out the new sollutions most of them are the worst possible ones ? first of all ppl said and said it well. AMARR NEEDS A BOOST. how come u guys understood that you should modify the other races ? it might be the "most balanced solution" (aldo for the last year or so the decisions you made were the most unbalaced ever)but guys give it a rest already .. noone asked u go give 100%+ damage on guns (if they did they have no ideea of fair fight) some issues exist in amarr like for example if u dont have a cap booster on gheddon ure guns eat out ure cap and u have only 3 medium slots ... hmm how about that ... alot of option huh ? maybe damage type change would be great but pls someone explain me how to get a laser beam to do explosive damage... that's ridiculous certanly some boosts for damage are needed, but c'mon resorting to tanking nerf ? (un)fortunatly i can fly all races i can urderstand the +ve and -ve side in each of them. yes some issues are positive in ure changes too but Guys (refering to CCP) you take more than u give... think it over balancing all racer for amarr's sake will unbalace 2 others (yes i said 2 others cause i already know there will eb a stealth boost balancing caldari) i know i am just waisting my time writing this but this is a fact ... if this reply can survive long enugh for other players to read i would be amaised.
|
|
adriaans
Amarr Advanced Capital Ship Designs Hephaestus Rising
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 13:55:00 -
[411]
Originally by: Elmicker Stealth minmatar boost.
Minmatar's most common damage type: Explosive.
Minmatar's most damaging ammo: EMP.
Won't help amarr much, though. They still can't fit ships worth a damn or fire for longer than a minute or two.
this as well. -sig-
Support the introduction of Blaze M crystals for Amarr! (Or make Amarr the only race able to deal EM damage from turrets).
|
Tobias Sjodin
Ore Mongers R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 13:59:00 -
[412]
Edited by: Tobias Sjodin on 31/01/2008 13:59:14 Nerfing armor EM resistance sounds good. But to nerf shield tanking at the same time just to strike some weird numbers equilibrium is just plain stupid.
Your reasoning for nerfing armor EM resistance is sound. Your reasoning for nerfing shield EXP resistance is not.
"Bring back the pain."
|
|
CCP Zulupark
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 14:05:00 -
[413]
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.
|
|
Damned Force
Minmatar Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 14:07:00 -
[414]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Originally by: Caligulus Raven base resistances
- Before changes
Shields EM - 0%, Exp - 60%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 20% Armor EM - 60%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 45%
- After changes
Shields EM - 0%, Exp - 50%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 20% Armor EM - 50%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 45%
I fail to see how modifying the explosive damage resistance on the raven increases Amarr damage.
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.
Extreme bad move... U trying to boost amarr, why? Because they weapons sux against armor tank. Why is that a probleme? Because in pvp everyone use speed or armor tank. Why? Because is better.... Speedtank is simply good, because u invulnerable till u can have the speed. This type of tank have not much counter, but it can be defeated. Armor tank is good, because have good base resist, remote armr reppers are more efective than shield transporters and u have the valuable midslots for EW. Shieldtank is rear used in pvp. Why? Because use midslots, the shield transfer is energy hungry and because the base resist is less on shields.
U can argue with shield recharge or with something else, but tbh on an active tanked ship shield recharge is so small that u even dont notice it.
The idea to adjust the resistances is very good, but it should not be changed because u want to get more damage for amars on armor, but to incrase the usage of shield tanked ships in pvp. And for this reason u should ajust shield damage to with taking 10% from Exp and give 15% to EM and 5 % to Therm res. With this move u would make shield tank harder and more viable in pvp, where armor res would be still more.
I hear how gallenteŠs hating me :P
|
Wrathamon Starfury
Gallente AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 14:09:00 -
[415]
Great.. nerf the raven resists.. it already has a horrible tank which is why it is the most destroyed ship in eve.
|
Kel Dario
Amarr Blue Sky Inc
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 14:11:00 -
[416]
I read the blog twice and all the player comments about this change. I must say I agree with most of them even if a big chunk is just whining. Your changes will push everyone into omni tanks, fitting hardeners on t1 hulls will be idiotic, or if people still do they will compensate the em-resistance loss with a rig when there is no low-slot left. So in the end this change really doesn't change anything.
Many people have already stated what needs to be done with the amarr ships, adjust grid, cap-usage, more capacitor etc.
If these changes is to mend the broken em-drones then this is just wrong, they need their base damage increased. As for em-missiles most caldari ships never uses them anyway because their bonus is linked to kinetic.
Maybe the solution would be to give a higher stacking penalty on resistances when fitting omni-tanks instead? But then you would probably need to remake the forumula. Just a thought...
/Kel
|
adriaans
Amarr Advanced Capital Ship Designs Hephaestus Rising
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 14:11:00 -
[417]
btw, what will be done about NPC's damage and tanks? as now NPC's will do more damage (on em, ex) but will they take more damage on (em, ex) too? -sig-
Support the introduction of Blaze M crystals for Amarr! (Or make Amarr the only race able to deal EM damage from turrets).
|
Ansala
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 14:16:00 -
[418]
92.5%-to-90% doesn't sound like all that much, but isn't that a 33% increase to damage taken? 7.5% vulnerable to 10% vulnerable. How is that going to play out in the EMP-heavy PVE spawns? |
Minerva Vulcan
Caldari The Nexus Foundation Endless Horizon
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 14:23:00 -
[419]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark 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... RoF bonuses add the same to EM that they will to every other type. I don't see how this is considered the "EM Caldari bonus" you were talking about. These changes aren't going to make using EM missiles any more viable or used more in PvP against armor tankers than they are now though, so I don't see what point you're trying to make. Just admit your bork up.
With the damage multipliers you're still not going to see EM drones used over Thermal or Explosive in PvP.
But this is supposed to be about Amarr anyway... so why are you now trying to spin it to make it sound like it's going to be great for everyone?
Minmatar will be a nice boost from it, sure. As far as drone and missile boats though you're going to see no change in the ammo or drones used... so why are you even (incorrectly, at that) mentioning 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 |
MONOCERUS
Xenobytes Stain Empire
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 14:32:00 -
[420]
explosive crystal? lol ccp _________________________
|
|
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
|
|
Nyxus
Amarr GALAXIAN RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 15:49:00 -
[451]
Zulu - Have you considered that this will make omni tanking even more attractive than it is today?
Have you considered changing armor compensation skills to be like shield compensation skills? So that they only apply to active hardeners when "off"?
Before revelations everyone had to make a decision on what to harden. Mostly we ended up with tri-hardened tanks (expl, kin, them hardener). When omni tanking became available it became the default since you could now harden ALL your resists and your hull with only 3 mods (EAN+EAN+DC).
Any thoughts on reducing omni tanks directly?
Nyxus
PS- Plz fix racial resists. Currently for Minmatar its' 60EM+10EM= 70EM total. It should be 60EM+(40*10%EM)=64%EM total. It's a big difference.
The Gallente ideals of Freedom, Liberty and Equality will be met by the Amarr realities of Lasers, Armor and Battleships. |
emotua
Gallente Arcana Imperii Ltd. Chaos Incarnate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 15:50:00 -
[452]
I kinda fail to see the logic behind all that.
So basically, since you can't really nerf the HUGE 0.00000% EM base resistance of the shields ( Shields are ALREADY the weakest when it comes to EM & THERM ), you nerf the base EXP resistance, all that originally for a boost to Amarr EM damage.
The side effects : Caldari EM and EXP missiles receives a boost. Minmatar ammo receives a boost and especially EMP L : double boost! Gallente gets nothing. Amarr gets a boost to EM damage.
Everybody gets a tanking nerf.
So basically, it's definitly a gallente nerf, and caldari/minmatar get a better boost out of this than amarr.
I doubt that it is really what you intended...
|
Jhagiti Tyran
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 15:55:00 -
[453]
Again the Issue of shield tanking ships being deficient because of the arrangement of slots makes some ships more effective in pvp and now Caldari are suffering a double nerf as not only do we loose Explosive resistance on shields we also loose the slight buffer against EM that the Armor provides.
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 16:00:00 -
[454]
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.
This is the whole problem!! This is much much more important than all the math ! Setups won't stay the same. Just ask a few players. You will notice no one on their right mind will stay with 50% EM. And if you check most ships setups people use, you will notice they are very hardly accepting to use more than 3 modules for resistance. That will result in almost all tri-hardener setups becoming EANM setups!
------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Takeshi Yamato
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 16:02:00 -
[455]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark 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.
After looking into it some more I have to say that the change to armor EM resistance isn't as bad as I thought. EMP did not need a boost but will benefit slightly less from this change than expected. Lasers will benefit decently.
Some people will probably want to lynch me for proposing this but EMP ammo can be brought back to where it was easily by decreasing the base damage it does by a few percent.
|
Lobster Man
Metafarmers
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 16:10:00 -
[456]
I can honestly say as an armor tanker, a reduce to EM resists isn't a bad idea, and I would like to see shield EXP resists reduced too so that my explosive/em drone combo will become more useful
|
Veng3ance
Prophets Of a Damned Universe Elemental Fury
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 16:15:00 -
[457]
I like the changes, however I only hope you won't pass off the Amarr problem as solved after the resistance changes. We still have very heavy cap usage problems on certain ships (namely battleships) and I believe the changes to cap usage will be just as important for Amarr pilots.
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 16:19:00 -
[458]
Originally by: Takeshi Yamato
Originally by: CCP Zulupark 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.
After looking into it some more I have to say that the change to armor EM resistance isn't as bad as I thought. EMP did not need a boost but will benefit slightly less from this change than expected. Lasers will benefit decently.
Some people will probably want to lynch me for proposing this but EMP ammo can be brought back to where it was easily by decreasing the base damage it does by a few percent.
EMP already does FAR FAR less damage than antimatter. Doing that would be ridiculous. EMP is already a crap ammo, Fusion and plasma are already far superior(focused damage type for either shield or armor and uses less space (so can carry more ammo).
------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Pat McCrotch
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 16:21:00 -
[459]
What we have here is a failure to communicate.
It appears to be a very sick and twisted joke.....
OK, you dang Amarr whiners are on our last nerves, so what we're going to do is use a bunch of arbitrary maths and bigtastic words to convince you that you are too stupid to really understand what we're doing and by default believe that we are boosting Amarr, when in fact, we are boosting everyone BUT! Ha Ha, take that you bunch of whiney n00bs.
|
Minji Harashua
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 16:22:00 -
[460]
I have to wonder what this will do to missioning, since there are several missions that are heavy on EM damage. But it does seem strange to call a nerf to everyone a boost to Amarr. Hope this stays on test long enough to work the bugs out. |
|
Winters Chill
Amarr Legio Victrix New Eden Federation.
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 16:33:00 -
[461]
Are any of you really that surprised that CCP would turn a request to boost amarr into a universal excuse to nerf everyone?
Devs, you don't have to "think outside the box" to solve EVERY problem, those posters are propaganda, ignore them.
|
haq aan
Omega Enterprises Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 16:41:00 -
[462]
Reduce %10 EXP on Shield , and %10 EMP on armor is the best start for pointed problems. That was a wise act to be honest.
-Reducing PG and cap use on some/all Lasers needs tests and math. But that would be another good step in the name of fixing.
-Balancing Thermal/EM damage on some crystals, will definitely increase the efectiveness of Amarian Ships in PvP.
SO i like the change. And i feel its gonna be something good for pvp.
-Explosive Crystals..? aint that sounds weird to u too ? Need to be avoided with extreme caution.
Many thanks for constructive pilots/comments.
haq aan Omega
|
Aphrodite Whiterose
Amarr Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 16:45:00 -
[463]
use projectiles on certain Amarr ships and it works well.
I see the logic for lowering the shields explosive resist but is it needed or is it being done as its "logical"?
How does any of this affect PvE?
It in fact makes it harder to PvE as Amarr, armour tanking against Amarr racial enemies, who do EM damage with the new EM damage resist reduction........ so we get a Caldari nerf for pvp and a further Amarr NERF for PvE??????? Well done Zulupark your "buff" has now made pve even harder for Amarr.
Lets hope they look at doing some of the other changes like cap issues or something as this "buff" seriously sucks
There are several really good ideas through this (and many other threads) which i think would work a lot better with some proper research behind them.
----------------------------------------------- Amarr - Playing EVE in Hardcore Mode since 2007 |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 17:00:00 -
[464]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
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.
Why is this biggest of changes being done first?
The Real Space Initiative - V5 (Forum Link)
|
Yazmina
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 17:03:00 -
[465]
I think the number of responses here should prove to CCP that they need to do more and they need to do it fast. (i dont really want to read all 17 pages of this so ill just say my observations)
First thing,i dont know if it was said or not but I did notice in game that grid requirements for the tachyon were lower. They were about 4250 and now they are 3750, which is quite nice. This is a step in the right direction.
The armor nerf was necessary and I feel that CCP could go even further in lower the base em resists on all ships. After all, its not just a few ships that their em resist is the highest, its practically all of them. If CCP really wants to help amarr against omni tanks the em resists need to be lowered across the board, not just on 3 or 4 ships. And another point, if your trying to help amarr perhaps you shouldnt nerf amarr resists as much or more than the other races, that almost defeats the purpose.
More fitting changes need to be made. It is still to hard to make a good fit on an amarr ship and more mid slots are a necessity to anything these days. When you take into acount that amarr need most or all of their mid slots for cap injectors or rechargers that makes it that much more difficult to fit ewar or propulsion mods.
CUT CAP USAGE OF GUNS AT LEAST 25%!!! Give the ships a real bonus to make up for this and then amarr ships wont have to use most or all of their mid slots on rechargers. This will go a long way towards bringing balance to the races. |
Wu Jiun
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 17:07:00 -
[466]
Originally by: Minerva Vulcan
Originally by: CCP Zulupark This change boosts EM damage, no matter what faction is using it. Some Gallente ships get damage bonuses to EM drones, some Caldari ships get bonuses to EM missiles etc.
Um... Are you an idiot?
Last I checked Gallente ships get bonuses to all drones... certainly not just EM drone damage...
And Caldari bonuses go towards Kinetic missile damage.
Please play the game before making any more changes.
kthx.
I wonder who is the idiot here. I mean obviously neither gallente nor caldari recieve specific em bonuses.
On the other hand the drone damage bonus will apply to all drones including the em ones. And a rof bonus like on the raven will apply to all missiles including the em ones. This is clearly what he meant and only someone with a whole lot of frustration would step so low to deliberately misunderstand him just to make a cheap shot. You really should go back to kindergarden, you know?
The point was that missile ships (with generic dmg or rof bonuses) and drone boats (with generic drone damage bonuses) can all profit from em dmg being more useful. If you didn't understand that than maybe you should learn what "context" means?
|
FinalFlash84
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 17:08:00 -
[467]
@Zulupark:
There has been numerous replies in this thread, and most of them are saying that you are adressing the wrong thing.
Why don't you just explain us, what you think about the "cap-problem". Now, it doesn't matter if you lower the base resists, if you can't shoot because you are out of cap. I personally hope, that you have played this game. Amarr isn't as bad as you think, they do suffer from the cap usage from their lasers (and ofc the fitting requirements), but nothing more. And to "nerf" the already bad shield tanks isn't fine
|
EliteSlave
Minmatar Tau Ceti Global Production SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 17:12:00 -
[468]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
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.
Zulu - This is where i ask what was the point of releasing this half-mule dev blog? This is obviously not Amarr love, why bother to title it that way? Makes no sense in doing this. I would thought you would have learned a little something of writing a Dev Blog that was well.. Thought out and didnt equate to a steaming pile of well censored*. I dont mean this as a flame but it seems that the Community just doesnt like any of your changes your thoughts that you decide to come up with. Its like if you make a post other then the Announcement of Fanfest for 2008 your going to be flamed due to your incompetence of actually understanding the problem at hand which is Amarr != PVP Viable
|
Telusar Bontan
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 17:20:00 -
[469]
Zealot base resistances - Before changes
Shields EM - 0%, Exp - 90%, Kin - 70%, Therm - 20% Armor EM - 60%, Exp - 80%, Kin - 62.5%, Therm - 35%
- After changes
Shields EM - 0%, Exp - 80%, Kin - 70%, Therm - 20% Armor EM - 50%, Exp - 80%, Kin - 62.5%, Therm - 35%
Yeah! their weapons are useless, lets go make their armor superiority worthless too!
In exchange their shuttles could go faster - maybe 3m/s or so.
|
Minerva Vulcan
Caldari The Nexus Foundation Endless Horizon
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 17:26:00 -
[470]
Originally by: Wu Jiun The point was that missile ships (with generic dmg or rof bonuses) and drone boats (with generic drone damage bonuses) can all profit from em dmg being more useful. If you didn't understand that than maybe you should learn what "context" means?
Well that's just aces there champ...
Except this change won't make anyone use EM Drones or missiles anymore than they already are. There's still going to be better to use all around... so him trying to spin this with that to make a point is just... well... pointless.
He made it sound like Gallente and Caldari has specific bonuses to EM damage directly. His words, not mine. _______________________________
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 |
|
Inflexible
Shokei
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 17:28:00 -
[471]
Originally by: Yazmina After all, its not just a few ships that their em resist is the highest, its practically all of them.
It is not true for majority of T2 ships. EM damage can be very useful.
|
Wu Jiun
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 17:36:00 -
[472]
Edited by: Wu Jiun on 31/01/2008 17:36:12
Originally by: Minerva Vulcan
Except this change won't make anyone use EM Drones or missiles anymore than they already are. There's still going to be better to use all around... so him trying to spin this with that to make a point is just... well... pointless.
Em is best resistance to shoot at on a lot of t2 tanks just fyi. Yes, generally speaking on armor you'd still prefer exp and em on shields for both of which the performance won't change. However this is just for t1 resistances. All my t2 ships have lowest resistance em(well except the minnies ones ofc). If you are too stubborn to accept that this can be useful so be it.
Originally by: Minerva Vulcan He made it sound like Gallente and Caldari has specific bonuses to EM damage directly. His words, not mine.
Yeah, it sounded like that. But from the context it was clear that it wasn't what he meant. So, why make a big deal of it? Its just nitpicking to make yourself feel better. Way to go.
|
Aphrodite Whiterose
Amarr Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 17:45:00 -
[473]
Personally i dont have a problem using EM in PvP as i still find it is the lowest tanked damage type out of most omni tanks. A lot of people i know use the triple hardener with an EANM2 or DC2 set up which leaves EM the lowest resist.
----------------------------------------------- Amarr - Playing EVE in Hardcore Mode since 2007 |
Cailais
Amarr VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 17:45:00 -
[474]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
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.
Ok, I stand corrected: but you can appreciate how players can interpret dev blogs -the last one hailing an amarr 'boost' had a pretty unremarkable change to tracking on medium turrets iirc.
The Amarr 'problem' has been around for so long now that expectation levels are very very high - you're almost certain to disappoint many. There's probably a lesson to be learnt in there somewhere.
I think you should consider how you 'quantify' your blogs - perhaps more detail is needed, extrapolate out to the future. The infamous 'carrier nerf blog' is a case in point, I realise you were suggesting changes for open discussion there but it came across as a fait a compli. The same applies here to an extent.
C.
Improved Low Sec Idea!! |
nihlanth
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 18:01:00 -
[475]
I think that reducing the EM resistances by 10% across the board is a very good first step (and one that I have been thinking about all along).
Proof of this exists in the fact that all Blood Raider and Amarr navy ships are so much easier to tank than Guristas or Angels.
The drawback - it will be MUCH harder to tank mercenary rats now since they do all damage types. The Damsel in distress mission was hard enough on Lvl3 even with an omni tank.
We dont need to change the number of midslots on any amarr ships except for the Retribution assault ship, it needs 2 mids.
Give the zealot and omen an extra turret slot. There is no point in it having a launcher hardpoint.
The true problems of Amarr:
1. Lasers simply take up too much cpu and grid. 2. They use too much cap. 3. not enough damage
Remove the cap bonus on all amarr ships and replace it with a Range or damage bonus. Some ships should have range bonus, others should have a damage bonus.
Reduce the base cap and grid cost of lasers accross the board.
Then it will be balanced.
|
Zubb Ionesco
Audentia et Artis
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 18:05:00 -
[476]
You are about to take away the differences and characteristics of the races. Amarr has some of the best tanks in the universe. Now they are going to have the best tanks und good damage, too, to be "competitive"? No, wait, then everybody wants to play Amarr and the players of other races will start to complain. So you will have to nerf the tanking abilities of the Amarr ships, in order to balance. You will have to put this process in recursion, until, after a while, all ships from all races will be the same, except for the appearance. I have a much better idea which takes less work: Create one big Ship production corp which produce ships for all races and delete all race-ships, then everybody has to fly the same ships, everybody is happy and the whiners shut the f*ck up! ----------------- Never knock on Death's door. Ring the bell and run! Death hates that. |
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 18:05:00 -
[477]
Originally by: nihlanth I think that reducing the EM resistances by 10% across the board is a very good first step (and one that I have been thinking about all along).
Proof of this exists in the fact that all Blood Raider and Amarr navy ships are so much easier to tank than Guristas or Angels.
The drawback - it will be MUCH harder to tank mercenary rats now since they do all damage types. The Damsel in distress mission was hard enough on Lvl3 even with an omni tank.
We dont need to change the number of midslots on any amarr ships except for the Retribution assault ship, it needs 2 mids.
Give the zealot and omen an extra turret slot. There is no point in it having a launcher hardpoint.
The true problems of Amarr:
1. Lasers simply take up too much cpu and grid. 2. They use too much cap. 3. not enough damage
Remove the cap bonus on all amarr ships and replace it with a Range or damage bonus. Some ships should have range bonus, others should have a damage bonus.
Reduce the base cap and grid cost of lasers accross the board.
Then it will be balanced.
STOP!!
We are NOT talking about PVE. PVE do not need balance. Balance is somethign you need for PVP. All this changes were made into the PVP view. So how they reflect on PVE is irrelevant! Amarr already are great mission runners (I can make easily 40M isk per hour with my Scorch armed abaddon)
------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Jonny JoJo
Amarr The Imperial Guards
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 18:06:00 -
[478]
Originally by: nihlanth I think that reducing the EM resistances by 10% across the board is a very good first step (and one that I have been thinking about all along).
Proof of this exists in the fact that all Blood Raider and Amarr navy ships are so much easier to tank than Guristas or Angels.
The drawback - it will be MUCH harder to tank mercenary rats now since they do all damage types. The Damsel in distress mission was hard enough on Lvl3 even with an omni tank.
We dont need to change the number of midslots on any amarr ships except for the Retribution assault ship, it needs 2 mids.
Give the zealot and omen an extra turret slot. There is no point in it having a launcher hardpoint.
The true problems of Amarr:
1. Lasers simply take up too much cpu and grid. 2. They use too much cap. 3. not enough damage
Remove the cap bonus on all amarr ships and replace it with a Range or damage bonus. Some ships should have range bonus, others should have a damage bonus.
Reduce the base cap and grid cost of lasers accross the board.
Then it will be balanced.
i would get rid of cap use for lasers altogether. Seriously. There is no point anymore given that every other race has a pvp ship with 0 cap usage. For example, Gallente drone/sentry drone ships, Caldari Missiles Ships, or any minmatar combat ship. Sig locked, lack of Eve content |
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 18:11:00 -
[479]
Originally by: Jonny JoJo
Originally by: nihlanth I think that reducing the EM resistances by 10% across the board is a very good first step (and one that I have been thinking about all along).
Proof of this exists in the fact that all Blood Raider and Amarr navy ships are so much easier to tank than Guristas or Angels.
The drawback - it will be MUCH harder to tank mercenary rats now since they do all damage types. The Damsel in distress mission was hard enough on Lvl3 even with an omni tank.
We dont need to change the number of midslots on any amarr ships except for the Retribution assault ship, it needs 2 mids.
Give the zealot and omen an extra turret slot. There is no point in it having a launcher hardpoint.
The true problems of Amarr:
1. Lasers simply take up too much cpu and grid. 2. They use too much cap. 3. not enough damage
Remove the cap bonus on all amarr ships and replace it with a Range or damage bonus. Some ships should have range bonus, others should have a damage bonus.
Reduce the base cap and grid cost of lasers accross the board.
Then it will be balanced.
i would get rid of cap use for lasers altogether. Seriously. There is no point anymore given that every other race has a pvp ship with 0 cap usage. For example, Gallente drone/sentry drone ships, Caldari Missiles Ships, or any minmatar combat ship.
and 99% of eve would get rid of you. How Interesting !
------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Hugh Ruka
Caldari Exploratio et Industria Morispatia
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 18:11:00 -
[480]
Ok, I waited this long for people oppinions and some time to cool my head.
Now practicaly, I only use the Anathema from all Amarr ships (plan is a sacriledge). So don't take my oppinion on Amarr ships (as it won't be anyway).
1. You said one change at a time and that other changes are comming. That is GREAT !!! But why in Gods name are you doing the LARGEST (i.e. most wide reaching) change as the first ? I mean I understand that making an easy db adjust over selected resist numbers is easy and hard to mess up (at least I hope), but it is not the best to start with.
2. As many people pointed out, there are Amarr ships that are OK, and there are Amarr ships that are rubbish (or simply bad). So I would (but I am not you of course) first analyse all the BAD ships and see if I can find any issues that stand out. Then try to remedy those.
3. I seem to see a bit of misunderstanding (or misstatement) of some game mechanics by a DEV ? That makes me worry. Especialy when he proposes a change of such impact. I hope it's just misstatement.
Now for some specific issues I picked on the wau through this thread:
1. Armor vs Shield tanks in PvP. This IS an issue. It is very complicated to fix, but this is one of the deepest we have atm (aside from lag). Shields have less resists and less fitting space compared to an armor tank. yes they are more effective and efficient if done right, but the price is too high for any half-competent PvP setup. Most you see are small ship buffer setups (extenders) or passive setups. With missile ships, you need a gang or at least mwd/scram/injector setup. means 3 slots for tank. that is too low for any good tank.
2. range vs ship size. as the ship size goes down, engagement range (or weapon range) stops making much of a factor as it changes faster the smaller the ship. so a few km range avantage is not much (2-3 seconds ?). this makes the laser optimal advantage less of a factor.
One last thing is about omnitanks. The only reasonable solutions that I see are either removal of all omni hardeners except damage controls (this means shield and armor omni hardeners). Then we are back to 3 hardener setups and shield get screwed massively. Or the change of EANMs to active hardeners, so they are not affected by comp skills.
Originally by: Aravel Thon
Originally by: Nith Batoxxx Hi my alt just leanred to fly the ferox...............
I am so so terribly sorry...
|
|
Inflexible
Shokei
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 18:13:00 -
[481]
Originally by: Jonny JoJo i would get rid of cap use for lasers altogether. Seriously. There is no point anymore given that every other race has a pvp ship with 0 cap usage. For example, Gallente drone/sentry drone ships, Caldari Missiles Ships, or any minmatar combat ship.
Yep, shooting truckloads of explosive crystals at anything that moves...
|
Captain Campion
Synergy. Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 18:14:00 -
[482]
PLZPLZPLZ can amarr have a sensor booster bonus?
|
nihlanth
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 18:15:00 -
[483]
Originally by: Kagura Nikon
Originally by: nihlanth I think that reducing the EM resistances by 10% across the board is a very good first step (and one that I have been thinking about all along).
Proof of this exists in the fact that all Blood Raider and Amarr navy ships are so much easier to tank than Guristas or Angels.
The drawback - it will be MUCH harder to tank mercenary rats now since they do all damage types. The Damsel in distress mission was hard enough on Lvl3 even with an omni tank.
We dont need to change the number of midslots on any amarr ships except for the Retribution assault ship, it needs 2 mids.
Give the zealot and omen an extra turret slot. There is no point in it having a launcher hardpoint.
The true problems of Amarr:
1. Lasers simply take up too much cpu and grid. 2. They use too much cap. 3. not enough damage
Remove the cap bonus on all amarr ships and replace it with a Range or damage bonus. Some ships should have range bonus, others should have a damage bonus.
Reduce the base cap and grid cost of lasers accross the board.
Then it will be balanced.
STOP!!
We are NOT talking about PVE. PVE do not need balance. Balance is somethign you need for PVP. All this changes were made into the PVP view. So how they reflect on PVE is irrelevant! Amarr already are great mission runners (I can make easily 40M isk per hour with my Scorch armed abaddon)
As I said, blood raiders and angels and mercenaries would be HARDER to tank, which means that the rat's base resistances remain the SAME. (If we assume that the 10% em armor reduction only applies to Player ships).
This means PVE would be MORE balanced since Blood Raiders would actually be a force to be reckoned with. (And that is the faction npc that Amarr mission runners are up against anyway).
Dont just focus on PVE, missions need lovin' too. PVE has been neglected for too long.
|
Xanduz
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 18:18:00 -
[484]
Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't Amarr supose to be the no 1 dps or tanking race in eve depending on the config in ones lowslots? Amarr have least mid slot of any race but highest number of low slots, they have huge cap size and don't use ammo in the normal sence. All this spells Tank/Gank and not much EW to me.
As Amarr "can't" use EW in any real sence they should have some other advantage over the other races. This advantage used to be tank/gank.
In the past a few nerfs to Amarr was a tad to much, for those that don't remember here's a short history lesson. Amarr used to be able to choose between all out tank, all out gank or balanced mix. And when I say all out gank I realy do meen ALL OUT. Geddon could melt ANY ship in mere seconds so there was a gigantic outcry from the general playerbase to nerf Amarr hard and so the nerfing started.
1. Introdusing stacking penalty on weapon upgrades. Well this one had it comming, a fair nerf. This idea was good in it's sence but hit Amarr harder than the other races as Amarr have most room for these type of modules and the option of "OMFG DPS" or "OMFG TANK" is down to "OMFG TANK"... 2. Decreasing the range of pulse lasers. Well this one had it comming too, a fair nerf. 3. Increasing the cap usage on laser weapons. Ohh, there went the option of "OMFG TANK" down the drain... No cap to run it when firing. 4. Increasing the powergrid usage on laser weapons. K, realy don't know where this stupid idea came from (Blasters got nerfed to in powergrid usage here).
All of these changes have taken away the Amarr race distinctive gank/tank like no tomorrow speciality.
Now to the issue at hand. CCP has after ALOT of nerfing Amarr and even more whining combined with more or less valid remarks got around to look at the Amarr race.
Make Amarr shine as a race again pls |
Jezala
Repo Industries R.E.P.O.
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 18:21:00 -
[485]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
To maintain a correct ratio between shield tanking and armor tanking we'd also remove 10% from the explosive resistances on shields.
What worries me is that this is perhaps one of the worst reasons you could use to justify changing the shield resistance attributes (or any item's attribute).
In the dev blog, there's nothing to suggest that the shield's EXP resistance is too high or that it is a major pvp obstacle. Also, I can't recall anyone complaining that the shields resistance distribution was an issue and detrimental to the gameplay.
So what if the original design document written 10 years ago called for a certain resistance ratio between shields and armor. Nothing suggests that the ratio was correct to begin with nor does anything suggest that original ratio should be adhered to after the game has evolved so much.
Basically at this stage in the game development cycle, you should be modifying resistances for balancing reasons and not worry so much about maintaining the original design implementation. By modifying the shield's resistances, you're are modifying a variable that probably should be kept constant when you implement all your Amarr related changes. It'll be much more difficult for you to identify balancing issues when you start your post-Amarr fix tweaks cause you've added a variable with unpredictable consequences.
|
Ort Lofthus
Wildlands Heavy Technologies FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 18:22:00 -
[486]
Repost from SHC:
I said it when they increased EANM cpu use and I will say it again: Omni tanks are a problem, encouraging tri-hardener tanks is the solution, and adjusting fitting is probably the most fair way of 'nerfing' EANMs. However, you really need to make hardeners superior to EANMs fitting wise to get pilots to change their tank around. If EANM is the problem, then fix EANM. Reduce the CPU need for hardeners to what EANM were are before the nerf, and reduce the CPU need of the rest of the ENMs enough to make them legitimate fitting choices on CPU starved ships.
I think the bigger problem with amarr lies with some poor ship designs and borked laser tiering and effectiveness under BS sizes. Geddon and baddon are both awesome ships, mostly due to the fact that the range on their guns is pretty much optimal for most confrontations at gates (sub-30km) and can engage in that envelope without manuvering.
Since this is kind of an 'amarr problem' thread, I'd like to post my ideas for a general change:
1) Increase laser cap use reduction to -15%/level, so lasers use half the cap that they do now. The ships with this bonus and the RoF bonus are now the 'endurance' gunboats. The improved cap efficiency means a geddon is cap-stable with scorch loaded with three heatsinks and no cap mods.
2) Change the second bonus of all ships with a 5% resist/lvl bonus to 5% damage bonus, a la abaddon. These boats are now the short-term gunboats, with a resist bonus to assist in plate tanking. It has been stated before that laser boats, and really gun boats in general, need to have a damage bonus. If lasers didn't need a damage bonus to be good, then ships with the damage bonus would be insanely powerful. This change also incentivizes the use of lasers on ships traditionally better fit with autos.
3) General modification of ship fittings. 5th turret for omen? With change #2, the maller does far more dps so another turret on the omen may be a good idea, but I would need to let an amarr specialist answer these sorts of questions.
4) Fix laser tiering. Amarr have trouble 'downgrading' weapons becuase lower tier lasers pale in performace to higher tier weapons. While the fittings are much better on smaller lasers, the other gun races have an intermidiate option where they can sacrifice some DPS for some fitting, rather than a lot of dps for a lot of fitting. Consider increasing the DPS and fittings for smaller lasers to the jump between tiers is smaller and thus opening up more fitting options. Case in point megapulse vs DHP.
5) Possible apoc solution? Make it the tachyon boat. Change the cap size bonus to a traking bonus and modify its fittings so tachyons fit without mods, or at least less. In normal gang combat it has about 20% less dps and about half the tracking, but it has twice the range. In sniperfests it has more alpha than the geddon and more endurance than the baddon while having its own useful unique bonus and probably a better tank as well, due to reduced fitting constraints.
|
Anwylyd Al'Vos
Re-Awakened Technologies Inc Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 18:22:00 -
[487]
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!
Yeah, I fail to see the... logic? ... here. _ . - Justice, Mercy, and Faith My soul has horizons further away than those of early mornings, deeper darkness than the night |
Zerode
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 18:30:00 -
[488]
Fidling with the resists in order to boost EM dominant weapons without boosting the ships raw dps is good, but far from enough.
Amarr need a clearly defined role. Give Amarr a new role or fix the old role. Either way is fine but just fix it and give Amarr a role to shine in.
Maybee a uber tank and drone master role is better than the old one (make them realy slow as nano anything is not good)?[:idea:] |
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 18:31:00 -
[489]
Originally by: nihlanth Edited by: nihlanth on 31/01/2008 18:16:40
Originally by: Kagura Nikon
Originally by: nihlanth I think that reducing the EM resistances by 10% across the board is a very good first step (and one that I have been thinking about all along).
Proof of this exists in the fact that all Blood Raider and Amarr navy ships are so much easier to tank than Guristas or Angels.
The drawback - it will be MUCH harder to tank mercenary rats now since they do all damage types. The Damsel in distress mission was hard enough on Lvl3 even with an omni tank.
We dont need to change the number of midslots on any amarr ships except for the Retribution assault ship, it needs 2 mids.
Give the zealot and omen an extra turret slot. There is no point in it having a launcher hardpoint.
The true problems of Amarr:
1. Lasers simply take up too much cpu and grid. 2. They use too much cap. 3. not enough damage
Remove the cap bonus on all amarr ships and replace it with a Range or damage bonus. Some ships should have range bonus, others should have a damage bonus.
Reduce the base cap and grid cost of lasers accross the board.
Then it will be balanced.
STOP!!
We are NOT talking about PVE. PVE do not need balance. Balance is somethign you need for PVP. All this changes were made into the PVP view. So how they reflect on PVE is irrelevant! Amarr already are great mission runners (I can make easily 40M isk per hour with my Scorch armed abaddon)
As I said, blood raiders and angels and mercenaries would be HARDER to tank, which means that the rat's base resistances remain the SAME. (If we assume that the 10% em armor reduction only applies to Player ships).
This means PVE would be MORE balanced since Blood Raiders would actually be a force to be reckoned with. (And that is the faction npc that Amarr mission runners are up against anyway).
Dont just focus on PVE, missions need lovin' too. PVE has been neglected for too long.
Currently, missions against Blood raiders and Sansha are cakewalks compared to any other pirate faction.
But PVE alance"may never cause any negative result on PVP balance. Because in PVP balance is essential, on PVE is negligible.
------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
nihlanth
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 18:36:00 -
[490]
Originally by: Kagura Nikon
Originally by: nihlanth Edited by: nihlanth on 31/01/2008 18:16:40
Originally by: Kagura Nikon
Originally by: nihlanth I think that reducing the EM resistances by 10% across the board is a very good first step (and one that I have been thinking about all along).
Proof of this exists in the fact that all Blood Raider and Amarr navy ships are so much easier to tank than Guristas or Angels.
The drawback - it will be MUCH harder to tank mercenary rats now since they do all damage types. The Damsel in distress mission was hard enough on Lvl3 even with an omni tank.
We dont need to change the number of midslots on any amarr ships except for the Retribution assault ship, it needs 2 mids.
Give the zealot and omen an extra turret slot. There is no point in it having a launcher hardpoint.
The true problems of Amarr:
1. Lasers simply take up too much cpu and grid. 2. They use too much cap. 3. not enough damage
Remove the cap bonus on all amarr ships and replace it with a Range or damage bonus. Some ships should have range bonus, others should have a damage bonus.
Reduce the base cap and grid cost of lasers accross the board.
Then it will be balanced.
STOP!!
We are NOT talking about PVE. PVE do not need balance. Balance is somethign you need for PVP. All this changes were made into the PVP view. So how they reflect on PVE is irrelevant! Amarr already are great mission runners (I can make easily 40M isk per hour with my Scorch armed abaddon)
As I said, blood raiders and angels and mercenaries would be HARDER to tank, which means that the rat's base resistances remain the SAME. (If we assume that the 10% em armor reduction only applies to Player ships).
This means PVE would be MORE balanced since Blood Raiders would actually be a force to be reckoned with. (And that is the faction npc that Amarr mission runners are up against anyway).
Dont just focus on PVE, missions need lovin' too. PVE has been neglected for too long.
Currently, missions against Blood raiders and Sansha are cakewalks compared to any other pirate faction.
But PVE alance"may never cause any negative result on PVP balance. Because in PVP balance is essential, on PVE is negligible.
Not it isn't negligible because missions are one of the greatest sources of income for many players. This affects the economy in EVE greatly. Currently, it is too easy to make lots of money in empire by doing this. (Ironically, I'm a mission runner and am welcoming this change)
|
|
Phyridean
Lionsgate Ionic Dispersion
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 18:41:00 -
[491]
Originally by: Rastigan Edited by: Rastigan on 31/01/2008 13:37:41
Originally by: DDemon CCP Zulupark, play this game before changing it please.....
He does, he obviously has alot of SP in Minmatar and Projectile weapons
I've never seen so much negative response so quickly to a proposed change, thats a pretty good indicator that you should rethink your decision... Its also a bad assumption to assume everyone armor tanks... the popular setup for nano-Hacs and Recons are LSEII's with a mix of hardeners, its also fallacious to assume that EVERY ship has midslots allocated to web,scrambling and E-war...
Does anyone else remember the 56 or so pages thrown down for the Khanid Mk II blog?
|
Ranger 1
Amarr Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 18:42:00 -
[492]
Originally by: Minerva Vulcan
Originally by: Wu Jiun The point was that missile ships (with generic dmg or rof bonuses) and drone boats (with generic drone damage bonuses) can all profit from em dmg being more useful. If you didn't understand that than maybe you should learn what "context" means?
Well that's just aces there champ...
Except this change won't make anyone use EM Drones or missiles anymore than they already are. There's still going to be better to use all around... so him trying to spin this with that to make a point is just... well... pointless.
He made it sound like Gallente and Caldari has specific bonuses to EM damage directly. His words, not mine.
Sure he did, if you are mildly ********.
Here is a thought...
Try the changes out before getting your panties in a bunch.
Keep in mind more changes are on the way to address specific ships. Further keep in mind this fix may very well be tweaked before it is done. Try to keep a civil tongue in your head, people might actually listen to what you have to say. Keep reminding yourself you don't do game design for a living, and frankly, are not qualified to do so. Your opinion is nothing more than that, an opinion... and it is not necessarily shared by wiser heads than yours.
|
Veng3ance
Prophets Of a Damned Universe Elemental Fury
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 18:48:00 -
[493]
After reading the blog again:
Minmatar ships only recieving a reduction of EM resists by 2.5%???!!!
How about 5% or more. Their EM resists should be like 85% stock, or at least 87.5%, 90% is still FAR to high. Especially considering thats no-hardeners.
|
Mack Dorgeans
Camelot Innovations
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 18:48:00 -
[494]
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.
Zulu, your answer speaks volumes. Why is it that the job of balancing/nerfing goes to someone who doesn't know how to code? Why is it you (and Tuxford before you) feel that changing ship/module/ammo stats is the best way to deal with a problem? I'm not saying it isn't sometimes the most effective way to make a change, but it also seems to me too easy, and thus too easily abused. At least with code changes, there has to be a lot of good reasons to do it, with a full understanding of what the side-effects could be.
|
Ranger 1
Amarr Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 18:53:00 -
[495]
Originally by: Mack Dorgeans
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.
Zulu, your answer speaks volumes. Why is it that the job of balancing/nerfing goes to someone who doesn't know how to code? Why is it you (and Tuxford before you) feel that changing ship/module/ammo stats is the best way to deal with a problem? I'm not saying it isn't sometimes the most effective way to make a change, but it also seems to me too easy, and thus too easily abused. At least with code changes, there has to be a lot of good reasons to do it, with a full understanding of what the side-effects could be.
The balancing and coding have nothing to do with each other, and require different skill sets.
|
Jezala
Repo Industries R.E.P.O.
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 18:54:00 -
[496]
Originally by: Mack Dorgeans
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.
Zulu, your answer speaks volumes. Why is it that the job of balancing/nerfing goes to someone who doesn't know how to code? Why is it you (and Tuxford before you) feel that changing ship/module/ammo stats is the best way to deal with a problem? I'm not saying it isn't sometimes the most effective way to make a change, but it also seems to me too easy, and thus too easily abused. At least with code changes, there has to be a lot of good reasons to do it, with a full understanding of what the side-effects could be.
You don't want coders doing this type of analysis and decision making. What you want are system engineers who can do the trade studies, analysis, and risk assessments. Coders aren't trained to handle this kind of multi-disciplinary work.
|
ragewind
Caldari VersaTech Interstellar Ltd. SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 18:55:00 -
[497]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark Ok, back up. Now to answer some questions:
Quote:
Here's something I've never understood. Why does armor have 20% extra resists on baseline T1 compared to shields?
Shields compensate for armor extra resistances by always having a natural recharge rate.
ok quick eft check natural recharge for a megathron is 15DPS, natural recharge for a ravan is 18dps so at base that is 3dps and yes that will get affected by modules for a slightly higher effect when fitted but 3dps recharge is the same as 20% bases resistance?
with your raven omni tank that means you can tank 41 dps!!
explain how that 41 dps tank is the same as 20% resistance when another BS will be doing 500-1K DPS on you?
so for the damage types that shield loses 5% on that the resistance loss is greater than the recharge can make up for and on the 10% resistance the recharge is always less affective
recharge means jack all in pvp unless its on a specific passive set up which have very limited uses.
add in that there is no nano pump type rig for shields to make them more cap efficient and that you cant run duel reapers makes them so much riskier than arrmor tanking. yes they can rep more by a fair bit. but they drain cap faster. when the shields go on a raven then your toast. there fitting makes then incredibly hard to fit with damage controls and damage mods. when a mega loses armour it hits a damage controlled structure can uses that as a buffer to carry on reaping armour back in chunks, by the same point on shields you either loses the remaining HP so fast it doesnÆt matter or your out of cap and have nothing to try and pull back.
mega v raven natural cap recharge on mega is better EANM uses no cap active armour hardeners uses less cap armour hardeners uses less CPU turret damage mods uses less CPU that BCUÆs dule LAR uses less than half of the CPU of XL + AMP a lot more grid but if i need grid there is a grid rig there isnÆt a CPU rig mid slots for well PVP mods
now why should anyone uses shields as a tank and PVP?
and again lowering all bases resistances to fix armarrs dps problem and the stupidly high mini T2 em resistance isnt the way it just means everone dies faster and armarr wont be killing any quicker
|
nihlanth
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 19:05:00 -
[498]
Originally by: ragewind
Originally by: CCP Zulupark Ok, back up. Now to answer some questions:
Quote:
Here's something I've never understood. Why does armor have 20% extra resists on baseline T1 compared to shields?
Shields compensate for armor extra resistances by always having a natural recharge rate.
ok quick eft check natural recharge for a megathron is 15DPS, natural recharge for a ravan is 18dps so at base that is 3dps and yes that will get affected by modules for a slightly higher effect when fitted but 3dps recharge is the same as 20% bases resistance?
with your raven omni tank that means you can tank 41 dps!!
explain how that 41 dps tank is the same as 20% resistance when another BS will be doing 500-1K DPS on you?
so for the damage types that shield loses 5% on that the resistance loss is greater than the recharge can make up for and on the 10% resistance the recharge is always less affective
recharge means jack all in pvp unless its on a specific passive set up which have very limited uses.
add in that there is no nano pump type rig for shields to make them more cap efficient and that you cant run duel reapers makes them so much riskier than arrmor tanking. yes they can rep more by a fair bit. but they drain cap faster. when the shields go on a raven then your toast. there fitting makes then incredibly hard to fit with damage controls and damage mods. when a mega loses armour it hits a damage controlled structure can uses that as a buffer to carry on reaping armour back in chunks, by the same point on shields you either loses the remaining HP so fast it doesnÆt matter or your out of cap and have nothing to try and pull back.
mega v raven natural cap recharge on mega is better EANM uses no cap active armour hardeners uses less cap armour hardeners uses less CPU turret damage mods uses less CPU that BCUÆs dule LAR uses less than half of the CPU of XL + AMP a lot more grid but if i need grid there is a grid rig there isnÆt a CPU rig mid slots for well PVP mods
now why should anyone uses shields as a tank and PVP?
and again lowering all bases resistances to fix armarrs dps problem and the stupidly high mini T2 em resistance isnt the way it just means everone dies faster and armarr wont be killing any quicker
Caldari's role is RANGE... they are not meant to be up close and personal like gallente or amarr or some mimnatar. It makes sense that to compensate for increased range, they should have less sturdy ships.
Mimnatar partly relies off of shield tanking OR armor tanking, but their ships are a little sturdier than Caldari because they rely off of close range combat sometimes.
Gallente have the highest rate of repair while amarr have the highest armor buffer... This makes sense.
|
Veng3ance
Prophets Of a Damned Universe Elemental Fury
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 19:09:00 -
[499]
Edited by: Veng3ance on 31/01/2008 19:10:09
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
That's the whole point, to make EM drones and EM missiles useful again.
Also..... I thought the point was to boost amarr....
Im pretty sure we don't use EITHER of these weapons. Wow.
|
Mack Dorgeans
Camelot Innovations
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 19:13:00 -
[500]
Originally by: Ranger 1
Originally by: Mack Dorgeans
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.
Zulu, your answer speaks volumes. Why is it that the job of balancing/nerfing goes to someone who doesn't know how to code? Why is it you (and Tuxford before you) feel that changing ship/module/ammo stats is the best way to deal with a problem? I'm not saying it isn't sometimes the most effective way to make a change, but it also seems to me too easy, and thus too easily abused. At least with code changes, there has to be a lot of good reasons to do it, with a full understanding of what the side-effects could be.
The balancing and coding have nothing to do with each other, and require different skill sets.
They have plenty to do with each other. I'm not saying a programmer should be in charge of balance, but I do think the person in charge of balance should have a broader skill set and be able to consider all aspects of the game when it comes to balance. I would think this akin to being a producer (in the game or entertainment fields). You need people with a broad view to make decisions with input from multiple areas. Often it looks like the last couple holders of the nerf bat focus too much on stat tweaks and don't look at broader possibilities.
That's not to say Zulu and Tuxford DON'T have those skill sets and broad view, but it generally appears that way from what we see in dev blogs.
|
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 19:35:00 -
[501]
Edited by: Goumindong on 31/01/2008 19:37:06
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
We don't want to change too much, we understand people also want cap use reduction and less powergrid requirements and we're not saying that won't happen. Just that we don't want to do everything at the same time.
Here is the thing. This change is larger than about any ship changes you could have done.
Now, i am not saying it isnt warranted, because really i dont know, i havent run the numbers. But if you want to come out in a dev blog and boost EM and EX damage, then step right up and explain why you want to boost EM and EX damage. Then after doing so, give us some numbers as to why Em and EX damage need boosting.
For instance you could have brought up the 10% damage drop between spike and aurora and tremor. Where aurora and tremor do about 10% less dps on average against different snipers. And how this skews sniper balance away from intended. But you havent given us numbers and have just said its an amarr boost.
As an amarr boost its not a great idea, because really, its not known if many of the ships that will be recieving the boost need it. Abaddons and Geddons are great ships, and while they do less dps against armor, they ought to as a function of their range[otherwise they will just *****other similarly quality ships]. As well, the racial armor resistance bonus which was the majority of the problem was not fixed.
The reason you are getting a lot of resistance here is that we are really wondering what the "small changes are" because to us, a change that affects the entirety of eves tanking isnt a small change, its a large change. Its a larger change than dropping the cap use bonus and halving the cap use of all lasers. Its a larger change than fixing the powergrid use on some beam lasers. Its a larger change than rebalancing low teir weapons. Its a larger change than changing individual ships to be good.
I.E. its a really really large change.
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.
Yes, but was it a bad thing? And if so, why was it a bad thing?
And now that EM has been lowered to 50%, if you tri-harden you now have a huge EM hole in addition to being overall less strong of a tank.
Originally by: CCP Zulupark That's the whole point, to make EM drones and EM missiles useful again.
EM missiles are usefull. They are usefull because ships that shield tank optimally have very low EM resistance, this makes their armor resistance of 60% less important. So they load EM ammo and just keep on going. Has explosive damage been useless because of the 60% ex resist base on shields? No it has not, its still great.
think about why that is.
As for em drones
EM Drones are not used because they do less damage against shields than thermal drones. They are not used because they are terrible. It has nothing to do with EM damage resistance on armor and everything to do with the drones doing so little damage that other drones which will always be better than them against armor due to resistances, are also better than them against shields
The change actually increases the usefullness of EX drones more than EM drones. This is because the primary deterrent to using EX drones was a targets shields. But now, since that has been reduced, that deterrent has been reduced. Making EX drones more valuable. Not EM drones, which will always suck so long as they do less damage against shields than thermal drones.
------------------
TL:DR
This is the largest change, that is why we are worried.
|
Viro Melchior
Interstellar eXodus R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 19:37:00 -
[502]
Biggest problem is that you're ignoring some balance issues while making this change:
1) Armor tanking > Shield tanking. --If they had looked at this a bit and adjusted things (like making a crappy low-slot warp scrambler [12km 1 point anyone?]), you could have helped moved the pvp tank focus off of armor tanking slightly. This would be a buff for non-ECM Caldari ships in pvp as well as Amarr ships (who love fighting shield tankers and hate armor tankers).
2) A generic drop in resists just makes ships more killable in general. A static -10% shouldn't be applied without something else done if you want to keep ships at their current survival levels. This is a drop from 130% total base t1 resists to 120%, so a 5% bonus to all shield and armor hitpoints could have been warranted. Or just raising the "crap" resistance by 10%. Resists of 10/50/35/35 on shields don't seem too "homogenous" to me.
3) High cap ammo isn't properly balanced. I'm talking about the super-short range stuff here. With max cap skills in a Rokh with 3 PDS II and a Cap Recharger II, running 8 railguns with antimatter ammo is still more than my cap can handle (nothing else but a Damage Control II turned on). Heaven forbid actually using Electron Blaster Cannons. And Amarr are worse off. Even with a maxed out capacitor bonus on their ships, they have to plan around their gun's energy consumption. My suggestion would be drop drop all weapon cap usage by something small, say 10%, and rebalance the range/cap/damage formula (hopefully leaving damage values in place, which would mean either cap usage goes down or range goes up some). As a Caldari pilot, I can say that cap-free guns (or launchers) are a huge boon in PvP, especially for fleet ops where you may not want to run a cap injector and focus on having strong hitpoints instead.
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 19:38:00 -
[503]
Hey guys, "making ships more killable in general" is an amarr boost. The more you reduce EHP the better off amarr are.
|
Xreed 238
Strife Mercenaries Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 19:40:00 -
[504]
oddly, i find myself strangely apathetic over this change. Frankly, i've come to the conclude lately that Amarr is not nerfed. It requires more patience to fit certain ships, and you'll simply have to deal with the fact that grinding your way through an enemy's armor is going to take longer. But there is nothing, but nothing that will annihilate a shield tank like Amarr (barring t2 minnie tanks, of course) the guns all have good dps, excellent dps for their relative size, and the range on the short range guns cannot be matched by anything except missiles which do much less dps. The tanks are ridiculous, and lets face it, ewar is simply not in the Amarr paradigm. No, Amarr overlap my paradigm; shut up, lock up, and shoot until one of us is dead.
Woe to the Megathron pilot who underestimates me due to race Raven pilots will scatter at my advance Pest pilots hope they can kill me before i kill them
Thus it is, that i have come to peace with what i am, a gunner and a tanker. If they've got 80% em resists, it will just take a bit longer. But by building more efficient builds, i can outlast.
And when they look down, and panic to see that the Cap Booster has only 1 or 2 charges after reloading, they will know the truth of it.
Amarr, and proud of it.
|
Leandro Salazar
Aeon Industries
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 19:43:00 -
[505]
Originally by: Phyridean
Originally by: Rastigan Edited by: Rastigan on 31/01/2008 13:37:41
Originally by: DDemon CCP Zulupark, play this game before changing it please.....
He does, he obviously has alot of SP in Minmatar and Projectile weapons
I've never seen so much negative response so quickly to a proposed change, thats a pretty good indicator that you should rethink your decision... Its also a bad assumption to assume everyone armor tanks... the popular setup for nano-Hacs and Recons are LSEII's with a mix of hardeners, its also fallacious to assume that EVERY ship has midslots allocated to web,scrambling and E-war...
Does anyone else remember the 56 or so pages thrown down for the Khanid Mk II blog?
Just that that was 90% positive feedback with the exception of a few boneheads... This is more like the avalanche CCP caused when they wanted to close the trade forums (though trolls notwithstanding that was 100% unanimous while this is more like 90% again it seems)
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 |
Aidonis Heideran
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 19:56:00 -
[506]
Really, two points to make here:
1) Aside from a few very good arguements, all I have seen is whinage from one camp saying they didn't get Amarr to become the uber-race, and the other camp who are *****ing due to feeling threatened due to a "I play so and so race, my race, my ships and I am awesome, you are not allowed to nerf me or change me, only buff me" mentality (conciously or unconciously). You people, please, STFU.
2) As stated before, I totally agree that cap and PG for lasers (and some others) need to be looked at and then revamped. Now I'm not saying that the resistence changes are bad, nor am I saying they're good, but rather I'm indifferent to them. However, what I am saying is that it would basically be UNNECESSARY if you (CCP) would just do the cap/PG changes.
P.S. I'm a bit against changing resistences, just because I'm a traditionalist, and those stats have been there forever and ever and ever.
|
Dlardrageth
Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 20:00:00 -
[507]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Originally by: Mila Prestoc Could you please answer this Zulupark, in your issues you say EM is to high on armour, when is EM to high with current real setups?
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.
Say what?
Sorry, but WRONG!
Guardian: 60% EM / 80% EXP / 62.5% KIN / 35% THE base armor resist
Zealot: See above
Absolution: 60% EM/ 70% EXP / 53.12% KIN / 35% THE base armor resist
Enyo: 60% EM / 10% EXP / 83.75% KIN / 67,5% THE base armor resist
Keres: 60% EM / 10% EXP / 67.5% KIN / 51.25% THE base armor resist
Cerberus: 60% EM / 10% EXP / 62.5% KIN / 86.25% THE base armor resist
Want me to look for more?
So, please, tell us again, CCP Zulupark, what was that game's name you were writing about? So much for step one in buffing Amarr... I'm sure especially the Zealot needed a resist nerf real badly...
|
Aidonis Heideran
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 20:10:00 -
[508]
I'm fairly sure he said he'd address the res's on T2 separately/in more detail. So try the T1 stats geez.
|
Elmicker
The Phoenix Rising FreeFall Securities
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 20:10:00 -
[509]
I've had a chance to play with this on sisi now.
Pulled out a tri-hardened megathron and hype a couple of times each.
Raped by an abaddon.
Stuck EANMs on and it was performing exactly the same as the tri-hardened setup does on TQ.
Congratulations zulupark, you've made tri-hardeners obsolete.
|
Inflexible
Shokei
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 20:14:00 -
[510]
Originally by: Viro Melchior A generic drop in resists just makes ships more killable in general. A static -10% shouldn't be applied without something else done if you want to keep ships at their current survival levels. This is a drop from 130% total base t1 resists to 120%, so a 5% bonus to all shield and armor hitpoints could have been warranted. Or just raising the "crap" resistance by 10%. Resists of 10/50/35/35 on shields don't seem too "homogenous" to me.
I'd like to point out that difference between 50% and 60% resist is twice as valuable as difference between 0% and 10%. There is nothing like "static 10%" in this case.
|
|
Aidonis Heideran
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 20:22:00 -
[511]
Oes Noes you can't do all-round tank with only upping 3 res's anymore? BOO HOO. Notice the fact that you want to ALL ROUND tank for FOUR res with only THREE buffs?
|
Elve Sorrow
Amarr Game-Over Insurgency
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 20:25:00 -
[512]
Originally by: Dlardrageth
So, please, tell us again, CCP Zulupark, what was that game's name you were writing about? So much for step one in buffing Amarr... I'm sure especially the Zealot needed a resist nerf real badly...
Obviously he's talking about tech1 ships.
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 20:26:00 -
[513]
Originally by: Elmicker I've had a chance to play with this on sisi now.
Pulled out a tri-hardened megathron and hype a couple of times each.
Raped by an abaddon.
Stuck EANMs on and it was performing exactly the same as the tri-hardened setup does on TQ.
Congratulations zulupark, you've made tri-hardeners obsolete.
Exaclty!
Exaclty the thing I predicted and any one using brain have noticed. Someoen that cannot notice that this would happen should not be doing this job, sorry but its true.
This change made the problem WORSE because now when i am flying my amarr battleship i will 100% sure to be facing EANM tanks. This change only droped one fit possibility out of window and praises more the fittign that created the whole problem to start.
------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Ezekiel Sulastin
Gallente Eve University
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 20:29:00 -
[514]
Edited by: Ezekiel Sulastin on 31/01/2008 20:30:19
Originally by: Elmicker I've had a chance to play with this on sisi now.
Pulled out a tri-hardened megathron and hype a couple of times each.
Raped by an abaddon.
Stuck EANMs on and it was performing exactly the same as the tri-hardened setup does on TQ.
Congratulations zulupark, you've made tri-hardeners obsolete.
QFT.
Also, on the subject of second-order side effects, nice to see you've made Angel Cartel missions/plexes harder to tank as well, as if it wasn't enough of a pain :)
The issue is Amarr ships and weapons. So fix the Amarr ships and weapons. I know CCP absolutely hates buffing ANYTHING, but in this case it is far easier and has MANY less second-order side effects to just improve the Amarr race itself instead of nerfing everyone.
|
Dlardrageth
Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 20:34:00 -
[515]
Originally by: Elve Sorrow
Obviously he's talking about tech1 ships.
Yeah, would be nice if he could be bothered to state it if he were. The statement (Yes, I fullquoted him) he did make paints a totally flawed picture of the effects of this... mhm... "idea".
|
Nianda SeCann
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 20:41:00 -
[516]
http://www.infinity-universe.com/Infinity/infinity_faq.php#
looking better all the time ain't it lads :)
and oh yeah personal mails threating bans is low ccp, esp as that email address is part of the data protection act
|
GRiMsReAPeR
Amarr Dynamic Industrial Group
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 20:51:00 -
[517]
Edited by: GRiMsReAPeR on 31/01/2008 20:52:31 Look, its simple. Fix the Cap/Powergrid...ESPECIALLY ON THE ABBADON. And mabye even add a damage type to the amarr race...Exp, Kin...doesnt matter which one. You do that, and you won't HAVE to make the lasers stronger. I would at least LOVE to use my rigs/medium slots for something other than powergrid/cap recharge. And for god's sake, LEAVE THE RESISTS ALONE! If a race can't even fit guns that they specially have bonuses for, WTF are you doing? And by not being able to fit them, I mean CAPPING OUT IN 8 MINS!!!!!!!
|
Ishan Mons
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 21:02:00 -
[518]
CCP Fails at math
Jaguar base resistances
- Before changes
Shields EM - 75%, Exp - 60%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 60% Armor EM - 92.5%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 67.5%
- After changes
Shields EM - 75%, Exp - 50%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 60% Armor EM - 90%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 67.5
now they claim that 92.5% to 90% is a 25% increase in damage... but they fail at math
100 damage turns into 7.5 now next patch it will turn into 10(the devs did this backwards they divided the difference by the new value instead of the old value) its... guess what? 33.333 % increase!
all minmatar ships will take 33% more EM damage to armor next patch while other races will take 25% more damage ------------------------ Infrared = heat = thermal Infrared crystals = less therm more EM I FEEL LIKE I'M TAKING CRAZY PILLS! Reach in front of a 10watt CO2 laser some time you'll get it... |
Dristra
Amarr Shadows of the Dead The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 21:07:00 -
[519]
Irony:
People whined about the hp buff.
Now that effective hp is lowered, they also whine.
This thread is just a ****-fest.
My thread that focused on the other changes promised to Amarr in the dev-blog got locked because of this thread, and you know what i think about this thread.
It's great being Amarr isn't it.
Support the introduction of well thought out Amarr solutions!
|
Aidonis Heideran
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 21:12:00 -
[520]
Another Eve-clone...
|
|
Frug
Zenithal Harvest
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 21:14:00 -
[521]
Originally by: Dristra Irony:
People whined about the hp buff.
Now that effective hp is lowered, they also whine.
This thread is just a ****-fest.
My thread that focused on the other changes promised to Amarr in the dev-blog got locked because of this thread, and you know what i think about this thread.
Some people whined about the HP buff.
Other people are whining about this silly sweeping change.
They might not be the same people. Ever think of that?
I for one welcomed the HP buff and think this change is junk. Also, this is not simply an "effective hp is lowered" so don't be stupid.
- - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - - If you think I'm awesome, say BOOO BOOO!! - Ductoris Neat look what I found - Kreul Hey, my marbles |
Aidonis Heideran
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 21:20:00 -
[522]
No you're right it isn't simply "effective hp is lowered" this is "we're acting like babies when our ships get threatened with nerf, whether its good or bad, big or small, and we'll always be looking for justification to make it sound bad."
Not endorsing the sweeping change either, but it's just how so many of you god damn people react to any change by CCP now adays.
|
ragewind
Caldari VersaTech Interstellar Ltd. SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 21:23:00 -
[523]
Originally by: nihlanth
Caldari's role is RANGE... they are not meant to be up close and personal like gallente or amarr or some mimnatar. It makes sense that to compensate for increased range, they should have less sturdy ships.
Mimnatar partly relies off of shield tanking OR armor tanking, but their ships are a little sturdier than Caldari because they rely off of close range combat sometimes.
Gallente have the highest rate of repair while amarr have the highest armor buffer... This makes sense.
range with rockets/HAMS and now torps caldari have short range weapons but shield tank fails for any short range pvp, guess im not meant to pvp
|
Franga
NQX Innovations
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 21:36:00 -
[524]
Think the idea is good. Changes look sensible. Also - I think (personally) that Amarr do quite a bit of damage as it is. We have 2 guys in corp that are amarr only and often end up on the top of the KM. The jerks ... it's more the long range crystals that I think are the problem, but not totally up to it with Amarr stuff.
Originally by: Rachel Vend ... with 100% reliability in most cases ...
General Aesthetics Changes Thread |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 21:46:00 -
[525]
Originally by: ragewind
Originally by: nihlanth
Caldari's role is RANGE... they are not meant to be up close and personal like gallente or amarr or some mimnatar. It makes sense that to compensate for increased range, they should have less sturdy ships.
Mimnatar partly relies off of shield tanking OR armor tanking, but their ships are a little sturdier than Caldari because they rely off of close range combat sometimes.
Gallente have the highest rate of repair while amarr have the highest armor buffer... This makes sense.
range with rockets/HAMS and now torps caldari have short range weapons but shield tank fails for any short range pvp, guess im not meant to pvp
No, shield tanking does not fail in short range PvP. It is different not weaker.
|
Ed Gein
lolcat incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 21:47:00 -
[526]
Originally by: Chronos VIII Sorry Zulu, but to me you havent really put much thought into this "boost". It doesnt adress any amarr problems but stealth boosts minmatar Chronos
shhhh, no one is supposed to notice that --------------------------------------------------------------------- What do you call the person that brings a gun to a knife fight?
The Winner. |
CamelKnight
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 21:53:00 -
[527]
I just want to know: are you stupid? I mean, I don't see NERFING EVERY SHIP as a BOOST to Amarr. Perhaps because it's NOT A BOOST.
One of my chars is 50+m sp. You just turned it into nothing. I might aswell start over as one of the real races with real damage and real defences. Or better yet. I might be better off quiting this game as the developers clearly have water for a brain.
|
Danjira Ryuujin
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 21:58:00 -
[528]
Originally by: CamelKnight
One of my chars is 50+m sp. You just turned it into nothing.
lol
Amarr - Annoying the Eve Community since 2005 |
Dlardrageth
Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 21:59:00 -
[529]
Originally by: CamelKnight [...] I might be better off quiting this game as the developers clearly have water for a brain.
Can I have your stuff as donation for E-Uni? Need to finance a "Projectile setups for Amarr pilots" class now...
|
DeadDuck
Amarr Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 22:00:00 -
[530]
I have to say that I went to sissi and really didnt like the changes... the tank is all messed now and I can predict a general EANM abuse again, also this might lead to a general "speed tank" route.
I only fly amarr ships and between this "boost" and the present status I prefer the current situation. If you really want to boost amarr reduce the PG requirements on some of their weapons.
________________ God is my Wingman |
|
Nianda SeCann
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 22:01:00 -
[531]
Originally by: Dlardrageth
Originally by: CamelKnight [...] I might be better off quiting this game as the developers clearly have water for a brain.
Can I have your stuff as donation for E-Uni? Need to finance a "Projectile setups for Amarr pilots" class now...
and there is your cap fix
|
Kon sama
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 22:11:00 -
[532]
Originally by: ragewind
Originally by: nihlanth
Caldari's role is RANGE... they are not meant to be up close and personal like gallente or amarr or some mimnatar. It makes sense that to compensate for increased range, they should have less sturdy ships.
Mimnatar partly relies off of shield tanking OR armor tanking, but their ships are a little sturdier than Caldari because they rely off of close range combat sometimes.
Gallente have the highest rate of repair while amarr have the highest armor buffer... This makes sense.
range with rockets/HAMS and now torps caldari have short range weapons but shield tank fails for any short range pvp, guess im not meant to pvp
thats why caldari does less dps then other races. and now they need a weaker tank too?
|
Cailais
Amarr VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 22:13:00 -
[533]
Originally by: CamelKnight I just want to know: are you stupid? I mean, I don't see NERFING EVERY SHIP as a BOOST to Amarr. Perhaps because it's NOT A BOOST.
One of my chars is 50+m sp. You just turned it into nothing. I might aswell start over as one of the real races with real damage and real defences. Or better yet. I might be better off quiting this game as the developers clearly have water for a brain.
Cool - if you can be so good as to transfer your 50mil SP char to me, along with all of his stuff that would be excellent.
C.
Improved Low Sec Idea!! |
nihlanth
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 22:14:00 -
[534]
Edited by: nihlanth on 31/01/2008 22:15:21 Yes, their time is up. And no, they dont do less dps, when you realize that kinetic dmg is the best against all t2 armor tanks.
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 22:31:00 -
[535]
Originally by: nihlanth Edited by: nihlanth on 31/01/2008 22:15:21 Yes, their time is up. And no, they dont do less dps, when you realize that kinetic dmg is the best against all t2 armor tanks.
all except the astarte :)
------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Dristra
Amarr Shadows of the Dead The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 22:54:00 -
[536]
Originally by: Aidonis Heideran No you're right it isn't simply "effective hp is lowered" this is "we're acting like babies when our ships get threatened with nerf, whether its good or bad, big or small, and we'll always be looking for justification to make it sound bad."
Not endorsing the sweeping change either, but it's just how so many of you god damn people react to any change by CCP now adays.
Yea, sort of the reply i was thinking about, thanks :D
It's great being Amarr isn't it.
Support the introduction of well thought out Amarr solutions!
|
Phrixus Zephyr
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 23:02:00 -
[537]
Edited by: Phrixus Zephyr on 31/01/2008 23:08:06 Underlying problem, reiterated for the slow.
The resistance change damages all tanks, helps Amarr only slightly, and gives Minmatar a welcome damage boost. Its the EANM change all over again. You completly remove any boost to the Amarr race by damaging one of their greatest strengths. Tanking. Amazingly, Amarr ships take EM damage from Amarr and Minmatar ships aswell.
It's not as if there is anything particulaly wrong with Amarr damage if you actually spent the time to skill in the race. The problem is the broken ships and certain rediculous cap issues.
Anyone been back handed by an Abbadon or 'geddon recently and thought "Yo, Amarr damage is well rubbish" I dont think so.
.
Maybe resistences do need tweaking, my problem is selling this as 'fixing part of the amarr problem' when it really has little to do with it as its a blanket change on all ships.
It was the same with EANM and 'dictors. Its picking out one ship or one race and saying "This ship/race is effected by this attribute" and then changing said attribute in all ships or classes without actually doing the leg work to find out how it effects everything else.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 23:06:00 -
[538]
Originally by: Dlardrageth
Originally by: CamelKnight [...] I might be better off quiting this game as the developers clearly have water for a brain.
Can I have your stuff as donation for E-Uni? Need to finance a "Projectile setups for Amarr pilots" class now...
Can I suggest some etiquette class for starter? and diplomacy?
It seem that half of EVE players need them.
|
gavhriel
Amarr Dark Blade Incorporated Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 23:20:00 -
[539]
I think it's a good change and a step towards balance. So what if lots of people whine about their own tanks being nerfed? (you can still choose the way you fit your ship, but as it is now...lasers are only good against people that ignore the existance of EM dmg in this game)
One module i would like to see nerfed is Damage control :) it should only give resistances to structure. (maybe more than 60%) (there is no other module that affects effective hp so much in pvp as this one, it's almost a requirement for a pvp setup, especially in gangs...where effective hp matters a lot more than the ammount of armour you can repair)
... and no, shiled tanks wont be so much affected about more exmplosive damage being dealt to them in pvp (they aren;t used for many other reasons than that). A solution to improve shield tanks in pvp would be maybe to further incrise the ammount of shield repaired..at the cost of capacitor, ofc.
|
BABARR
PARABELUM-Project
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 23:22:00 -
[540]
Edited by: BABARR on 31/01/2008 23:25:38
Quote: I have to say that I went to sissi and really didnt like the changes... the tank is all messed now and I can predict a general EANM abuse again, also this might lead to a general "speed tank" route.
I only fly amarr ships and between this "boost" and the present status I prefer the current situation. If you really want to boost amarr reduce the PG requirements on some of their weapons.
Yup, true. I really wonder if zulupark playing the same game as us...
One of the "amarr problem" is they don't actually have a decent PVE BS. Make the apoc whith launcher like a sacrilege and it will be ok.
Quote: So what if lots of people whine about their own tanks being nerfed? (you can still choose the way you fit your ship, but as it is now...lasers are only good against people that ignore the existance of EM dmg in this game)
The EM resist is not the bigest one on a lot of pvp armor tanked ship ...
"Si vis pacem, parabellum" |
|
Gavin Darklighter
THE FINAL STAND
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 23:30:00 -
[541]
Funny thing is, even on TQ, a Ex/Kn/Th active hardner + damage control T2 tank ends up with EM being the worst resist. I wonder how many people will switch to an EANM tank after this change and end up with MORE EM resist than they have now on live.
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 23:44:00 -
[542]
Originally by: Gavin Darklighter Funny thing is, even on TQ, a Ex/Kn/Th active hardner + damage control T2 tank ends up with EM being the worst resist. I wonder how many people will switch to an EANM tank after this change and end up with MORE EM resist than they have now on live.
No, its ex unless its an Amarran ship.
|
Aidonis Heideran
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 23:44:00 -
[543]
Originally by: Phrixus Zephyr Edited by: Phrixus Zephyr on 31/01/2008 23:08:06 It's not as if there is anything particulaly wrong with Amarr damage if you actually spent the time to skill in the race. The problem is the broken ships and certain rediculous cap issues.
Anyone been back handed by an Abbadon or 'geddon recently and thought "Yo, Amarr damage is well rubbish" I dont think so.
Maybe resistences do need tweaking, my problem is selling this as 'fixing part of the amarr problem' when it really has little to do with it as its a blanket change on all ships.
Totally agreed.
|
Ranger 1
Amarr Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 23:49:00 -
[544]
Originally by: Dlardrageth Edited by: Dlardrageth on 31/01/2008 21:01:38
Originally by: Elve Sorrow
Obviously he's talking about tech1 ships.
Yeah, would be nice if he could be bothered to state it if he were. The statement (Yes, I fullquoted him) he did make paints a totally flawed picture of the effects of this... mhm... "idea".
Edit: A request to any moderator:
Can you pretty please change the title of this thread? Every time I read the "Some love for the Amarr" title I feel like ganking some random person due to the sheer absurdity of it. It's like someone at CCP tries to deliberately make fun at the expense of the Amarr part of the player base.
Amazingly, all but a select few seem to be able to understand what he was talking about perfectly well.
Hmmm... wonder why?
|
Dlardrageth
Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 23:53:00 -
[545]
Originally by: Aidonis Heideran
Originally by: Phrixus Zephyr Edited by: Phrixus Zephyr on 31/01/2008 23:08:06 It's not as if there is anything particulaly wrong with Amarr damage if you actually spent the time to skill in the race. The problem is the broken ships and certain rediculous cap issues.
Anyone been back handed by an Abbadon or 'geddon recently and thought "Yo, Amarr damage is well rubbish" I dont think so.
Maybe resistences do need tweaking, my problem is selling this as 'fixing part of the amarr problem' when it really has little to do with it as its a blanket change on all ships.
Totally agreed.
/signed
Well except for the part in the original quote about acquiring skills. I still do not think it has to be a prereq for Amarr only to acquire maxed cap-related, ship and weapon skills to make a ship work. When I can make another race's comparable ship work with half the SP investment.
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 23:55:00 -
[546]
Originally by: nihlanth Edited by: nihlanth on 31/01/2008 22:15:21 Yes, their time is up. And no, they dont do less dps, when you realize that kinetic dmg is the best against all t2 armor tanks.
No, its not.
The only t2 racial resist that doesnt hit kinetic is Minmitar. EM and EX both only have one racial resist that hits them.
This means that EM is the lowest or second lowset resist on the following racial ships
Amarr, Gallente, Caldari
And EX is the lowest or second lowest resist on the following racial ships
Gallente, Caldari, Minmitar.
Kin is the lowest or second lowest on
Amarr, Minmitar
Thermal is the lowest or second lowest on
Nothing
|
Rhadamantine
Game Community
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 23:56:00 -
[547]
So motherships also got hit, as they are Tech1.
Just checked, and my EM went from 74.15625% down to 67.69531%
Another ham fisted nerf, to boost something which actually wasn't the issue. Nice work.
Regards. Rhadamantine. |
Aidonis Heideran
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 23:58:00 -
[548]
Oes Noes, your "I Win" button got slightly de-buffed. Dude as long as you're careful (which you should be, this being EVE) and you don't fit it as a freakin Raven (like those EBayers) you'd be fine.
|
Rhadamantine
Game Community
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 00:02:00 -
[549]
Originally by: Aidonis Heideran Oes Noes, your "I Win" button got slightly de-buffed. Dude as long as you're careful (which you should be, this being EVE) and you don't fit it as a freakin Raven (like those EBayers) you'd be fine.
This is an Alt, I wouldn't for one minute let you know my main, or which 'I-Win' Button I am using. (Which is a great joke btw ) But if you did have much of a clue, you would get an Idea from the stats, which mod has affected the EM.
Regards. Rhadamantine. |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 00:03:00 -
[550]
This is a fairly interesting boost for amarr against capital armor tanks.
|
|
El Alamein
Destructive Influence Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 00:04:00 -
[551]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Originally by: Elmicker
Hahaha, joke, right? Unless you have (contrary to the dev blog) changed fitting costs, it's still going to take 2-3x PG mods to get a decent fleet fit out of any one of the BSes. The tier 2 BS is still utter kack due to it only really having 1 bonus and no tank OR gank bonus. I could go on, but i'm not qualified to talk on amarr ships, i don't fly them often. I'll leave it to goumindong. He'll be along shortly.
You're talking about a very limited way of fitting a ship. Also, I said in the blog we were looking at some Amarr ships. There will be a blog shortly about how/what ships we've balanced.
Amarr needs a Fleet BS that isnt ******* gimped. every other race gets a tier 2 or 3 battleship that doesn't need 2-3 fitting mods or ancillary current routers to get a full rack of long range t2 guns.
|
Rhadamantine
Game Community
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 00:05:00 -
[552]
Originally by: Goumindong This is a fairly interesting boost for amarr against capital armor tanks.
Damn..... but I thought everyone Omni tanked.
Regards. Rhadamantine. |
DrAtomic
Atomic Heroes Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 00:17:00 -
[553]
Ok, I've slept this one over for a night and talked it over with my corp mates and we keep coming to the same conclusion. This nerf is bigger then the carrier nerf and very short term visioned. Now it's easy to say that without coming up with another solution which would indeed oompf Amarr.
The issue identified by CCP is that the amount of damage that originates from EM sourced weapons is absorbed too much.
An under lying issue is that armor tanks are preffered in PVP over shield tanks.
The reason behind armor tanks being favored over shield tanks lays in the fact that to fit the best shield tank you'll need to sacrifice ewar utility such as warp scramblers. Many people approach there ships as if they are goign to fly it solo even in fleets and therefor want at least one point onboard; doing such would require sacrificing defense so the choice falls to armor tanking over shield tanking (sensor boosters are another common reason to sacrifice tank).
The solution CCP came up with is to lower all base EM resists on armor and in order to maintain balance from a resistance point of view the same amount from shieldtanks.
The results of that approach are: 1. The solution is entirely focussed on pvp, however there are plenty of three way damage type NPCs in the game that are balanced around those resists being as they are. This solution 2. Special complexes such as DED and Exploration plexes have various EM traps in them which all in turn are very deadly allready and balanced on the very edge of what setups are able to deal with often even these are balanced in such a way that a logistic ship is taken into account with the amount of damage dealt (i.e. Thor torpedo's doing 180k base damage versus highest possible sig). These environments often deal at least two other damage types as well and in pletorea. 3. All ships will have an EM hole in their setups now, especially with untanked shields. Mathmatically EM allready was the best resist to do damage against, this is further increased. It will see an increase in EM weapon usage as is intended by the change on SISI. 4. Haulers and freighters and other ships that are untanked by nature of their role will become increasingly easy prey. 5. The proposed change will actually benefit Minmatar more then Amarr given the lower base explosive shield resist; thus reaching armor faster for armor tanks and vaporizing shields quicker due to lower maximum explosive resists. Gallente will feel the pain from this one particularly. 6. From a PVP perspective omni tanking is not just encouraged it is made into a cookie cutter must have fitting if you are going to tank, other forms of tanking combinations leave too big a hole even partial omni tank (with only one EANM or one Invul field) is not even viable anymore because it leaves a big hole. 7. Ships that can't fit dual rep, base resist mod, 2x eanm and a plate will be further driven into nano setups or not being flown in pvp at all anymore. 8. This what is promoted as a boost is nothing more then the biggest nerf to hit Eve by far. And your customers notice. Changing in this manor will drive customers away from your product how good your intentions may be. For a prime example see Dark Age of Camelot.
So is there another way to accomplish exactly the same thing but with the list of side effects listed above (some may be intended but those aside). There certainly is.
In one of your examples you said that the aim was to have a 25% damage increase from EM damage sources.
Then change the EM damage output of EM weapon sources by 25%, or just start off with Amarr, maybe by introducing a crystal that does pure EM damage but has 25% higer raw dps then a mixed damage type crystal.
By taking this approach you have a long term solution, a solution that you can prenerf and adjust as further needed and a solution that doesnt effect the entire balance of the game both NPC wise and PVP wise.
Make changes through love not nerfs!
- - -
Originally by: CCP Wrangler If you can understand our goal, disagree with our solution and offer a solution that is equal or better your opinion has a better chance of being heard...
|
Aidonis Heideran
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 00:18:00 -
[554]
Haha Rhada I'm just being a jackass. But no worries eh?
@ El Alamein: Agreed. I've tried fitting fleet sniper remote repper BS's in-game and in EFT with all level V. (though admittedly never tried it with an Abaddon in-game) Compared to the other races it's a nightmare to even attempt it. (With setups of decent lowslot usage that isn't 50%+ directed towards PG boosting, i.e. with actual damage mods and tank mods that you're supposed to use, you're looking at about 6 guns, 7 if lucky, out of the total 8. Other races have much easier time, requiring 0-1 PG mods. And this is on an Apoc. Geddon doesn't even come close.)
|
Aidonis Heideran
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 00:26:00 -
[555]
Nice summary DrAtomic. (Whines about you being a Phalanx member though) Then again, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" sure CCP isn't my enemy, but this nerf takes them damn close. And the crystal thing might work, but I think fixing cap and PG (which possibly leads to freeing up bonus slots for many amarr ships, which can also be tended to) should be done first, with new ammo as a secondary option. Personally I don't think the problem is entirely DPS, but rather that to get the DPS we can't have gimped ships which aren't able to fit the required modules or use them effectively.
|
DrAtomic
Atomic Heroes Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 00:41:00 -
[556]
Originally by: Aidonis Heideran Personally I don't think the problem is entirely DPS, but rather that to get the DPS we can't have gimped ships which aren't able to fit the required modules or use them effectively.
In all honesty I agree with you there; if they fixed fitting requirements and cap sustainability for Amarr then a lot of the Amarr issue is resolved. EM is allready the most gimped resist in most setups people fly. If you look on killboards you'll find lots of Amarr pilots on top as DPS dealers (that is net dps not raw dps) allready; their problem comes when handling multiple targets plus they often required a sacrifice to fit their weapons. The real question is however are they achieving those top dps dealer spots doing EM damage or through another damage type?
Basicly solution wise I went with CCP their assesment that not enough EM damage is coming through due to it being absorded too much but took an easier approach to solving that statement without unbalancing the grounds on which Eve was build both NPC and PVP wise.
Having slept the anger and frustration off for a night helped as well, can you imagine the flames a none dev would have gotten if he'd proposed this as a solution on the forums, that is if he would have gotten any attention at all. - - -
Originally by: CCP Wrangler If you can understand our goal, disagree with our solution and offer a solution that is equal or better your opinion has a better chance of being heard...
|
Ogul
Caldari ZiTek Deepspace Explorations Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 00:49:00 -
[557]
Originally by: DrAtomic
Then change the EM damage output of EM weapon sources by 25%, or just start off with Amarr, maybe by introducing a crystal that does pure EM damage but has 25% higer raw dps then a mixed damage type crystal.
As a Caldari pilot I resist this notion vehemently.
--- This is a war declaration, issued from your alt corp. It is used to gank people in high sec. |
BishiBosh
Caldari MASS
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 00:56:00 -
[558]
Edited by: BishiBosh on 01/02/2008 01:02:26 Edited by: BishiBosh on 01/02/2008 01:02:00 Edited by: BishiBosh on 01/02/2008 00:59:50 Edited by: BishiBosh on 01/02/2008 00:57:05 Hi zulu do u actually read this **** about what ur doin to the game and what the nerfs mean to mom pilots ? ... i aint a mom pilot but i do remember when they were scary and thats what moms were meant to be, so now u have nerfed them,,
and i know personally of 3 or 4 mom ship pilots that have said feck it im chucking eve and they have like 4 accounts each small peanuts to ccp but long term hardcore eve players who loved the game so much they left communitys which i know ,,which played other games and they left that to play eve and u have just killed the game for them ,
id like u to know this as ur doing stuff , and from what ive seen since u came along u dont know wtf ur doing >? ,,,, for all the other guys who wish to say can i have their stuff ,
feck off and grow up , zulu i hope u read this and understand what ur doin to the old school players which i know and are so disgusted they dont even want to post they have moms and are just chuckin the game ,
reason they aint postin is cos they cant be arsed listening to the ****s sayin can i have ur stuff ffs ,, so i thought i post on thier behalf ,
hope u read this cos u are feckin the game for lots of my friends , cos of ur nerfs u seem to have no idea what ur doing
|
Rastigan
Caldari Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 01:10:00 -
[559]
Originally by: DrAtomic
Then change the EM damage output of EM weapon sources by 25%, or just start off with Amarr, maybe by introducing a crystal that does pure EM damage but has 25% higer raw dps then a mixed damage type crystal.
That works , or make a crystal that does primarily Thermal damage...
Hybrids have roughly 80-90% of the same cap usage as Energy weapons(counting the Amarr bonus) and have no choice for damage types either, and these hybrid weapons work amazingly well..
You are going about the situation in the wrong way... Most Amarr ships have 1 less true bonus per level with the cap usage bonus.. This is NOT an EM damage type issue this is a 'we need to make this gun worth the bonus' issue.
|
Mag's
MASS Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 01:13:00 -
[560]
Edited by: Mag''s on 01/02/2008 01:13:37
Originally by: DrAtomic In all honesty I agree with you there; if they fixed fitting requirements and cap sustainability for Amarr then a lot of the Amarr issue is resolved. EM is allready the most gimped resist in most setups people fly. If you look on killboards you'll find lots of Amarr pilots on top as DPS dealers (that is net dps not raw dps) already; their problem comes when handling multiple targets plus they often required a sacrifice to fit their weapons. The real question is however are they achieving those top dps dealer spots doing EM damage or through another damage type?
Basicly solution wise I went with CCP their assesment that not enough EM damage is coming through due to it being absorded too much but took an easier approach to solving that statement without unbalancing the grounds on which Eve was build both NPC and PVP wise.
Having slept the anger and frustration off for a night helped as well, can you imagine the flames a none dev would have gotten if he'd proposed this as a solution on the forums, that is if he would have gotten any attention at all.
This is exactly why this nerfboost is a bad idea. It tackles a none issue, this seems to be a growing list from Zulu.
Most Armor tanks have EM as the lowest resist, the only real benefactor from this nerfboost is Minmatar.
Why not address the real issues with Amarr, instead of swinging that nut cr4cking sledgehammer on something that's not needed.
Cap problems. Fitting problems. etc etc
Mag's
Originally by: Avernus One of these days, the realization that MASS is no longer significant will catch up with you. |
|
Tessikhet
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 01:13:00 -
[561]
Let's play out a chain of logic.
Minmatar outdamage Amarr because, due to the wide use of omni-tanking setups, explosive damage is on the whole more effective than EM damage.
We will reduce EM resists on armor in order to increase the effectivness of EM damage relative to explosive damage.
EM and explosive damage now have parity.
The current (questionable) degree of balance between armor tanking and shield tanking setups has been disturbed. We must restore that balance.
We will reduce the explosive resist on shields in order to maintain the current balance between shield and armor tanking setups.
Explosive damage is now once more superior to EM damage. Buffs/Nerfs cancel out for no net change.
This is a waste of programmer time.
|
Katana Seiko
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 01:17:00 -
[562]
Edited by: Katana Seiko on 01/02/2008 01:22:33 Well, give these Amarr a little love - but give their "i-win" button an other little *****: How comes Frequency Crystals don't break while in use? Only the advanced or faction ones tend to break... That's a little unfair towards the other races.
Hey, how comes the word c.rack gets censored? It's just an other word for a flaw in i.e. a crystal... Used like "fatigue *****", "***** initiation", "hairline *****"... Come on! --- This is your Captain speaking. Thank you for flying with our spaceline. Please remain seated until the ship has completely burned out. Thank you. |
Frug
Zenithal Harvest
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 01:17:00 -
[563]
Originally by: Tessikhet Let's play out a chain of logic.
Minmatar outdamage Amarr because, due to the wide use of omni-tanking setups, explosive damage is on the whole more effective than EM damage.
We will reduce EM resists on armor in order to increase the effectivness of EM damage relative to explosive damage.
EM and explosive damage now have parity.
The current (questionable) degree of balance between armor tanking and shield tanking setups has been disturbed. We must restore that balance.
We will reduce the explosive resist on shields in order to maintain the current balance between shield and armor tanking setups.
Explosive damage is now once more superior to EM damage. Buffs/Nerfs cancel out for no net change.
This is a waste of programmer time.
No kidding.
Someone please explain to me again why they need to nerf shield tanking with this change?
I do not look forward to fighting minmatar with caldari after this.
- - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - - If you think I'm awesome, say BOOO BOOO!! - Ductoris Neat look what I found - Kreul Hey, my marbles |
lt flaps
MASS
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 01:23:00 -
[564]
sucks! Nurf after nurf. Your alienating old schools players that bring new peeps to game like me and in turn my son and mates.
It sucks goal posts moved all the time what are nubbins like me meant to do as we aim for something then it gets nerfed.
Sort it out CCP.
|
Aidonis Heideran
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 01:30:00 -
[565]
Actually for crystals, under the stats it also shows volatility and stuff the same as faction and T2, so they should break as well. Though, I have to say, no crystal has ever broken for me yet, T1 or otherwise (though admittedly I don't use faction/t2 extremely often)
|
Danjira Ryuujin
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 01:48:00 -
[566]
Originally by: lt flaps sucks! Nurf after nurf. Your alienating old schools players that bring new peeps to game like me and in turn my son and mates.
It sucks goal posts moved all the time what are nubbins like me meant to do as we aim for something then it gets nerfed.
Sort it out CCP.
Play what you want to play. The nerf wagon keeps on rollin'. Besides, if you think this resist change is going to seriously affect anyones playstyle, think again.
Amarr - Annoying the Eve Community since 2005 |
Guillame Herschel
Gallente Cheers Restaurant and Bar Coalition Of Empires
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 01:51:00 -
[567]
If CCP insists on changing armor and shield resists to rebalance things so Amarr are more competitive, then do it logically. First of all, shield resists do not need to be changed to accomodate Amarr. Amarr already melt shield tankers like buttah. The two lowest sheild resists are EM/Thermal, but everyone knows this already (except, apparently, Zulupark).
Caldari & Gallente - no change to base T1 armor resists. These two races are not part of the problem, and do not need to be part of any tank-resist solution.
Amarr - Right now they get a bonus to Explosive at the expense of Kinetic. Change this to a Bonus to Explosive at the expense of EM, and a bonus to Kinetic at the expense of Thermal. New armor resists: 50 EM, 20 Exp, 45 Kin, 25 Therm
Minmatar - Right now they get a bonus to EM at the expense of Kinetic. Change it to a bonus to Thermal at the expense of Kinetic. New armor resists: 60 EM, 10 Exp, 25 Kin, 45 Therm
This change allows Amarr to do more EM damage to two races, their own and Minmatar. It also makes more roleplaying sense. I think it also actually accomplishes what Zulupark thinks he wants to do with this change. -- Guile can always trump hardware -- |
Vabjekf
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 01:54:00 -
[568]
Edited by: Vabjekf on 01/02/2008 01:55:26 I just want to hear someone say that this EM resist change will not be considered as part of the 'amarr fix' and will not make the devs think that after this just a few minor ship tweaks will be all thats required. Amarr damage has always been fine, its always been the fitting and cap issues that made them weak. Small changes to certain ships wont cut it, large, drastic changes to all (non khanid) ships is what is required. I don't really care if they want to rebalanced resists or whatever, i just don't want them to pay for it with amarrs saved up karma.
|
Ogul
Caldari ZiTek Deepspace Explorations Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 02:13:00 -
[569]
Originally by: Danjira Ryuujin Besides, if you think this resist change is going to seriously affect anyones playstyle, think again.
One thing it will definitely do is reduce the number of 3 hardener fits in favour of eanm omnitanks. Reducing fitting options ftl.
--- This is a war declaration, issued from your alt corp. It is used to gank people in high sec. |
Thalagar
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 02:33:00 -
[570]
Every Amarr pilot I've heard from seems to be saying they don't need more damage, they need more cap. So maybe instead of changing every ship in the game, CCP could just give Amarr ships more cap?
|
|
Kyle Haque
Solstice Systems Development Concourse The Reckoning.
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 02:36:00 -
[571]
Edited by: Kyle Haque on 01/02/2008 02:44:09
Originally by: Guillame Herschel If CCP insists on changing armor and shield resists to rebalance things so Amarr are more competitive, then do it logically. First of all, shield resists do not need to be changed to accomodate Amarr. Amarr already melt shield tankers like buttah. The two lowest sheild resists are EM/Thermal, but everyone knows this already (except, apparently, Zulupark).
Caldari & Gallente - no change to base T1 armor resists. These two races are not part of the problem, and do not need to be part of any tank-resist solution.
Amarr - Right now they get a bonus to Explosive at the expense of Kinetic. Change this to a Bonus to Explosive at the expense of EM, and a bonus to Kinetic at the expense of Thermal. New armor resists: 50 EM, 20 Exp, 45 Kin, 25 Therm
Minmatar - Right now they get a bonus to EM at the expense of Kinetic. Change it to a bonus to Thermal at the expense of Kinetic. New armor resists: 60 EM, 10 Exp, 25 Kin, 45 Therm
This change allows Amarr to do more EM damage to two races, their own and Minmatar. It also makes more roleplaying sense. I think it also actually accomplishes what Zulupark thinks he wants to do with this change.
So what you have done here is made Minmatar vulerable to Amarr but by adding to the kinetic resist you are harding Amarr farther against Minmatar.... How is this even close to fair?
If you are going to do that you need to move the extra 10% Amarr get on explosive on armor to kinetic. So Amarrs T1 resists are 60% EM / 10% Exp / 35% Kin / 35% Therm. Now everyone has Caldari/Gallente base resist and the game losses flavor....
Seems like you and Zulu are wanting to penlize minmatar for being the racially hardened enemy of amarr just cause they are needing of some love. I don't see one elses T2 resists being touched on their tank but you take allow 33% more damage to minmatar armor tankers from their racial enemies while we still have to shoot at an unchanged high resist on armor?
Honestly playing the shift resistance game is opening up all sorts of problems and kills the diversity that different races ships bring to the game.
Amarr just need to be tweaked slowly so you get it right, first start with fitting requirments for lasers they are stupidly hard to fit on ships no matter what you try to run. Then go onto cap usage and see where you stand.
All this that I have said is just a repeat of what other people in this thread are telling you Zulu.
Edit: Grammar |
Guillame Herschel
Gallente Cheers Restaurant and Bar Coalition Of Empires
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 03:08:00 -
[572]
Originally by: Kyle Haque
So what you have done here is made Minmatar vulerable to Amarr
I just changed which Amarr damage type got a resists boost at the expense of a non-Amarr damage type (relative to the Gallente/Caldari "standard" 60/10/35/35).
Looking at my OP again, I'd say I should have proposed simply moving the -10% resist to EM and not moved any other values around: 50 EM, 20 Exp, 35 Kin, 35 Therm. But that's seems too Gallente/Caldari-ish. Maybe 50/10/45/35?
Quote: I don't see one elses T2 resists being touched on their tank but you take allow 33% more damage to minmatar armor tankers from their racial enemies while we still have to shoot at an unchanged high resist on armor?
EMP and Faction EMP.
-- Guile can always trump hardware -- |
Tarron Sarek
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 03:09:00 -
[573]
Edited by: Tarron Sarek on 01/02/2008 03:11:31
Oh the drama...
It's probably not the best thing to start a post with, but seriously people, get a grip! EVE is a harsh world. Some of you make this look like yet another WoW forums thread.
Ah well, I guess that's why I always proposed a mere -5% EM armor resistance change together with a change in energy consumption bonus, NPC EM shield resistance change (imho very important) and perhaps a slight energy need reduction or damage increase. And not to forget a small change to EANM's (yeah I know, people would go on the rampage).
Overall I'm with DigitalCommunist on this one. It's a start, and it's not as game-breaking as some try to make it look. Most importantly, test it! Try it out and come with some arguments, instead of 'the heavens are falling' statements. I'd be interested in how many actually did some research and calculated base laser damage output? Very few here seem to really know the facts.
Then some quotes:
Quote: Amarr damage has always been fine, its always been the fitting and cap issues
I guess that's why people were crying out for damage type changes on crystals? Quote: it makes the second highest damage mod drones û explosive drones even more viable vs. all enemies
Explosive drones are the third highest, or second lowest, damage mod drones.
However, I guess one thing that Zulupark really missed is to clearly differentiate between Amarr PvE and PvP issues.
EM never was a bad choice for PvP. Well, except for the drones, but reason here is lowest damage mod, not the damage type. Concerning PvP it's more a fitting and energy consumption issue. People crying for other damage types or complaining about laser damage most likely came from the PvE camp, where too many NPC types sport high EM resistances, both shield and armor. The former of which being unnecessary and putting Amarr at a disadvantage due to limited options in choice of dmg type.
So again I'd like to throw the following suggestions into the fray: * 18% bonus for EANM2 * -5% reduction for armor EM resistance * Reduced NPC EM shield resistances * -7,5% instead of -10% laser energy usage. Accordingly reduced base activation costs. This makes it much easier for non lvl5 pilots to not run out of cap. * Tweaked fitting costs or powergrid values, so that mid sized (focused, mega, etc) weapons plus a basic tank fit more easily * Perhaps a 5% damagge increase on lasers, although this might overpower Amarr ships with damage bonus. Alternatively a 5% reduction in laser cap usage. Probably much more viable.
Small tweaks, but combined it would probably work wonders.
Nevertheless, thumbs up for having the balls of comming up with a change after all. Just order some new T2 flamesuits.
___________________________________ - Balance is power, guard it well -
Please stop using the word 'nerf' Nothing spells 'incompetence' or 'don't take me serious' like those four letters |
Gamesguy
Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 03:23:00 -
[574]
Originally by: Kon sama
Originally by: ragewind
Originally by: nihlanth
Caldari's role is RANGE... they are not meant to be up close and personal like gallente or amarr or some mimnatar. It makes sense that to compensate for increased range, they should have less sturdy ships.
Mimnatar partly relies off of shield tanking OR armor tanking, but their ships are a little sturdier than Caldari because they rely off of close range combat sometimes.
Gallente have the highest rate of repair while amarr have the highest armor buffer... This makes sense.
range with rockets/HAMS and now torps caldari have short range weapons but shield tank fails for any short range pvp, guess im not meant to pvp
thats why caldari does less dps then other races. and now they need a weaker tank too?
Caldari does NOT do less dps than other races. Cerb with Hams outdps all amarr hacs, raven's dps is 2nd only to the gallente blasterboats.
Shield tanking is very viable in gang pvp, you just have to know how to fit.
All I see in this thread is a lot of caldari mission runners whining because it might take them 2 extra minutes to complete a level 4 mission.
|
Crexa
g guild Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 03:40:00 -
[575]
Edited by: Crexa on 01/02/2008 03:44:38 Edited by: Crexa on 01/02/2008 03:41:40 Fix Amarr by reducing resists to EM by 5 not 10% across the board shields, armor and structure, reduce laser cap usage by 5% (and/or) create new mid slot mod for laser energy usage, replace obsolete bonuses to Amarr ships.
And perhaps a slightly larger drone bay and bandwidth
About all i can suggest, as surely most has been said already.
|
Ogul
Caldari ZiTek Deepspace Explorations Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 03:42:00 -
[576]
Edited by: Ogul on 01/02/2008 03:43:27
Originally by: Gamesguy
Caldari does NOT do less dps than other races. Cerb with Hams outdps all amarr hacs, raven's dps is 2nd only to the gallente blasterboats.
Last time I checked the Sacrilege had the same number of launcher hardpoints and a more useful damage bonus for HAMs. Oh, and drones...
--- This is a war declaration, issued from your alt corp. It is used to gank people in high sec. |
Ogul
Caldari ZiTek Deepspace Explorations Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 04:02:00 -
[577]
Maybe this has been answered before, if it was, please point me to the relevant post...
How exactly are the efficiencies of two different damage types on two different tanking philosophies related so that when increasing one the other has to be increased too?
--- This is a war declaration, issued from your alt corp. It is used to gank people in high sec. |
Becka Call
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 04:18:00 -
[578]
Zulupark;
First the good news: Congratulations, You've actually tried something and put it out for test on the test server.
Now for the bad news. This armor change is complete fail.
Here is your assignement:
Go back and read all of the the Amarr are broken threads from the past 6 months. Then read them again. Then come and explain in a dev blog how the game mechanics changes have been detrimental to Amarr. Your player base has made some very good analysis; however for some reason CCP has this weird idea that the only thing broken about Amarr is the armor resists. The EANM changes were because of this; Did that work? Why do you think that another armor change will? I've heard it said that insanity is doing the same thing over again and expecting a different result.
And here I am really ambivalent. I have some suggestions on boosting Amarr without blowing the balance out. But I find that suggesting fixes in any thread on this subject is not going to be taken seriously by CCP. You're going to do what you want. You don't care what the playerbase thinks about this. You just know that the problem is all armor resists. If I see some better discussion on this than the last time Zulupark "answered" one of my posts maybe I will post a suggestion.
If anyone wants background: Post explaining
|
Shigawahhhhh
Caldari Metalworks THE INTERSTELLAR FOUNDRY
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 04:30:00 -
[579]
I still can't get past nerfing shield to help amarr...that doesn't even make sence...and if shield and armour were balanced to each other everyone would still fit armour but cuase all your utility stuff goes in mids. The two are not balanced to each other so please leave shield resists out of this if you go with this solution. But nerfing everyone's resists to make amarr right doesn't make sence to me anyway...
|
Cpt Abestos
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 04:44:00 -
[580]
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.
|
|
Blutreiter
Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 04:48:00 -
[581]
Originally by: DigitalCommunist ...
I'd also like to suggest the following ideas for making shield tanks more common in EVE:
- introduce new HIGH SLOT warp disruptor that requires more powergrid and cap, but gives -2 at 25% more range - make one for frigate, one for cruiser and one for battleship - switch the medium and low slots of the Muninn around; atm both minnie HACs armor tank, and terribly - but at least the vaga has speed - consider giving shield modules the highest overloading bonuses - make low slot signal amps comparable to mid slot sensor booster - consider adding natural shield recharge to the boost amount and giving PDUs a lower HP bonus but higher recharge bonus
Sensor booster and warp disruptor are pretty necessary for pvp ships, so if you can solve that its going a long way. Minmatar ships should be able to do both, but the majority are still armor tankers which I feel is wrong.
Anyways, good changes.
The Amarr specific stuff would have to do with reducing Medium Beam grid usage a lot. They should be an easy fit on Retribution and possible on Crusader with one MAPC fitted. Medium Pulse fittings are annoying too, but not as much. ...
High Slot Warp Disruptor?
Damn good idea now that I think about it actually.
This would fix a lot of medslot issues with Amarr PvP ships, or some of the more "ganky" ships. (As well as some other races ships.
For example, it would make a Retribution a viable choice to fly in combat! (Fitting likely requires you to downgrade your guns but hey...)
WANT!
Cogito ergo boom - I think i'll blow sh*t up
Originally by: CCP Explorer I know we have said this before, but this time we really mean itÖ
|
Julius Romanus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 04:52:00 -
[582]
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.
If we're completely changing up Amarr from top to bottom, this is the exact way I'd do it.
|
Daan Sai
HAZCON Inc Knights Of Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 04:53:00 -
[583]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
That's the whole point, to make EM drones and EM missiles useful again.
Ah, so it isn't an Amarr boost at all. Doh! Then why name the dev blog "Amarr oomph and other similar words". You are your own worst enemy, you know that don't you?
Call the devblog something like "EM and EXP damage resist changes: boost for EM and EXP weapons" and you avoid the whole Amarr hot button. This affects everyone, even Galente.
Then announce a separate "Amarr boost!!!!" devblog where you actually *do* address Amarr issues like ship design and fitting/Ewar.
Also can you clarify how this is going to affect NPC resists and weapons?
A *lot* of unnecessary aggro could be avoided by being more careful on how you present things!
|
Julius Romanus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 04:55:00 -
[584]
Originally by: Daan Sai
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
That's the whole point, to make EM drones and EM missiles useful again.
Ah, so it isn't an Amarr boost at all. Doh! Then why name the dev blog "Amarr oomph and other similar words". You are your own worst enemy, you know that don't you?
Call the devblog something like "EM and EXP damage resist changes: boost for EM and EXP weapons" and you avoid the whole Amarr hot button. This affects everyone, even Galente.
Then announce a separate "Amarr boost!!!!" devblog where you actually *do* address Amarr issues like ship design and fitting/Ewar.
Also can you clarify how this is going to affect NPC resists and weapons?
A *lot* of unnecessary aggro could be avoided by being more careful on how you present things!
In this case, not really. Since it's you and your like choosing to read what's been said in your own reationary way.
|
Daan Sai
HAZCON Inc Knights Of Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 04:58:00 -
[585]
Also, if you want to boost EM damage for EM drones and missiles (and presumably lasers and EMP/fusion etc) then boost them. Don't change Explosive resists it that isn't your stated aim - out of a 'sense of balance'. If the game is already out of balance, doing that just ensures that imbalance is preserved.
Boost EM damage, fine. leave EXP exactly where it is and you will be a step closer to your stated aim.
|
Kuseka Adama
Gallente Paxton Industries Paxton Federation
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 05:05:00 -
[586]
Here is my question
On every other major ship i can look up the em resists on shields is near zero or at zero.
While on the vagabond the suggested resists are OBSCENE
Broken on the highest order when combined with the speed tanking methods employed by this particular ship. So tell me again why nerf all resists when its quite frankly just a few ships that need their resists brought in line with everyone else?
|
Kon sama
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 05:31:00 -
[587]
Originally by: Blutreiter
Originally by: DigitalCommunist ...
I'd also like to suggest the following ideas for making shield tanks more common in EVE:
- introduce new HIGH SLOT warp disruptor that requires more powergrid and cap, but gives -2 at 25% more range - make one for frigate, one for cruiser and one for battleship - switch the medium and low slots of the Muninn around; atm both minnie HACs armor tank, and terribly - but at least the vaga has speed - consider giving shield modules the highest overloading bonuses - make low slot signal amps comparable to mid slot sensor booster - consider adding natural shield recharge to the boost amount and giving PDUs a lower HP bonus but higher recharge bonus
Sensor booster and warp disruptor are pretty necessary for pvp ships, so if you can solve that its going a long way. Minmatar ships should be able to do both, but the majority are still armor tankers which I feel is wrong.
Anyways, good changes.
The Amarr specific stuff would have to do with reducing Medium Beam grid usage a lot. They should be an easy fit on Retribution and possible on Crusader with one MAPC fitted. Medium Pulse fittings are annoying too, but not as much. ...
High Slot Warp Disruptor?
Damn good idea now that I think about it actually.
This would fix a lot of medslot issues with Amarr PvP ships, or some of the more "ganky" ships. (As well as some other races ships.
For example, it would make a Retribution a viable choice to fly in combat! (Fitting likely requires you to downgrade your guns but hey...)
WANT!
in my opinion every "attacking" module should be highslot.
this means missiles, turrets, damps, scram, web, ecm, nos/neut, tracking disruptors.
think this would have reduced a lot of solowtfbbqpwn ships. instead lots of these mods have been nerfed boosted and nerfed again
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 05:44:00 -
[588]
Edited by: Tarron Sarek on 01/02/2008 05:46:40
Originally by: Kon sama how about just think logicly. if they want more damage give them more damage, or is that just silly?
It is silly, because lasers don't generally do less damage. So instead of too little in some cases and ok in other cases, it would be ok in some cases and too much in others.
The problem with lasers is the immensely varying performance, especially in PvE.
Judging lasers based on the occasions where they are really crappy, like for example against Guristas, results in a false picture. I'm sure no Amarr pilot will complain if he goes up against Sansha or Bloodraiders, because in these cases lasers are very good.
It's hard to find some kind of middle ground. The fact that only some Amarr ships have damage bonuses doesn't make things easier, as that's another 25-33% diffference.
___________________________________ - Balance is power, guard it well -
Please stop using the word 'nerf' Nothing spells 'incompetence' or 'don't take me serious' like those four letters |
Tarron Sarek
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 05:52:00 -
[589]
Originally by: Cpt Abestos 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
So basically you want them to be overpowered like in the old days? Next to losing their racial trait. Well done.
___________________________________ - Balance is power, guard it well -
Please stop using the word 'nerf' Nothing spells 'incompetence' or 'don't take me serious' like those four letters |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 05:57:00 -
[590]
Originally by: Elmicker I've had a chance to play with this on sisi now.
Pulled out a tri-hardened megathron and hype a couple of times each.
Raped by an abaddon.
Stuck EANMs on and it was performing exactly the same as the tri-hardened setup does on TQ.
Congratulations zulupark, you've made tri-hardeners obsolete.
Maybe you should try a hyperion, after all abaddon is a tier 3 battleship. Amarr pvp Vids: Inq - I Inq - II |
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 06:01:00 -
[591]
Originally by: Dristra Irony:
People whined about the hp buff.
Now that effective hp is lowered, they also whine.
This thread is just a ****-fest.
My thread that focused on the other changes promised to Amarr in the dev-blog got locked because of this thread, and you know what i think about this thread.
Lets just post our ideas here instead, Zulu wanted ideas posted here anyways. But hard to ignore all the whining.
Amarr pvp Vids: Inq - I Inq - II |
Tarron Sarek
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 06:04:00 -
[592]
Originally by: Elmicker I've had a chance to play with this on sisi now.
Pulled out a tri-hardened megathron and hype a couple of times each.
Raped by an abaddon.
Stuck EANMs on and it was performing exactly the same as the tri-hardened setup does on TQ.
Congratulations zulupark, you've made tri-hardeners obsolete.
This is a joke, right? It performed exactly the same against the Amarr ship. But at a tradeoff, which is worse resistances on the other resistances. Very one dimensional and short-sighted 'tests'.
___________________________________ - Balance is power, guard it well -
Please stop using the word 'nerf' Nothing spells 'incompetence' or 'don't take me serious' like those four letters |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 06:21:00 -
[593]
--------------- Amarr Ship Fix Ideas ----------------------
APOC Lets look at the apoc first. Please fix this ship, its horrible and has no real role. Let me kindly remind everyone that tanking-baitship is not a role.
What is amarr missing? To some degree we miss a real T1 mission/ratting battleship. The geddon is not ideal and is very skill intense while the abaddon has serious cap problems in pve and is more of a pvp ship.
Since ccp already scratched the khanid ship while making our T2 battleships (neither our black ops or marauder are khanid) I dont feel it would be odd to remake the apoc into a armor tanking missile platform just like sacrilege.
This would always make sure that amarr atleast have a battleship being able to rat angels and doing angel extravaganza missions independantly of what you decide to do with problematic laser damage type behaviour.
ZEALOT
The Zealot is missing 1 turret hardpoint + pg to fit it. It doesnt need missile hp or drones because this is a sniper support ship that just needs a little more punch. We dont want to give it drones and a missile hardpoint because its not supposed to be an amarr-vagabond.
Amarr cruisers
Omen needs desperate help in dps department. More cpu, more grid, one more turret slot. This ship is one of the worst. Needs a desperate fix.
Maller needs more damage to compete with other races ships in the same tier.
Pilgrim
Something needs to be done about pilgrims survivability. It is the ONLY recon that cant tank a battleship for example with its ew, range and/or speed. If you decide that it should stay short ranged (ie no range bonus to nos/neut) you should give it means to tank more then it does today.
Amarr EW: Tracking disruptors
These need a boost. Either give TDs scripts that somewhat affect missile OR drastically increase TD bonuses on TD bonused ships from 5% per level to 10% per level. A single tracking disruptor pointed at a ship should render its turrets basically useless. It should get TDs somewhat in line with the power of the other EW systems.
Prophecy
This ship needs more dps. And let me remind that tanking-baitship isnt a role.
Thats all for now, thank you for listening and Im glad to see that changes are on the way.
Amarr pvp Vids: Inq - I Inq - II |
Semkhet
Spartan Industries Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 06:28:00 -
[594]
Nah, personally I find the proposed change completely ridiculous. But what the hell, it's not more stupid than other recent changes.
After all, as an enlightened pilot flying Amarr, I've cross-trained enough Matar stuff
|
Julius Romanus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 06:34:00 -
[595]
My ideal changes to the Omen/Zealot are as follows:
Omen +cpu and powergrid, +dronebay and bandwidth. A 5 turret omen imo puts out too much dammage at 20km for a tier 2 cruiser. While the likely rax sized dronebay gives the omen its DPS buff in a form that can be destroyed. Keeping it in check.
Zealot, 5th turret and room to fit it. Definitely agreed that a sniper hac does not need a drone boost or a missle slot.
|
Steve Clone
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 06:38:00 -
[596]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer --------------- Amarr Ship Fix Ideas ----------------------
Amarr EW: Tracking disruptors
These need a boost. Either give TDs scripts that somewhat affect missile OR drastically increase TD bonuses on TD bonused ships from 5% per level to 10% per level. A single tracking disruptor pointed at a ship should render its turrets basically useless. It should get TDs somewhat in line with the power of the other EW systems.
Thats all for now, thank you for listening and Im glad to see that changes are on the way.
TBH I want tracking disruptors to stay the way it is...
Why would you want them boosted??? ironically which race does this EW affects MOST???
ITs A GOOD thing nobody uses them... leave it...
|
Jack Jombardo
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 06:49:00 -
[597]
Edited by: Jack Jombardo on 01/02/2008 06:54:03 Edited by: Jack Jombardo on 01/02/2008 06:50:50 please no change to resitences and if just try 5%.
I'm an Amarr only pilote and 10% will kill all my fittings from Punisher, Veangance, Harbinger, etc as EM would be my lowest resitenc then and I need to compensate it.
One way could be drobbing an NanoMembran and fitting a EM-only modul wich gimps my total tank. Same for Damage Control, drobbing it for a EM-only modul gimps again my total tank. Or drobbing one of my CCC rigs (where I use 2 on T2 and 3 on T1 ships to compensate my REAL problems) for a EM-rig. But then I'll get even more cap-problems.
The nerv to EM-resitences doesn't help me to kill better but make it harder to survive as I had to fitt dual-repper where I don't have the cap for or let a resistenc hole open :/.
As I live with the "Amarr are the best armor-tanks" I totaly build my char around "live longer as your oponent" and if you nerv my tank .... none of my problems is solved but I get a nother one or my old problems become heavier!
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 06:50:00 -
[598]
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 01/02/2008 06:50:55
Originally by: Steve Clone
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer --------------- Amarr Ship Fix Ideas ----------------------
Amarr EW: Tracking disruptors
These need a boost. Either give TDs scripts that somewhat affect missile OR drastically increase TD bonuses on TD bonused ships from 5% per level to 10% per level. A single tracking disruptor pointed at a ship should render its turrets basically useless. It should get TDs somewhat in line with the power of the other EW systems.
Thats all for now, thank you for listening and Im glad to see that changes are on the way.
TBH I want tracking disruptors to stay the way it is...
Why would you want them boosted??? ironically which race does this EW affects MOST???
ITs A GOOD thing nobody uses them... leave it...
Because this would not boost the unbonused TDs and there are only 3 ships (all amarr) that have bonused TDs. I want the TD to be so good and crippling that a pilgrim can use it to tank a turreted ship, just like other recons can disable their targets.
Amarr pvp Vids: Inq - I Inq - II |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 06:53:00 -
[599]
Originally by: Julius Romanus My ideal changes to the Omen/Zealot are as follows:
Omen +cpu and powergrid, +dronebay and bandwidth. A 5 turret omen imo puts out too much dammage at 20km for a tier 2 cruiser. While the likely rax sized dronebay gives the omen its DPS buff in a form that can be destroyed. Keeping it in check.
Zealot, 5th turret and room to fit it. Definitely agreed that a sniper hac does not need a drone boost or a missle slot.
You might be right about omen. Id settle with +dronebay and bandwidth on omen too I guess, as long it does reasonable dps.
Amarr pvp Vids: Inq - I Inq - II |
Gane Green
Gallente Dominus Imperium
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 07:16:00 -
[600]
How about this. Take three of the races. Delete the stats of their ships. Copy the last races ships and paste all the stats to all the equivilent ships.
There you go perfect balance. Your job zulu will be complete. It will be as fun as getting a draw in tic tack toe every game. Listen to the people on this one. Ive seen verry constructive post on Amarr. You really need to read them. If God was a number he would be over 9,000!!!!!!!!! |
|
Demoiselle Gebrier
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 07:36:00 -
[601]
Edited by: Demoiselle Gebrier on 01/02/2008 07:37:47 I have slept about this change, and I'm not sure anymore if this is really such a good change. The reasons are the global effects of that change. It does not only affect PvP but a large proportion of PvE and whole Freighters business as well.
Your approach the Amarr problem is based on deductive reasoning. You want to change global aspects first and then get more specific. But one should only use such an approach if he knows all the related mechanics and variables. With humans that is more likely not the case. Regarding this game it is not my or anyone else place to judge whether you feel comfortable with acknowledging that you know all to most of the mechanics or not. That is for you to decide.
On the other hand I would choose an inductive approach. First do the more specific changes and if they do not help get step by step bigger. Having said that, I would start looking at cap usage of lasers and a %cap increase on most amarr ships. At that point I wouldn't even look ship bonuses and stuff. In a second step I would most likely have a look power grid and fitting issues. Only then I would even begin with looking at damage modifiers, because most of these changes represent an indirect damage boost.
|
Elias Ryker
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 07:39:00 -
[602]
<quote> the Amarr simply sit there and charge their lasers, secure in their knowledge that God is on their side <\quote>
is that a religion tank, similar to an honor tank?
|
Cpt Abestos
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 07:46:00 -
[603]
Originally by: Tarron Sarek Edited by: Tarron Sarek on 01/02/2008 05:56:42
Originally by: Cpt Abestos 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
So basically you want them to be overpowered like in the old days? Next to losing their racial trait. Well done.
I'm all for boosting Amarr, and EM drones. But I'd prefer to do it without making them 'Gallente with EM instead of Kinetic'.
I don't recall adding "Reduce Heatsink stacking to pre cold-war levels" and "Increase pulse range %25"
The current high dps amarr ships wouldn't get a dps bonus bar the zealot and omen which are both badly out dpsed by their counterparts anyways.
The most they would gain is %25 dps and thats only on the ships that are already outclassed(zealot,omen) or are so bad with lasers they end up being used with hybrids or projectiles(apoc/punisher/maller/proph).
|
Amira Shadowsong
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 07:51:00 -
[604]
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.
|
Hectaire Glade
Forum Jockey
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 08:00:00 -
[605]
The logic of the explosive resist reduction on shields is beyond me. Its been clearly stated that many more people are favoring armor tanking over shield tanking, surely one way to begin to redress that balance is to make shield tanking more attractive? Albeit superficially, agreed, due to the mid slot value problem, but why the hell would you arbitrarily remove that 10%?
The mind boggles. please rethink.
|
Amira Shadowsong
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 08:03:00 -
[606]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer --------------- Amarr Ship Fix Ideas ----------------------
APOC Lets look at the apoc first. Please fix this ship, its horrible and has no real role. Let me kindly remind everyone that tanking-baitship is not a role.
What is amarr missing? To some degree we miss a real T1 mission/ratting battleship. The geddon is not ideal and is very skill intense while the abaddon has serious cap problems in pve and is more of a pvp ship.
Since ccp already scratched the khanid ship while making our T2 battleships (neither our black ops or marauder are khanid) I dont feel it would be odd to remake the apoc into a armor tanking missile platform just like sacrilege.
This would always make sure that amarr atleast have a battleship being able to rat angels and doing angel extravaganza missions independantly of what you decide to do with problematic laser damage type behaviour.
This please. Apoc needs to be a missile boat. And Zealot needs a 5th turret badly.
|
Hugh Ruka
Caldari Exploratio et Industria Morispatia
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 08:25:00 -
[607]
I think Goumindong is right on spot with fixind cap/fitting first. This will fix a few things on the troubled ships (like Omen f.e.):
1. No fitting mods needed - free lows/rigs for tank/damage mods 2. No cap mods needed - free lows/rigs for tank/damage mods 3. More fitting versatility as a result of the above
I see no need for such a general change.
Originally by: Aravel Thon
Originally by: Nith Batoxxx Hi my alt just leanred to fly the ferox...............
I am so so terribly sorry...
|
Jordan Musgrat
Convergent Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 08:32:00 -
[608]
tbh it's not a horrible idea, ya the Raven/Rokh/Mael get hit a little harder by Matari, but let's face it, Matari are next on teh list to buff and nobody in their right mind will shoot exp willingly against a Raven. I do find it funny that this encourages omnitanks, while you were trying to get rid of them :)
But seriously, ZULUPARK, you do not read ships and modules, do you? If you do, you don't read nearly enough. There are great discussions there when people get get over their egos long enough. Cap is an issue for all Amarr. At the least, include a 15% reduction in laser usage. That's not enough to change the fact that they still really need cap, but it's enough to hopefully give some people reason to stop fitting cap injectors on every single one of their ships.
Finally, please:
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer remake the apoc into a armor tanking missile platform just like the sacrilege
-----------
Primary is family values, secondary is 0.0... |
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 09:09:00 -
[609]
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Originally by: Elmicker I've had a chance to play with this on sisi now.
Pulled out a tri-hardened megathron and hype a couple of times each.
Raped by an abaddon.
Stuck EANMs on and it was performing exactly the same as the tri-hardened setup does on TQ.
Congratulations zulupark, you've made tri-hardeners obsolete.
This is a joke, right? It performed exactly the same against the Amarr ship. But at a tradeoff, which is worse resistances on the other resistances. Very one dimensional and short-sighted 'tests'.
no its aperfec test. It shows everyone wil gravitate to EANM, then this will become a NO BOOST to amarr anda boost to Explosive and KIn damage dealing ships!!
------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
xOmGx
Warriors tribe
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 09:09:00 -
[610]
Edited by: xOmGx on 01/02/2008 09:10:51 OK.. i say it HARD but short
1. Changing resistance - sux no metter why you want to do it it is wrong 2. You want to boost amarr? Oo RLY? so why you don't loverLasercap usage? lets say -50% Lasercap usage (both combination Skill boost (Controlled burst) and module capuse lovering), also it is possible to introduce a new skill for wich take effect only on amarrian ships. 3. Give REAL bonus, real second bonus to all T1 ship's
Just ceep in ming that amarria supose to be BEST tankers in game* and give right second bonuses (tanking)
Every on who choose amarr know some troubles with damaging armor but it is ok.
PS. Boost abit damagemod on Amarrian drones to be in line with T1/T2 Gallente drones.
PPS. i forgot amarr defenetly need a few Missile boats* with EM damage bonus* No Pain - No Gain |
|
Vagel
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 09:32:00 -
[611]
This change means that all Amarr pilots will have to choose projectile's over lasers!
Why ?
O - well... since the amarr tank was just lowered as well, we need to reinforce that tank - by exchanging the cap power relay with an active hardner.
And loosing 24% of your cap recharge, you cannot sustain laser as your weapons.
Rethink your "amarr love" devs - this idea simply doesnt do ANY good for Amarr or lasers at all.
|
Blutreiter
Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 09:50:00 -
[612]
I still stand by my point which I put in the 60 page amarr thread... keep the cap usage and turn it into a real bonus.
Meaning:
Reduce overall cap use on energy turrets by about 10 or 15%
This will make energy turrets (on amarr bonused ships only!) at maximum skill levels more energy efficient than blasters. Not by much but i'd say thats a bonus allright.
Easy solution.
Cogito ergo boom - I think i'll blow sh*t up
Originally by: CCP Explorer I know we have said this before, but this time we really mean itÖ
|
Kael D'mende
Homo Victor
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 10:06:00 -
[613]
Must say that i hope there will be some cap reduction in all this re-balance of amarr, the cap use are quite heavy tbh, and training controlled burst from 4-5 does almost nothing that would justify the extra week of training. Even compared to gallente, it seems amarr use a bit to much juice.
Regards. /Kael |
Blutreiter
Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 10:10:00 -
[614]
Alternatively, cut the capacitor usage on the laser lenses by a factor.
Again, explained in the 60 page amarr thread. Maybe i'll quote them here.
Cogito ergo boom - I think i'll blow sh*t up
Originally by: CCP Explorer I know we have said this before, but this time we really mean itÖ
|
Rezerwowy Pies
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 10:27:00 -
[615]
Edited by: Rezerwowy Pies on 01/02/2008 10:39:27
Originally by: CCP Zulupark I think it's general consensus that one of the underlying problems for Amarr is that base EM resistances are too high.
1. Dont mess with res. If you want do something right, then change "Controlled Bursts" skill to -10% cap need bonus. That will stop whinee about lowered cap usage only on amarrian ships and wont nerf other races.
2. Delete rof bonus on all amarrian ships, change it to dmg bonus/cap usage bonus/range bonus.
3. Reduce pg need for some laser turrets like Tachyon's II (if you increase pg and capacitor on amarrian bs, you will get more gank-neuts-gedon's in game and its not the point. Then fit every ship with full rack of heaviest t2 laser turrets and one type of armor rep (for examlpe lar t2 for bs). Add 2-3% and you will know what pg ships should have (with maxed skills like adv weapons upgrade 5). It wont be enought for ab/mwd/cap injector/plate/second rep withoud a pg mod, but its fair enought.
But if you lower pg reqs for some laser turrets (or add pg to some ships), suddenly players will be able to drop one pg mod and fit a dmg mod, and dmg problem also will be solved.
Thats all about amarrian problem.
|
Garia666
Amarr T.H.U.G L.I.F.E Mercenary Services
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 10:32:00 -
[616]
Edited by: Garia666 on 01/02/2008 10:32:11 You know what... as an amarr only player i am not going to whine to this fix.. and wait this one out.. every bit of help is apreciated for the amarr race..
Quote: CCP Chronotis Amarr boost is coming in a future dev blog, lets keep this on topic
|
xOmGx
Warriors tribe
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 10:36:00 -
[617]
Quote: 2. Delete rof bonus on all amarrian ships, change it to dmg bonus/cap usage bonus/range bonus.
OMG another CAP bonuses?? emm.. it is WRONG why other races git 2 useful bonuses? and amarrien get 1? CAPusage bonus not realy bonus isn't is?
No Resistance changes are needed
MOST simpe way Boost abit ROF/Damagemod on Lasers and/or give usefull bonus in place of cap bonus + same time reduce lasercapusage No Pain - No Gain |
Failron
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 10:58:00 -
[618]
first off i fly caldari and i use the raven for running mission's it's not a pvp'er at all if you do this it will kill the raven if your going to take 10% off caldari exp then add 10% to em as far as the armor hell do all you want to the caldai but don't kill my shield. :(
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 11:09:00 -
[619]
Originally by: Failron first off i fly caldari and i use the raven for running mission's it's not a pvp'er at all if you do this it will kill the raven if your going to take 10% off caldari exp then add 10% to em as far as the armor hell do all you want to the caldai but don't kill my shield. :(
Yeah because its not easy enough to ***** missions with the raven compared to other battleships...?
Amarr pvp Vids: Inq - I Inq - II |
Tsu'ko
Valley Forge STELLAR LEGION
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 11:15:00 -
[620]
Bad idea to make apoc into a missile platform, it's bad is it is now you want to make it even harder by making us train longer (+ a couple months for missile training???). If i want to pvp or pve i don't want to train multiple weapon systems.
|
|
45thtiger 0109
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 11:21:00 -
[621]
Quote: first off i fly caldari and i use the raven for running mission's it's not a pvp'er at all if you do this it will kill the raven if your going to take 10% off caldari exp then add 10% to em as far as the armor hell do all you want to the caldai but don't kill my shield. :(
What should ccp should do increase the % of restance on the amarr ships like the other races. Instead of reducing it by 10% restance of the other races. That would be alot fairer to do it that way.
|
Morkus Rex
eXtended Amarr Research 24
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 11:22:00 -
[622]
@ Dev Blog changes ... I'm still happy that I switched to other ships than Amarr long time ago!
___ [Service] Corp standing |
Vabjekf
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 11:37:00 -
[623]
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Quote: Amarr damage has always been fine, its always been the fitting and cap issues
I guess that's why people were crying out for damage type changes on crystals?
NO, they where complaining about the damage type because they where looking at the problem too simplistically.
Problem: Amarrs cap problems restrict how long they can shoot their guns, even with slots dedicated to cap management.
What they see: I run out of cap and X is not dead yet!
What they think is the solution: More flexible damage types so i can zomguberdps against every single ship, thereby killing them before my cap runs out.
What would really fix the situation: Make it so the cap lasts longer, so that things can be killed before said cap runs out, with out changing amarrs DPS. yes heavy em resist hurts amarr, thats needed balance because lasers, if they are firing and have proper damage mods (which is harder for amarr to get on their fits due to higher fitting cost of lasers and the fact you need tons of cap management mods also else you are sitting in the dark on your third volley) they are actually pretty good weapons already.
So, the solution: Make lasers easier to fit, and able to shoot longer.
And the problem goes away, and you do not need extra damage types.
|
Tsu'ko
Valley Forge STELLAR LEGION
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 11:52:00 -
[624]
Edited by: Tsu''ko on 01/02/2008 11:53:09 If you want to add explosive crystals why not give conflagration crystals exp damage? Would maybe make it worth the penalties.
And to ppl saying amarr got best tank, it's not sustainable because of cap probs, imo if you only care for tank then shield is the best you get buffer and boost and no need for cap tank while armor only get benefit to use less slots to achieve decent tank, but not great (unless perhaps if you don't fit any weapon upgrades, which you can do with shield tanks and still get great tank?).
|
Tzrailasa
Destructive Influence Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 11:55:00 -
[625]
Am I the only one thinking along these lines?
Amarr users generally agree that the problem with Amarr lies in two places: 1. CAP use, and one or both 'bonus' on ships being a requirement(!), not a bonus! 2. Fitting issues!
CCP then decides to reduce resists on EM?
It seems sort of like the following comedy: Worker: I need some nails to finish the building! Boss: Ok, here are some screws!
Just fix the damned CAP issue! Damage isn't a problem, CAP and fitting is!
You've buffed HP 2-3 times over the last year or so (including rigs), not considering that this hits Amarr the most! Amarr runs OUT of it's 'ammo' fast (cap), while other races ships has enough to last even with more HP. You even reduced the size of other races ammo, but kept the size of Amarr's (cap) as it is!
Add to that that Amarr doesn't get any bonus to their weapons as the increase their ship training. They're just allowed to finally use the weapons when they finally reach skill level 4 (or 5).
To reiterate, just fix the damned CAP issue!
My views are my own. They do not represent the views of my corporation or alliance. |
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 11:58:00 -
[626]
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. ------------------------------------------
What is Oomph? It the sound Amarr players makes when they get kicked in the ribs. |
Jonny JoJo
Amarr The Imperial Guards
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 11:59:00 -
[627]
Originally by: Tsu'ko Edited by: Tsu''ko on 01/02/2008 11:41:26 Bad idea to make apoc into a missile platform, it's bad as it is now you want to make it even harder by making us train longer (+ a couple months for missile training???). If i want to pvp or pve i don't want to train multiple weapon systems.
Even if omni-tank get more popular than it is, it will still take more damage from em probably and i wouldn't omni-tank just because em is too low and reduce my other resistances to low levels, maybe a DC + EANM or something but not 3 eanm and 1 DC, that will give low resists to kin/therm/exp, compared to active hardeners.
Missile apoc is fine. It taks only a couple weeks to get missile skills at a half decent level, month or two to have "good" skills.
For comparison, most Amarr pilots need lvl5 in all skills to be able to compete with lasers. With missiles, lvl4 in support skills is competitive enough. Dont worry, once you see missiles hit on every shot, then you relise how useful they are.
I have always said all along that Amarr suffer from Fake Slots. Crazy fitting and crazy cap usage on lasers means that damage and hardner mods get taken up by cap mods, and you cannot have cap mods because of fitting mods.
CCP should remove 100% cap usage for lasers as the broken system of tanking mods being in the same place as fitting mods in the same place as damage mods is fine for 2003, but in 2008 eve, it is obsolete. Capless weapons are the way to go.
Sig locked, lack of Eve content |
Zarch AlDain
The Establishment Establishment
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 12:00:00 -
[628]
I liked the idea at first, but I have to admit having read the thread and thought about it some more I am going off it. In particular the drop to shield explosive resistance seems very unwarranted and makes this into a Minmatar buff more than an Amarr one.
As you said yourself armor tanking is currently much more popular than shield, which surely is reason in itself to not nerf shield tanking?
The other thing missing is to drop all NPCs EM resistance by 10% across the board.
I have a (slightly connected) idea too, 4 new skills:
The idea is to remove something from each races ships and then add a skill to remove it. For Amarr this would replace the energy turret ship bonus, for other races it would have a different effect. The skill would be available (but not cheap) through each races LP store and all members of a race would get their race specialisation on level 1 for free.
Amarr Ship Specialisation: Pre-nerf: Remove the laser cap usage bonus on amarr ships Skill Bonus: 10% reduction per level in capacitor usage of energy turrets fitted to amarr ships. Consequence: Amarr ships can all get a second bonus, even Khanid ships gain a bit if their turret hardpoints are used.
Minmatar Ship Specialisation: Pre-nerf: Reduce speed of minmatar ships by 10% Skill Bonus: 4% boost to minmatar ship speed per level
Caldari Ship Specialisation: Pre-nerf: Reduce all ships max shield capacity by 10% Skill bonus: 4% boost to ship max shield capacity per level
Gallente Ship Specialisation: Pre-nerf: Reduce all ships max armour by 10% Skill bonus: 4% boost to max armour per level
Each skill enhances one of the strengths of the race, but is not essential in order to fly the ships. The main reason for the change is obvious Amarr but a similar skill is introduced to all races. This also gives an advantage to people flying their own race's ships (as they start with the specialisation skill) but the advantage can be countered by people who buy the skill for other races and train it which would be priced at the point where it is noticeable but not ground breaking (i.e. 5 million isk and 5k LP).
Zarch AlDain
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 12:08:00 -
[629]
Originally by: Zarch AlDain I liked the idea at first, but I have to admit having read the thread and thought about it some more I am going off it. In particular the drop to shield explosive resistance seems very unwarranted and makes this into a Minmatar buff more than an Amarr one.
As you said yourself armor tanking is currently much more popular than shield, which surely is reason in itself to not nerf shield tanking?
The other thing missing is to drop all NPCs EM resistance by 10% across the board.
I have a (slightly connected) idea too, 4 new skills:
The idea is to remove something from each races ships and then add a skill to remove it. For Amarr this would replace the energy turret ship bonus, for other races it would have a different effect. The skill would be available (but not cheap) through each races LP store and all members of a race would get their race specialisation on level 1 for free.
Amarr Ship Specialisation: Pre-nerf: Remove the laser cap usage bonus on amarr ships Skill Bonus: 10% reduction per level in capacitor usage of energy turrets fitted to amarr ships. Consequence: Amarr ships can all get a second bonus, even Khanid ships gain a bit if their turret hardpoints are used.
Minmatar Ship Specialisation: Pre-nerf: Reduce speed of minmatar ships by 10% Skill Bonus: 4% boost to minmatar ship speed per level
Caldari Ship Specialisation: Pre-nerf: Reduce all ships max shield capacity by 10% Skill bonus: 4% boost to ship max shield capacity per level
Gallente Ship Specialisation: Pre-nerf: Reduce all ships max armour by 10% Skill bonus: 4% boost to max armour per level
Each skill enhances one of the strengths of the race, but is not essential in order to fly the ships. The main reason for the change is obvious Amarr but a similar skill is introduced to all races. This also gives an advantage to people flying their own race's ships (as they start with the specialisation skill) but the advantage can be countered by people who buy the skill for other races and train it which would be priced at the point where it is noticeable but not ground breaking (i.e. 5 million isk and 5k LP).
This would give amarr weapons a fix while everyone else gets a huge boost. Minmatar speeds going even more out of line, caldari passive tanks going skyhigh and gallente getting extra tanking so they can tank+gank even harder. No thanks.
Amarr pvp Vids: Inq - I Inq - II |
Ogul
Caldari ZiTek Deepspace Explorations Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 12:10:00 -
[630]
Originally by: Zarch AlDain
I have a (slightly connected) idea too, 4 new skills:
No more time sinks, please.
--- This is a war declaration, issued from your alt corp. It is used to gank people in high sec. |
|
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 : œ Great Game + 13/20 Revelations : œ Desyncs... + 11/20 Trinity : œ BBSOD, Bugs, Desyncs, F***** Nerfs + 10/20 v1.1 : œ [...] + 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 omnitankersà Passive EANM/ANM together with plates is the preferred form of tanking resulting in most of the capacitor used in the purification of infidelsà 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 ædisposableÆ 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
|
|
Dread Emperor
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 15:28:00 -
[661]
Originally by: Becka Call Zulupark; ... Go back and read all of the the Amarr are broken threads from the past 6 months. Then read them again. Then come and explain in a dev blog how the game mechanics changes have been detrimental to Amarr. ...
And without mentioning dmg nerf and stacking nerf after which dmg wasn't unnerfed. Or the nos/TD nerf.
In order of appearance:
MWD. MWD is for many reasons a must. A standard if you will. So no, the Amarr cant just sit there. Theres bubbles to go through, DDs to be evaded and range maintained. And the cometition and their mothers use it. 95% of all pvp is short or sniper range. So, MWD=end of amarr "midrange". And screws with CAP.
Cap injectors. Yes, cap injetors are a standard as well. Voiding the amarr cap supremacy. Especially in the active tankin department where Gallente rule atm. Apoc can compare ofcourse, but not much else it can do. And the abaddon could if its guns wouldnt drain the Sun to keep shooting. sidenote: did anyone notice the hyperion has more CAP then the abaddon?
HP buff. Now the fights last longer. 50% longer. And CAP on amarrian ship still dies after 2 mins. 1 minute on abaddon.
Also, FITTING! No, the sniper abaddon doesnt do more dps (for the whole 55 seconds it can fire with max skills) then a hyperion simply because noone int their right mind wastes 2 slots on fitting mods.
So, lets say this rezist nerf fixes amarr dmg problems (/snicker), the above stand.
As for this nerf helping minmatar; nobody fears minnie dps!
|
xOmGx
Warriors tribe
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 15:31:00 -
[662]
Edited by: xOmGx on 01/02/2008 15:34:57 well CCP.. i think YOU don't know what YOU want with amarr. First you nerfed 1/2 of all t2 ships turnung tham into missile boats without ANY (beside frigate class vessel) missile speciasation ship in amarr fleet. And now you trying to boost somehow amarr boosting Matar more than amarr..
lets just have wat we have and change ship bonuses. Giving to lasesr -50% capusage and replacing same bonus on ships by simesing realy usefull.
Stop making from a wheel a square.. the car will not drive better.
Fixing one problem without creating another is it soo difficult?
PS. Didi some one mentioned fitting problems on amarr ships? anything T1 smaller than BC.. No Pain - No Gain |
DrAtomic
Atomic Heroes Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 16:05:00 -
[663]
Originally by: Ogul
Originally by: DrAtomic
Then change the EM damage output of EM weapon sources by 25%, or just start off with Amarr, maybe by introducing a crystal that does pure EM damage but has 25% higer raw dps then a mixed damage type crystal.
As a Caldari pilot I resist this notion vehemently.
The reason being that Amarr allready pose a great threat to you as shield tanker; the EM damage increase could be solved for shield tankers to maintain their current position versus Amarr by giving Shield tanked ships an EM shield bonus equal to the damage output bonus given to Amarr. However that brings another issue to light and that is that shield tanks are more powerfull defenses then armor tanks; so it could trigger a whole package of shield tank nerfs. Better solution would be to not touch the shield resists and add warp scrambler modules and sensor boost modules that are equal to their midslot counter parts but in either low or highslots. Because that is why armor tanking is favored over shield tanking in solo -> smaller gangplay for starters. - - -
Originally by: CCP Wrangler If you can understand our goal, disagree with our solution and offer a solution that is equal or better your opinion has a better chance of being heard...
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 16:12:00 -
[664]
Originally by: Takeshi Yamato Edited by: Takeshi Yamato on 01/02/2008 15:07:38 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'm sure though that a way to add a 10 second delay when switching from EM/THERM crystals to EM/EXP ones could be found.
I think the problem would be on decidign how much Explosive damage to deal.
I really thin something like 40% EM 40%Thermal 20% Explosive coudl be workeable. But the problem is I think a lot of people will whine if they don get a 90% explosive one.
------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Zarch AlDain
The Establishment Establishment
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 16:23:00 -
[665]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Zarch AlDain
I have a (slightly connected) idea too, 4 new skills:
The idea is to remove something from each races ships and then add a skill to remove it. For Amarr this would replace the energy turret ship bonus, for other races it would have a different effect. The skill would be available (but not cheap) through each races LP store and all members of a race would get their race specialisation on level 1 for free.
This would give amarr weapons a fix while everyone else gets a huge boost. Minmatar speeds going even more out of line, caldari passive tanks going skyhigh and gallente getting extra tanking so they can tank+gank even harder. No thanks.
Perhaps you didn't look at the figures I listed for the other ships? Or the fact that they get a pre-nerf? This is hardly a huge boost.
A 10% drop which you can then train a skill to get at most 8% more than you have now... that is not a huge boost.
They would have to train the skill to 3 just to be back to the current situation, and an 8% speed/shield/armour increase from training a skill to level 5 is nothing like as huge as the 10% per level reduction in laser cap usage.
One implant can give that much advantage!
Zarch AlDain
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 16:32:00 -
[666]
Originally by: Reatu Krentor 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.
Well you hit the nail on the head. This quite likely IS the original Amarr concept.
It's just that nobody who didn't calculate and didn't take a close look at the numbers realizes it. Lasers, without a damage bonus, do about the same amount of raw dps than other weapon systems with their damage bonus. Hence the cap usage bonus is a real bonus. But most people don't recognize it. And actually they can't be blamed for it. Why? Because most NPC EM resistances are so high that lasers do low damage there. Because in PvP armor tanking is more popular than shield tanking and armor has naturally high EM resistance. You'll always hit a minimum of 60%.
Instances where EM damage is a good choice, like missioning against Sanshe or Bloodraiders, show that laser damage is perfectly fine, even without a damage bonus. It's even almost overpowered with ships like the Armageddon or Abaddon, due to the damage bonus on top of the high base damage. Because of this a flat increase in laser damge of more than perhaps 5% is problematic, to say the least.
___________________________________ - Balance is power, guard it well -
Please stop using the word 'nerf' Nothing spells 'incompetence' or 'don't take me serious' like those four letters |
Abrazzar
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 16:58:00 -
[667]
As almost everybody is crying about their tank of choice being reduced by 10% in resistances, I'd propose you balance it by increasing shield EM by 10% and armor kinetic and explosive by 5% each. This will keep the total sum of resistances the same as we have now, make the the extreme resistances more of a bother and still makes EM damage more significant. Of course people will still make a threadnought of whines over it as Zulupark+Nerf=WHAAAAAŠ
So to sum it up: Shield: EM +10%, Thermal 0%, Kinetic 0%, Expl -10% Armor: EM -10%, Thermal 0%, Kinetic +5%, Expl +5%
Sum = 0 EM still lowest resist on shields EM still highest resist on armor, just not as high as it had been Kin and Explo resists on armor balance the effect of EMP ammo on armor EM resist on shields balance the effect of EMP ammo on shields
Actual Amarr issues need other changes as stated in the devblog. -------- Ideas for: Mining Clouds
|
Dread Emperor
The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 17:18:00 -
[668]
...The constructive post>
Lasers shoot EM/Thermal. Period. All Amarr T1 ships use lasers so cap use, fitting and ships themselves revolve around these. And let's say the armor rez nerf actually helps Amarr dmg output.
1. Cap and cap use>
10-20% cap increase on all (bar the Khanid) Amarr ships. Amarr should be cap race, no? Decrease Laser cap use by 30-40%. This would make the -% cap use absolete on Amarrian ships while ensuring lasers still use considerably more cap then any other weapon.
2. Fitting>
Adjusting fitting to be on par with the other races' fitting options. This should be done by both decreasing laser fitting req and boosting ship grid/cpu output. We don't want other races fitting lasers now do we (as if anyone would). Take a look at what other gunboats fit and make it simmilar on Amarr.
3. Ships>
Having covered the above; all that is left is finesse: changing the ship bonuses without making the ships themselves overpowered.
So no more dmg/rof bonuses for ships above cruiser size (well maybe the prophecy) as those are the ones lacking in dmg output. Tracking bonus would be fine. MWD (thorax like) or some agility boni are not Amarrish really. Any tanking bonus is fine. Nos/neut is too. Optimal range (YES dammit even the half-arsed 10% one) is fine as beams have low optimal and almost no falloff.
Also, ontroducing missiles into the Amarr T1 line (have one or two cruisers and frigs opt for missiles, dont even have to specialize, just opt). This would introduce missiles to new Amarr players avoiding the "train missiles now!" shock Khanid t2 ships provide. And it seems nowadays it goes with the story.
Conclusion>
That's it. Not that hard (definitley simpler the messing with EVERY ship in the game). Speed/midslot gimpage issues would remain but that's Amarr. Not to mention low sensor strength...
If you want exact numbers just say so
|
X3k5
Amarr Brotherhood of the Phoenix Free Trade Zone.
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 17:34:00 -
[669]
Some people just have nothing to do except criticize. First people complain about everything that's wrong with the game and when something gets changed, you get stupid comments like this -- "Sigh, another example of 'whine enough and we'll change it'"
So you'd rather they remain ignorant and dont care what the players have to say.
Im Amarr myself and I dont like this change atall, but atleast they are trying to fix the problem no matter how unsuccessfully. You have to give them credit that they atleast listen to players.
|
Black Scorpio
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 17:40:00 -
[670]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
You're talking about a very limited way of fitting a ship. Also, I said in the blog we were looking at some Amarr ships. There will be a blog shortly about how/what ships we've balanced.
So you're looking at SOME Amarr ships and you modify the entire baseline for all shield and armor?
Very good work Zulupark.. please spend more time thinking on this. I know you have the numbers, now make it so that your CUSTOMERS who pay your salary do not feel like they've been robed or that game style is not yet changed to some whim of a Dev.
Yes some amarrian ships need buffs. Limit it at that. You are going totally the wrong way with this by starting to move base resistances and pretend this helps. The fact that it might in some cases make it easier on amarr ships does not mean it's the correct fix.
Everything in this game is interconnected. But it is YOUR job to find the RIGHT thing to modify and not make the players seem like you're shooting blind in the dark.
Find a good way of BALANCING/BOOSTING this game by not making everyone MISERABLE for a change, but making everyone happy for once. Isn't that what a boosing patch should do?
You have very nice bosses at CCP, you should have been reprimanded a few times by now, including after this post!
|
|
Black Scorpio
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 17:46:00 -
[671]
Originally by: DigitalCommunist I like this change, just because you pointed out that its got more to do with people using armor tanks than shield tanks in EVE. And I also like that you reduced shield explosive too, because it would have been easy to do nothing given the problem I just mentioned. I fly Zealot a lot and its amazing how long those shields last against an enemy firing explosive ammo. Active explosive shield tanking modules and active EM armor tanking modules might be more useful too. Right now they're kinda nice if you're NPCing.
I'd also like to suggest the following ideas for making shield tanks more common in EVE:
- introduce new HIGH SLOT warp disruptor that requires more powergrid and cap, but gives -2 at 25% more range - make one for frigate, one for cruiser and one for battleship - switch the medium and low slots of the Muninn around; atm both minnie HACs armor tank, and terribly - but at least the vaga has speed - consider giving shield modules the highest overloading bonuses - make low slot signal amps comparable to mid slot sensor booster - consider adding natural shield recharge to the boost amount and giving PDUs a lower HP bonus but higher recharge bonus
Sensor booster and warp disruptor are pretty necessary for pvp ships, so if you can solve that its going a long way. Minmatar ships should be able to do both, but the majority are still armor tankers which I feel is wrong.
Anyways, good changes.
The Amarr specific stuff would have to do with reducing Medium Beam grid usage a lot. They should be an easy fit on Retribution and possible on Crusader with one MAPC fitted. Medium Pulse fittings are annoying too, but not as much.
The other problem is swapping crystals. I know you can't do this with an overhaul but lasers have the shortest falloff. It requires you to swap crystals a lot if you want the most out of your guns. You need to be able to switch all crystals at once with a single click.
Other than stuff like that, I really don't see a problem with Amarr ships.
HELLOO, waving at you.. now if you only can think past your gallente/amarr/minmatar flying setups and TRY to make Caldari ships be Able to PvP.. using shield tanks, then i can really see you post. Until them i am blinded by the same shortsightedness that makes you skip Caldari off your charts in the PvP or Boosting category.
|
Black Scorpio
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 17:49:00 -
[672]
Originally by: Goumindong Edited by: Goumindong on 30/01/2008 18:09:11
Originally by: Alexander Knott
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.
If armor tanking is overwhelmingly more popular than shield tanking, why is this true? It would seem that the player base has spoken on which form of tanking it feels is superior.
Shield tanking is superior. That is not the question. The question is "what is the best use of the slots I have?" and shield tanking, while superior to armor tanking, is not superior to other uses of the med slots for the most part.
All that means is that when performing different tasks, different slots are more or less valuable. Over a certian number of med slots or low slots are unnecessary to a long ranged passive tanked ship. This is why the Armageddon is pretty good, because 3 meds, no big deal, they are sensor boosters anyway, but the extra low is another damage mod or plate, which is hugely important. But if you take the tempest, with 5/6, it cant armor tank effectivly because it needs damage mods in a passive gank setup, it cant shield tank effectivly because it doesnt have enough med slots to fill with ewar, and split tanking is less effective because EANMs do not benefit shield resistances and plates dont benefit shield hit points which reduces the synergy between stacking tanking mods.[in the same way that adding an MAR to a drake with an invuln results in the same EHP on both, but a drake with a shield booster would tank a lot better due to the synergy between the shield resists and the shield booster]
ed: But then again, med slots, with the current slot distribution, probably ought to be more valuable than low slots. This is because the number of ships with high numbers of med slots is very low, and in fact, there is no tech 1 ship that is not specialty kitted for ewar that has 7 med slots. 7 med slots and 4 low slots[or 8/3] being the optimal shield tanking configuration[1 damage control and 3 damage mods in the low slot]. Since there is no such ship, med slots really do need to be more valuable than low slots, or the ships that dont have optimal configurations will have problems. And since that is pretty much every ship that isnt 4/7 or 7/4 or 8/3 that is basicially every ship except the Abaddon, Megathron, and Hyperion[special circumstances], and Apoc[which sucks anyway]
You are a moron and a noob. Did not read past your first sentence. Shield tanking - superior, ah ok.. i'll tell them that. Maybe in your passive version, but really who are you kidding?
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 17:52:00 -
[673]
Edited by: Pinky Denmark on 01/02/2008 17:53:27
Originally by: Shevar
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. [/quote=Shevar]
1: This debate is actually for the EM issue... save the beans for another blog m8 2: racial shield hardeners are valid choices in many situations - INV's arent bad, I know... But the many armor tanks in PvP and abundance of omnitanks must be a clear sign of something 3: Minmatar have no trouble against shield tanks with their EMP ammo and decent dps (vs caldari ships) - I'm a nice guy!!
But hook me up with some pew pew, because I'm really bored... |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 18:00:00 -
[674]
Originally by: Black Scorpio
You are a moron and a noob. Did not read past your first sentence. Shield tanking - superior, ah ok.. i'll tell them that. Maybe in your passive version, but really who are you kidding?
Your inability to properly utilize shield tanks and med slots is not my problem. Try examining the strengths of your ships and then utilizing them instead of trying to fly them like gallente blaster boats.
|
CamelKnight
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 18:04:00 -
[675]
670 replies to a single "boost-that-is-a-nerf" and still CCP don't get the message.
So let me use this post to clarify stuff: CCP, you're handling things the wrong way. There are tens, if not hundreds of topics about how you should boost Amarr. Take a good look around. Read them. And note that not one of them speaks of nerfing resists on shields and armor. And note *several* VERY good suggestions instead. Then build those. Then release those on Sisi. Then have a happy community once more.
I still can't understand where the hell you got that idiotic idea to nerf shields and armor. You sure as hell didn't go to Holland to puff your brains out. Or did you?
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 18:13:00 -
[676]
Most suggestions to 'fix' Amarr are crap, and attest to a lack of insight into game mechanics and/or game design. Or they simply destroy any racial trait and make Amarr more like the other races. Why should CCP implement them?
Just because you repeat the same rubbish over and over again doesn't make it any less rubbish.
On a different note.. Please CCP, next time no blog. Just change things and let people deal with it.
The amount of whinage in this thread is disturbing the force.
I feel so robbed! Heavens are falling! It's the END!
If a change like this lets you turn into a whining, flaming mess of testosterone, better leave and play something like Tetris.
Stop the complaining already! This is getting silly. Grow up and take it like a man.
Otherwise Hello Kitty Online is that way -->
___________________________________ - Balance is power, guard it well -
Please stop using the word 'nerf' Nothing spells 'incompetence' or 'don't take me serious' like those four letters |
Jonny JoJo
Amarr The Imperial Guards
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 18:16:00 -
[677]
Edited by: Jonny JoJo on 01/02/2008 18:18:01
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Stop the complaining already! This is getting silly. Grow up and take it like a man.
Otherwise Hello Kitty Online is that way -->
I went into a Resteraunt.
They made a excellent meal, great service. However my cola was flat.
Should customers drink flat cola? Or make their view known so that the flat cola does not spoil their excellent meal?
How can you expect CCP to improve if people dont tell them what is going wrong?
After all, if a business does not make mistakes - its not a business. Sig locked, lack of Eve content |
Tarron Sarek
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 18:25:00 -
[678]
This is about how they make their view known.
Constructive criticism, perhaps even with some arguments and based on facts? Great!
Senseless flaming, spouting and blabbering? Based on nothing except hearsay and bias? No thanks!
___________________________________ - Balance is power, guard it well -
Please stop using the word 'nerf' Nothing spells 'incompetence' or 'don't take me serious' like those four letters |
Flaming Lemming
Caldari Puppeteer Press
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 18:51:00 -
[679]
How many pages since a Dev reply?
Yeah, they give a damn what we have to say. Re: Carrier nerf
|
Maximillian Dragonard
mUfFiN fAcToRy Sex Panthers
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:13:00 -
[680]
Beyond a doubt, EM becomes the single most damaging weapon type across the boards (factoring both shield and armor resists).. Guess that means we all need to train amarr drones and ditch any caldari ship with only kinetic bonuses (most). Any missile pilot that fires anything other than EM after this is downright silly.
|
|
Hugh Ruka
Caldari Exploratio et Industria Morispatia
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:19:00 -
[681]
Originally by: Tarron Sarek This is about how they make their view known.
Constructive criticism, perhaps even with some arguments and based on facts? Great!
Senseless flaming, spouting and blabbering? Based on nothing except hearsay and bias? No thanks!
Constructive criticism is not much possible here, because all we have is a change taken from thin air and thrown out with half-assed arguments.
If I want constructive criticism, I state my case clearly in full detail, my reasoning and solutions so far and then let people consider all things said.
Not just stating "we think that this is a solution, deal with it, something else may come later".
Originally by: Aravel Thon
Originally by: Nith Batoxxx Hi my alt just leanred to fly the ferox...............
I am so so terribly sorry...
|
Aidonis Heideran
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:19:00 -
[682]
Edited by: Aidonis Heideran on 01/02/2008 19:23:41
Originally by: Flaming Lemming How many pages since a Dev reply?
Yeah, they give a damn what we have to say. Re: Carrier nerf
Well no Sh** they don't reply. When you have dozens upon dozens of b****y whiners giving them heaps upon heaps of total crap and abo****ely BURYING all of the yes-sayers and even the people who try to look at thinks logically do you think they'd reply? What about the people arguing with other people *note that the "other" people aren't CCP staff* about minor errors in the CCP posts, do you think the staffers care? NO. It's non constructive and mostly insulting.
Ergo, they REALLY don't care about whining, b****ing and people saying "OMG CCP YOU SUCK I HATE YOU YOU GUYS ARE IDIOTS IM QUITTING THE GAME BECAUSE WE'RE BEING EGOTISTIC BABIES".
They care about us when we say USEFUL THINGS.
So if people like you would stop making posts like the one you jus did, CCP would be back over here, because it wouldn't take them sifting through pages upon pages of absolute CRAP to find useful feedback.
Oh and in case you didn't know, it's called a JOB. That's 9-5 not 24/7.
|
Elrinarie
Gallente Freelancers Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:24:00 -
[683]
I still don't understand the whole idea of nerfing shields in this change.
I mean. Armor base resistances are 140 points, and shield base resistances are 120 points.
all shield resistances are
0 em, 60 explosive 40 kinetic 20 heat. for 120 points of resistance.
armor varies by race, but for gallente it is 60 EM 10 explosive 35 kinetic 35 thermal. for 140 points of resistance.
Sure shields slowly regenerate by themselves, but as already pointed out by you guys, shields also aren't very popular in this game for PVP (and this is because they require vital midslots)
and as others have said, this change makes a small boost for amarr PVP, and the biggest boost is to minmatar pvp. But weakens everyone in mission running/ratting.
suggestions
1) move 10% EM resist to another resist in armor 2) fix power usage on lasers 3) fix powergrid need on lasers 4) fix certain ships that need more cpu/PG 5) perhaps give amarr some bigger drone bays on some of the ships, or some other way to boost non EMP damage, outside of adjusting lasers 6) step away and test the changes.
Creator of another Mining Calculator |
Aidonis Heideran
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:37:00 -
[684]
Constructive comments yay! Thanks mate.
And the dronebay thing is something I haven't quite heard before. (If I missed it on this thread, it's cause I couldn't be bothered to sift through 24 pages of whinage for the good comments :P. And I'm usually a VERY patient guy.)
I think more dronebay would be awesome. It would crank up DPS a bit. Though, of course, CCP may decide to cite fluff reasons for not including bigger drone bays.
|
Black Scorpio
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:40:00 -
[685]
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Black Scorpio
You are a moron and a noob. Did not read past your first sentence. Shield tanking - superior, ah ok.. i'll tell them that. Maybe in your passive version, but really who are you kidding?
Your inability to properly utilize shield tanks and med slots is not my problem. Try examining the strengths of your ships and then utilizing them instead of trying to fly them like gallente blaster boats.
Would you like to schedule a 1v1 with your Raven and my BS of choice? I'm sure between my inability to use mid slots appropriately and your superior shield tanking Raven in PvP you should have nothing to worry about. I would also like you to have your Raven scramble me at all times, just so I can see at least one of your mid slot of yours used as mines will be..
|
Black Scorpio
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:45:00 -
[686]
Originally by: Hugh Ruka
Originally by: Tarron Sarek This is about how they make their view known.
Constructive criticism, perhaps even with some arguments and based on facts? Great!
Senseless flaming, spouting and blabbering? Based on nothing except hearsay and bias? No thanks!
Constructive criticism is not much possible here, because all we have is a change taken from thin air and thrown out with half-assed arguments.
If I want constructive criticism, I state my case clearly in full detail, my reasoning and solutions so far and then let people consider all things said.
Not just stating "we think that this is a solution, deal with it, something else may come later".
Exactly my m8!!!
|
Black Scorpio
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:47:00 -
[687]
Originally by: Tarron Sarek Most suggestions to 'fix' Amarr are crap, and attest to a lack of insight into game mechanics and/or game design. Or they simply destroy any racial trait and make Amarr more like the other races. Why should CCP implement them?
Just because you repeat the same rubbish over and over again doesn't make it any less rubbish.
On a different note.. Please CCP, next time no blog. Just change things and let people deal with it.
The amount of whinage in this thread is disturbing the force.
I feel so robbed! Heavens are falling! It's the END!
If a change like this lets you turn into a whining, flaming mess of testosterone, better leave and play something like Tetris.
Stop the complaining already! This is getting silly. Grow up and take it like a man.
Otherwise Hello Kitty Online is that way -->
Do you like to "Take it like a ... man" Tarron?
|
farfrael
Freelancer Union
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:49:00 -
[688]
Uh?
I don't understand why because the minmatar/gallente EM armor resists are (supposedly) too high you have decided to screw the caldari shield resists?
In addition, the reduction discussed in your example from 92.5% to 90% is just a joke, it's not going to make any difference whatsoever.
As for amarr pilots not doing enough DPS, not being good at PvP blah, blah, blah (cry me a river) please watch THAT VID ! and reconsider.
|
Aidonis Heideran
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:50:00 -
[689]
Originally by: Black Scorpio
Originally by: Hugh Ruka
Originally by: Tarron Sarek This is about how they make their view known.
Constructive criticism, perhaps even with some arguments and based on facts? Great!
Senseless flaming, spouting and blabbering? Based on nothing except hearsay and bias? No thanks!
Constructive criticism is not much possible here, because all we have is a change taken from thin air and thrown out with half-assed arguments.
If I want constructive criticism, I state my case clearly in full detail, my reasoning and solutions so far and then let people consider all things said.
Not just stating "we think that this is a solution, deal with it, something else may come later".
Exactly my m8!!!
Maybe you guys ticked him off? haha. "Hmm maybe I'll revise the changes if they have better ideas." "OMG YOU SUCK ZULU GO TO HELL OR IM QUITTING GAME" "err okay screw you guys too then."
|
snotvomit
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:56:00 -
[690]
I have posted in another topic, but wanted to add my opinion here in the hope that the Devs take notice.
They have acknowleged that there is a problem with many Amarr ships and that this needs to be addressed.
What I still can't understand is why nerfing EVERYONE's armour and shields (especially the EXP nerf to shields) is preferable to specific boosting of the Amarr weaknesses.
If Amarr are buffed so that they can use lasers more effectively, then that's a very specific, targeted change.
As others have pointed out previously, nerfing everyone's resistances seems to have much more potential for unintended consequences.
|
|
Yazmina
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 20:20:00 -
[691]
I agree, that nerfing sheild tanking is wrong. The armor nerf still remains to be seen, but I think that CCP misses the point here. As has been said, AMARR NEEDS THE BOOST, OTHER RACES DONT NEED A NERF. Its simple, do this and everyone will be happy:
1. REDUCE CAP 25%-50% FOR ALL LASERS 2. REDUCE PG/CPU ON LASERS BY ABOUT 25%(OR MORE) 3. GIVE REAL BONUSES TO AMARR SHIPS 4. CERTAIN SHIPS NEED MORE MID SLOTS
These are the issues. Amarr does enough damage but has trouble fitting optimally. If they have more slots for damage mods and tank mods all will be well. Please CCP do this and really give Amarr the oomph you promised without hitting everything with that nerf bat!
|
Aidonis Heideran
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 20:24:00 -
[692]
Agreed on PG/Cap fix. 25% less cap on all lasers sounds good. Though if they just do that then the bonuses generally don't need to be fixed, because the -25% inherent + 50% for ship bonus (the latter of which was just under "enough" before fix) would equal a decent amount of cap reduction.
Also, Amarr armour tank, so I fail to see how your #4 is relevant to being able to fit more tank/gank mods.
|
Alex Medvedov
Minmatar Soliders Of Eve The Church.
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 20:24:00 -
[693]
From Minmatar t2 ships point of view - if you have armor tanking ship, you get from 92,5% to 90% EM armor resitance. Well who cares, if you think that would boost the Amar, than do it i have no problems at all. But if you have t2 shield tanking ship you would loose 10% of explosive resistance and how it helps Amar?? I think it helps Minmatar:)) Wouldnt be better to lower both shield and armor EM resists?
|
HatfulOfHollow
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 20:25:00 -
[694]
Who wants to bet me that even after 24 pages of people saying these are horrible changes, they still make it to Tranquility?
|
Haradgrim
The Wild Bunch INTERDICTION
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 20:28:00 -
[695]
I think I have read all of the comments on the issue, but; Has CCP given a reason why they don't think that a pg/cpu and cap usage reduction + addition of a new bonus for Lasers/Amarr ships would be a worse way to go about this then the resist changes?
Originally by: CCP Oveur ...every forum whine feels like a baby pony is getting killed
|
Aidonis Heideran
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 20:36:00 -
[696]
I think their blanket "we don't think certain solutions are correct" statements have addressed that, but their reason is generally regarded as BS by threadgoers.
Quote: The issues These are the issues that we've identified with Amarr:
Some ships could need lovin' Cap usage on Energy Weapons may be too high in some cases Fitting requirements on some Energy Weapons need adjusting Base EM resistances on armor are very high
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. Then once you start looking at the Minmatar ships that get extra 10% resistances to EM on armor by default and their Tech 2 versions go up to 92.5% resistances, well the issue pretty much explains itself.
The solution we've been looking at to fix this is quite simple and straight forward. Remove 10% off the EM resistance on all Tech 1 ships and re-calculate the racial bonuses for the Tech 2 ships from there. To maintain a correct ratio between shield tanking and armor tanking we'd also remove 10% from the explosive resistances on shields.
That's not to say we won't do anything about the other issues. For example we'll be looking into some of the Amarr ships this patch. However we don't want to change too much in one go so we're trying to pace ourselves and spread the changes over more than one patch.
They've ID'ed cap and PG as issues, but they think by far the largest issue isn't even DPS but that EM on Armour is too high. (Note the choice of the LEAST plausible problem as being the biggest here)
As much as I love ya guys CCP, and will defend you from all the uber-whiners, after I re-looked at the blog in detail I have to say: Not the smartest decisions mates.
|
Summersnow
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 20:55:00 -
[697]
Edited by: Summersnow on 01/02/2008 21:01:33 "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. Then once you start looking at the Minmatar ships that get extra 10% resistances to EM on armor by default and their Tech 2 versions go up to 92.5% resistances, well the issue pretty much explains itself.
The solution we've been looking at to fix this is quite simple and straight forward. Remove 10% off the EM resistance on all Tech 1 ships and re-calculate the racial bonuses for the Tech 2 ships from there. To maintain a correct ratio between shield tanking and armor tanking we'd also remove 10% from the explosive resistances on shields."
So the BIGGEST problem is shield tanking is unpopular, BY FAR no less, your own words.
Your solution to the BIGGEST problem, BY FAR no less, is to nurf shield tanking.
In a way that is of ABSOLUTELY NO BENEFIT TO THE AMARR, which is what I thought the goal of this thread was.
BRILLIANT !!!!!!!!!!!!
where can I get paid the big bucks for an idea as counterintuituve as this ??????????????????
Seriously, this is just dumb.
As far as your second point.
Maybe you should read up on eve history a bit, maybe realize minmatar have been the racial enemy of the amarr since there birth as a nation ( look there even bundled as the amarr enemy in the card game ).
now, if you are building a ship to combat you racial enemy what damage resists do you emphasize? the ones yer enemy does?
which damage types do amarr do?
seriously, reducing from 92.5% em to 90% em is going to do what exactly? the amount of em getting through is tiny anyways, as it should be given the past history of these two races.
Shouldn;t the solution to an AMARR problem be one that affects AMARR ships, i.e. more cap or more damage to thermic?
|
Tsu'ko
Valley Forge STELLAR LEGION
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 21:12:00 -
[698]
Originally by: Flaming Lemming How many pages since a Dev reply?
Yeah, they give a damn what we have to say. Re: Carrier nerf
Maybe they are too busy to reply to every post because they actually do something useful compared to what some of the people here is doing.
Patience, they are working on a patch.
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 21:13:00 -
[699]
Edited by: Tarron Sarek on 01/02/2008 21:13:05
Originally by: Black Scorpio Do you like to "Take it like a ... man" Tarron?
I don't know what your're trying to say, but I definitely know that I don't want to know and that it's a pretty much senseless one-liner which didn't justify creating a whole new post in the first place.
___________________________________ - Balance is power, guard it well -
Please stop using the word 'nerf' Nothing spells 'incompetence' or 'don't take me serious' like those four letters |
Kell Braugh
Caldari letter of marque Plunder-Bears
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 21:38:00 -
[700]
Although My alt flies t2 minnie ships and this wil hurt me, at least CCP is picking up on the fact that damage bonuses are better than fitting/cap/range bonuses (in PVP).
Just can't wait till Caldari actually have a viable solo PvP platform that isn't T2, Especially in the age of speed-tanking, Caldari solo pvp is laughable at best if not just downright discouraging.
EFT screen shots are NOT an accurate example of a ship's abilities. |
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 22:10:00 -
[701]
We love the changes to Zealot and Apoc! Good job zulu!
Amarr pvp Vids: Inq - I Inq - II |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 22:14:00 -
[702]
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.
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 22:18:00 -
[703]
Originally by: Black Scorpio
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Black Scorpio
You are a moron and a noob. Did not read past your first sentence. Shield tanking - superior, ah ok.. i'll tell them that. Maybe in your passive version, but really who are you kidding?
Your inability to properly utilize shield tanks and med slots is not my problem. Try examining the strengths of your ships and then utilizing them instead of trying to fly them like gallente blaster boats.
Would you like to schedule a 1v1 with your Raven and my BS of choice? I'm sure between my inability to use mid slots appropriately and your superior shield tanking Raven in PvP you should have nothing to worry about. I would also like you to have your Raven scramble me at all times, just so I can see at least one of your mid slot of yours used as mines will be..
This is your first failure. Look at what you are asking and then think about why this is a loaded question. Specificially, look at this qith regards to what i asked you to do earlier.
That being said, the Raven would probably win unless you were shooting it with an Abaddon or Phoon, and even then, it would still probably win. If i flew ravens.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 22:22:00 -
[704]
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 01/02/2008 22:22:42
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 ********.
Cencored.
I think its good that we finally have a good fleet ship. We have been kinda missing one with all the mwd, cap, range problems. We need this.
Amarr pvp Vids: Inq - I Inq - II |
Steve Clone
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 22:41:00 -
[705]
What ? Where? WHen? GIVE me MOARRRRR news.... not everyone plays on SIsi
|
Stage one
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 22:45:00 -
[706]
Still the main problem i think, is laser has limited value on damage output and high resist on armor tanker.
Secondly, i do not understand reason to reduce shield exp resist which directly boost minmatar ship espcially their t2 ammo is exp damage. It seems no one even bother to mention. I rather ask CCP is this patch minmatar boost instead of amarr boost.
In order to really boost only amarr is reduce EM resist on armor and increase exp resist on armor across board. Just leave shield resist as is or give extra 10%.
Remember the amarr is the lowest populatuion based on last economic statistics survey.
|
Torashuu
Amarr TALON'S GRIP Green Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 23:30:00 -
[707]
Edited by: Torashuu on 01/02/2008 23:30:39 Its taking a bit to get used to, but at the moment I'm really liking the resist changes, as well as the Omen/Zealot/Apoc stuff on SiSi, though the apoc might be having a wee bit to much optimal atm
|
nihlanth
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 23:49:00 -
[708]
Originally by: Torashuu Edited by: Torashuu on 01/02/2008 23:30:39 Its taking a bit to get used to, but at the moment I'm really liking the resist changes, as well as the Omen/Zealot/Apoc stuff on SiSi, though the apoc might be having a wee bit to much optimal atm
Looks like it's time for the Amarr empire to celebrate. These changes sound pretty good, cant wait for TQ implementation.
|
Phrixus Zephyr
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 23:54:00 -
[709]
Just when i thought you couldn't miss the mark anymore.
You don't play the game, i'm not even asking the question anymore. It's pretty self evident, looking at some of the most rediculous changes i think i've ever seen.
And here's me thinking the last patch of irrational changes was bad enough.
|
Ricdic's Hoe
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 00:00:00 -
[710]
Yeh ok. Let's nerf every other ship so the Amarr ships are more powerful....
The Raven has the lowest amount of resistance hitpoints out of all the t1 battleships iirc. Now it just got lower on it's one, SINGLE half decent resist.
Rubbish.
|
|
Guillame Herschel
Gallente Cheers Restaurant and Bar Coalition Of Empires
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 01:02:00 -
[711]
Edited by: Guillame Herschel on 02/02/2008 01:02:14
Originally by: Tsu'ko Maybe they are too busy to reply to every post because they actually do something useful compared to what some of the people here is doing.
Patience, they are working on a patch.
NO, they finished work and deployed it to the Singularity server, which is the last step before posting it to Tranquility. That this off-topic patch is on Sisi means they have finished almost all work on it, and want feedback from us.
This is it: the patch don't accomplish what it sets out to do
Now they can go back to work.
-- Guile can always trump hardware -- |
Blutreiter
Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 03:32:00 -
[712]
Can someone who is playing on SiSi give some additional information on the current tweaking on those ships please?
Thanks in advance!
Cogito ergo boom - I think i'll blow sh*t up
Originally by: CCP Explorer I know we have said this before, but this time we really mean itÖ
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 03:40:00 -
[713]
Originally by: Blutreiter Can someone who is playing on SiSi give some additional information on the current tweaking on those ships please?
Thanks in advance!
-Apoc, more cap grid, got 7.5% range bonus instead of cap bonus per level. Good fleet ship now.
-Omen and Zealot +1 turret hardpoint. Havent tested omen but Zealot is spot on.
-Tracking disruptors kill optimal AND fall off at the same time/amount now. (This is good stuff)
Amarr pvp Vids: Inq - I Inq - II |
Cosmo Raata
Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 04:01:00 -
[714]
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.
Don't Ban me for my Love of Amarr! |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 04:11:00 -
[715]
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.
I think they will be looking at fittings and cap soon because they havent touched omen grid/cpu really and it definately will need some love there. So Im pretty sure that will be looked at.
Question remains if Abso and Vult get another turret and if they fix pilgrim.
I wouldnt get my hopes up for extra mids for retri and coercer tbh.
Amarr pvp Vids: Inq - I Inq - II |
Blutreiter
Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 04:13:00 -
[716]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Blutreiter Can someone who is playing on SiSi give some additional information on the current tweaking on those ships please?
Thanks in advance!
-Apoc, more cap grid, got 7.5% range bonus instead of cap bonus per level. Good fleet ship now.
-Omen and Zealot +1 turret hardpoint. Havent tested omen but Zealot is spot on.
-Tracking disruptors kill optimal AND fall off at the same time/amount now. (This is good stuff)
Almost too nice on the Apoc
I think someone put down the numbers somewhere and concluded that even 5% would be damn nice, due to the energy turrets high optimal. 7,5% is not only a stripper in the birthday cake, it's a hot, oiled female one.
5th turret is nice as well! Will the fitting suffice for it? Also, will the cap last for an additional turret? (Can't have everything I know)
And the tracking disruptor fix... let me just say that the stripper just magically lost her bikini in a split second and is doing a lapdance
Cogito ergo boom - I think i'll blow sh*t up
Originally by: CCP Explorer I know we have said this before, but this time we really mean itÖ
|
Xeron Silverblade
Esthar Industries Tres Viri
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 04:21:00 -
[717]
People: learn to READ and learn to THINK!
read the devblog and read the answers from zulupark. and think before posting. can't be that hard :-/
4 out of 5 posts in this thread are dumb and therefore unneeded. thx.
regarding the changes: good step into the right direction. let's see how it turns out when they are deployed.
|
Sevro
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 06:32:00 -
[718]
I like all the changes so far. Just need Amarr drones, beam fittings, and cap to have a look over and a tweak. Would love the retri to have 1 less high and add that to the mid.
As for explosive crystals. No way. It's good that EM damage isn't such a bad damage type anymore.
|
Sevro
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 07:02:00 -
[719]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Question remains if Abso and Vult get another turret and if they fix pilgrim.
Pilgrim will be better now with the TD boost. Abso might not need the 7th turret with EM resists getting a nerf?
|
Druadan
Institute of Fungineering
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 08:00:00 -
[720]
Originally by: Takeshi Yamato Edited by: Takeshi Yamato on 01/02/2008 15:07:38 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'm sure though that a way to add a 10 second delay when switching from EM/THERM crystals to EM/EXP ones could be found.
The idea of lasers dealing explosive damage is ridiculous. If you do that then you might as well rename them "Damage Type A", B, C, and D, as their names will mean sod all. Besides, if Amarr get explosive ammo that will just further generalise things as far as picking your damage types go, leaving Gallente (and Caldari railboats) the only ones pinned to specific types.
|
|
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 : œ Great Game + 14/20 Revelations : œ Desyncs... + 11/20 Trinity : œ BBSOD, Bugs, Desyncs, F*** Nerfs + 10/20 v1.1 : œ [...] + 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 : œ Great Game + 14/20 Revelations : œ Desyncs... + 11/20 Trinity : œ BBSOD, Bugs, Desyncs, F*** Nerfs + 10/20 v1.1 : œ [...] + 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 |
|
rgreat
Gallente OEG Red Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 13:34:00 -
[751]
Edited by: rgreat on 03/02/2008 13:44:11
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer So blasters can do even more stupid damage? I think not.
Effective range = 5 km or less. No point to use 'long range' t2 ammo for blasters as it plain suck. And not like blasters have very good tracking up in close.
Amarr have it very nice with optimal for 'close range' medim lasers of like 30km with t2 ammo. I bet new Zealots will do alot more damage in gangs compared to Deimoses. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 13:44:00 -
[752]
Originally by: rgreat
No point to use 'long range' t2 ammo for blasters. Not much of a difference.
This is not true. -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
Ogul
Caldari ZiTek Deepspace Explorations Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 13:46:00 -
[753]
Originally by: rgreat
How about Hybrid damage boost then?
Since the damage ratio between hybrids and lasers needs to be preserved to ensure balance that is absolutely necessary. Just like the shield resist nerfs.
--- This is a war declaration, issued from your alt corp. It is used to gank people in high sec. |
rgreat
Gallente OEG Red Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 13:48:00 -
[754]
Edited by: rgreat on 03/02/2008 13:54:33
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: rgreat
No point to use 'long range' t2 ammo for blasters. Not much of a difference.
This is not true.
Null M ammo - 25% range bonus (opt+fallof). (effective range 5 km -> 10 km compared to Antimatter ammo) Scorch M Cristals - 50% range bonus (optimal). (effective range 10 km -> 30+ km compared to Multifreq Cristals)
10 km for Null blasters = still point blank 'web' range, only with less damage and tracking compared to AM. No use for it. Zealot user with Scorch can fire Pulses earlier, and from 'safe' range. Deimos pilot with null ammo - can't. Think again. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
rgreat
Gallente OEG Red Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 13:59:00 -
[755]
Edited by: rgreat on 03/02/2008 14:09:38
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Im pretty sure a blaster pilot will tell you that he uses long range blaster ammo. Its quite common...
Common failures.
In fact ALL T2 Blaster ammo is useless. Null have crap damage and range. Void have crap traking and terrible cap usage.
Simple and faction AntiMatter is the only one ammo type used in blasters. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
Ogul
Caldari ZiTek Deepspace Explorations Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 14:09:00 -
[756]
Edited by: Ogul on 03/02/2008 14:09:06
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Ogul
Since the damage ratio between hybrids and lasers needs to be preserved to ensure balance that is absolutely necessary. Just like the shield resist nerfs.
This is where youre wrong. The only ratio that needs preserving is damage/range ratio. Have they changed range on hybrids? No. Will they change their damage? No.
It was a perfectly fine reason for nerfing shield resists. So why not apply it to turret damage?
--- This is a war declaration, issued from your alt corp. It is used to gank people in high sec. |
rgreat
Gallente OEG Red Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 14:14:00 -
[757]
Edited by: rgreat on 03/02/2008 14:15:28 As for damage/range argument.
Damage of all weapons except hybrids was increased due to reduced base resistances on EM/EXP.
You suggest to nerf lasers, missiles and projectiles?
It better boost hybrids only then to nerf all other weapons. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 14:56:00 -
[758]
Originally by: rgreat Edited by: rgreat on 03/02/2008 14:25:40 As for 'preserve damage/range' argument.
Damage of all weapons except hybrids was increased due to reduced base resistances on EM/EXP.
Youre wrong. Now that there is less EM and EX on armor resp. shields people will try to cover that up instead of sticking another omni resist (wich would bring thermal and kinetic resists up) resulting in hybrids actually getting a small dmg boost technically. -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
rgreat
Gallente OEG Red Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 15:07:00 -
[759]
Edited by: rgreat on 03/02/2008 15:11:23
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Youre wrong. Now that there is less EM and EX on armor resp. shields people will try to cover that up instead of sticking another omni resist (wich would bring thermal and kinetic resists up) resulting in hybrids actually getting a small dmg boost technically.
You have a point here, but it is only possible on some configurations.
I dont think people will change tank setups alot just becouse of that. Damage controls and EAMN will still be preferred mod types in armor tanks. Not so sure about shield tanks, as im not useing ones. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
Cpt Abestos
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 19:44:00 -
[760]
Why not just boost lasers and the amarr ships that are bad and leave resists alone?
|
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 19:45:00 -
[761]
Originally by: Cpt Abestos Why not just boost lasers and the amarr ships that are bad and leave resists alone?
Because that would lasers the bane of non-tanked, semi-tanked and shield tanked ships. This was a better way to balance it. -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
Jerusalem Eve
Amarr Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 20:04:00 -
[762]
Now that I had some time to absorb the changes to some of the ships and TDs, maybe hold off on mucking with resists. There are still a lot of things being changed and I think your changing too many variables at once.
Just my .02 ISK
|
Buyerr
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 20:05:00 -
[763]
so about the -10% em res on armour and -10% expl on shield..
well i see this as a caldari nerf (like they arn't nerfed enough in the pvp area), since there are much more pvp'ers using expl damage type then em type, but even if they doesn't it is still a caldari pvp nerf since the shield tankers will not only have lower resist but they have a 0 em resist which will now become more popular...
so basically i think you guys need to rework your idea or do something about the caldari pvp aspect.
just a fast thought... (nice to see that you finally look on amarr) I declare war on stupidity |
Aidonis Heideran
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 21:19:00 -
[764]
Actually there should be no boost to blasters, because Kin/Therm are best damage types in game (in general) anyways.
|
Julius Romanus
Amarr Blood Corsair's Blood Blind
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 21:59:00 -
[765]
Originally by: Buyerr so about the -10% em res on armour and -10% expl on shield..
well i see this as a caldari nerf (like they arn't nerfed enough in the pvp area), since there are much more pvp'ers using expl damage type then em type, but even if they doesn't it is still a caldari pvp nerf since the shield tankers will not only have lower resist but they have a 0 em resist which will now become more popular...
so basically i think you guys need to rework your idea or do something about the caldari pvp aspect.
just a fast thought... (nice to see that you finally look on amarr)
They did, go look at your moa eagle ferox blackbird rook falcon kitsune and torp raven
Because in the last few patches ALL have recieved a boost in pvp.
|
scorp3
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 22:42:00 -
[766]
If your gonna nerf the explosive resists on caldari ships why dont you add to our em.....Personaly I hate nerfs
|
Sky Marshal
Aeden Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 23:06:00 -
[767]
Edited by: Sky Marshal on 03/02/2008 23:12:22
Originally by: Julius Romanus They did, go look at your moa eagle ferox blackbird rook falcon kitsune and torp raven
Because in the last few patches ALL have recieved a boost in pvp.
Well... I never see someone use a Ferox, as the Drake is more efficient.
Blackbird, Kitsune, Rook & Falcon are always primary so not very usable, this depend of the situation. Moa... If you still use cruisers, yes it can be good, if not, forget it.
Torp Raven is indeed a boost, and I really appreciate this... for ratting. For PVP I don't know, never have the opportunity to test.
There is the Eagle, who received a nerf when tracking computers was nerfed.
Actually for PVP I only use Drake and Cerberus, and a Rokh for fleet battle. Few times a Kestrel, and I pray every day that CCP will never nerf them (it was useless). I have a Torp Raven for BS gang but he never leave the station for the moment. _______
16/20 Dragon : œ Great Game + 14/20 Revelations : œ Desyncs... + 11/20 Trinity : œ BBSOD, Bugs, Desyncs, F*** Nerfs + 10/20 v1.1 : œ [...] + EXP shield nerf +
CCP, you are tiring. |
Aidonis Heideran
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 23:13:00 -
[768]
Quote: If your gonna nerf the explosive resists on caldari ships why dont you add to our em.....Personaly I hate nerfs
Read the blog. ALL ships have EM-Armour and EX-Shield nerfs, not just caldari. So, it balances out. (plus it's not an EM-shield nerf, which would be so ridiculous I couldn't begin to describe it)
And nerfs happen. Games need balance, boosting everyone until everyone is the same 500 billion kilometer tallness is not an option.
Quote: Well... I never see someone use a Ferox, as the Drake is more efficient.
I have. Ferox is still decent. Prophecy for Amarr on the other hand (which hasn't been addressed in the dev blog) is far more crappy.
Quote: Blackbird, Kitsune, Rook & Falcon are always primary so not very usable. Moa... If you still use cruisers, yes it can be good, if not, forget it.
Why wouldn't you use cruisers? Occasionally throw these medium sized suckers out. They're cheap, and they aren't total garbage. And just the fact that BB/Kits/Rook/Falc are always prim doesn't matter at all. In fact, all that says is they are REALLY good.
Quote: Torp Raven is indeed a boost, and I really appreciate this... for ratting. For PVP I don't know, never have the opportunity to test.
Okay, I'll give you that.
Quote: There is the Eagle, who received a nerf when tracking computers was nerfed so...
But got an extra turret. And don't forget tracking computer is a MODULE. therefore it affects ANYONE WHO USES IT.
|
Sky Marshal
Aeden Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 00:16:00 -
[769]
Quote: I have. Ferox is still decent.
Well, it wasn't expected, as I think the ferox more fragile and do less DPS than a Drake, so useless Maybe I will take a look with the new changes.
Quote: In fact, all that says is they are REALLY good.
Yes, they are dangerous, really dangerous, I admit it and I don't say that they are worthless, but not easily usable as they are killed fastly This kind of ship separate people who like use them and those who like survive more than a minut ^^
I never said the contrary for tracking computers :) but this didn't help the Eagle, whose standard fitting included 2 of them. _______
16/20 Dragon : œ Great Game + 14/20 Revelations : œ Desyncs... + 11/20 Trinity : œ BBSOD, Bugs, Desyncs, F*** Nerfs + 10/20 v1.1 : œ [...] + EXP shield nerf +
CCP, you are tiring. |
Aidonis Heideran
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 00:27:00 -
[770]
=P fear not Caldarians, this is a mainly Amarr oriented series of updates. the caldari/gallente ship-fixes are purely for balance.
So your time may yet come!
|
|
Summersnow
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 06:39:00 -
[771]
From Zuluparks BLOG
The solution we've been looking at to fix this is quite simple and straight forward. Remove 10% off the EM resistance on all Tech 1 ships and re-calculate the racial bonuses for the Tech 2 ships from there. To maintain a correct ratio between shield tanking and armor tanking we'd also remove 10% from the explosive resistances on shields. Raven base resistances
Note the emphasis I placed, armor vs shield ratio must be maintained
Now look at the example for a standard T1 ship. - Before changes
Shields EM - 0%, Exp - 60%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 20% = 120 resist Armor EM - 60%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 45% = 140 resist
ratio = 1.1666. i.e. armor gets a built in overall 16% resist bonus
- After changes
Shields EM - 0%, Exp - 50%, Kin - 40%, Therm - 20% = 110 resist Armor EM - 50%, Exp - 10%, Kin - 25%, Therm - 45% = 130 resist
ratio = 1.1818. i.e. armor gets a built in overall 18% resist bonus, a 2% INCREASE in ratio.
hardly what I'd call maintaining the correct ratio
maintaining the correct ration would be 120/140 = .8571428 x 130 = 111.42856, which rounded off = a new shield explosive resist of 51.4%, not 50%
|
Seishi Maru
The Black Dawn Gang Mashen T'plak
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 09:24:00 -
[772]
The "EM Problem" of amarr is a falacy! THere is a very good post about this in SH, where a guy made a very good work analysing the time an armageddon, MEgathron and tempest with common setups take to kill a MEgathron with also a common setup (with EANM and DC). Surprisingly the Armageddon was almost tied with the megathron(was less than 5% time difference) and tempest quite behind them.
THe no resist on shields buffer and the base high DPS make laser work very well. Only exeption are extreme cases or exageration like 3 EANM II and DC or 2 EANM and DC on a typhoon.
CCP shoudl just have made a boost to active hardeners. And if they wanted to reduce EM resists, then 5% woudl be more than enough (for a total of 12.5% of real reduction in resistance)
25% is ridiculows. I never ever saw any ship in eve ever gets such a massive boost in damage.
|
SephiriotH
REUNI0N Red Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 10:01:00 -
[773]
Edited by: SephiriotH on 04/02/2008 10:02:14 lol... for another time I'm asking myself, did devs EVER bothered to take a look into some major alliances killboards and figure out a top damagers ? they would be a damn siurprised too see that revelation dreadnoghts are far from being last ones while killing minmatar towers (the ones that supposed to have anti-amarr resistance) , also same for kiling capital ships. They might also discover that armageddon is a tremendous dmg dealer too. But nvm - lasers are too weak because we said so!
Another thing : **many playrs tank armor** Orly ? During all that time you finally discovered that electronic warfare need a medium slots , therefore shield tanks are not so popular ? And yes.. of course it's the reason to get the shield resistance to explosive 10% less , as it will increase laser dmg output and make shield tank EVEN MORE popular... And no, this doesnt affects minmatar EMP ammunition...
enough..gimme a break ...
Remember : With a bad word and good torpedo you are always hurting more then with a bad word alone. |
Amira Shadowsong
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 10:50:00 -
[774]
Originally by: SephiriotH Edited by: SephiriotH on 04/02/2008 10:02:14 lol... for another time I'm asking myself, did devs EVER bothered to take a look into some major alliances killboards and figure out a top damagers ? they would be a damn siurprised too see that revelation dreadnoghts are far from being last ones while killing minmatar towers (the ones that supposed to have anti-amarr resistance) , also same for kiling capital ships. They might also discover that armageddon is a tremendous dmg dealer too. But nvm - lasers are too weak because we said so!
Another thing : **many playrs tank armor** Orly ? During all that time you finally discovered that electronic warfare need a medium slots , therefore shield tanks are not so popular ? And yes.. of course it's the reason to get the shield resistance to explosive 10% less , as it will increase laser dmg output and make shield tank EVEN MORE popular... And no, this doesnt affects minmatar EMP ammunition...
enough..gimme a break ...
Geddons might be top damage dealers because they have enough range. Maybe gallente should learn not to fit blasters on everything so they can actually reach a target with dps before its dead? Failed arguments.
|
Sky Marshal
Aeden Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 12:56:00 -
[775]
Edited by: Sky Marshal on 04/02/2008 12:56:50
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong Geddons might be top damage dealers because they have enough range. Maybe gallente should learn not to fit blasters on everything so they can actually reach a target with dps before its dead? Failed arguments.
He used alliance killboards for his statement, so the result of some fleet battles who are in general in a range of 140/150KM, and indeed we often see Amarr ships in top damage dealers.
I don't think that Gallente pilots are too dumb to fit blasters in this kind of fight...
You fail. _______
16/20 Dragon : œ Great Game + 14/20 Revelations : œ Desyncs... + 11/20 Trinity : œ BBSOD, Bugs, Desyncs, F*** Nerfs + 10/20 v1.1 : œ [...] + EXP shield nerf +
CCP, you are tiring. |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 13:05:00 -
[776]
Originally by: Summersnow From Zuluparks BLOG
That is not the ratio they are talking about.
E.G.
If EM = 0% resist shield and 60% resist armor And if Ex = 60% resist armor and 0% resist armor and if thermal = 30% resist shield and 30% reist armor.
Then, against a ship with equal shields and armor a ship that does 100% EM or EX will take longer to kill the total HP than a ship dealing 100% thermal assuming they both do the same dps.
100 DPS vs 100 shield and 100 armor
Thermal = 1.42 seconds shield, 1.42 seconds armor = 2.82 seconds EM = 1 seconds shield, 2.5 seconds armor = 3.5 seconds EX = 2.5 seconds shield, 1 seconds armor = 3.5 seconds
So despite their being "equal" resists on both shield and armor and equal total resits on em and thermal, EM damage is conisderably worse than thermal.
|
Avery Ubermann
Pitbull Industries
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 13:23:00 -
[777]
It may not be all that was hoped for, hopefully in time that will happen, but in the meantime this is a very pleasing step in the right direction for us Amarrians. \o/
Advanced Psychosis/ Rank 8 / SP: 666666 of 2048000 Currently training to: level 5
|
Angelic Eviaran
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 14:14:00 -
[778]
Originally by: Sky Marshal Edited by: Sky Marshal on 04/02/2008 12:56:50
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong Geddons might be top damage dealers because they have enough range. Maybe gallente should learn not to fit blasters on everything so they can actually reach a target with dps before its dead? Failed arguments.
He used alliance killboards for his statement, so the result of some fleet battles who are in general in a range of 140/150KM, and indeed we often see Amarr ships in top damage dealers.
I don't think that Gallente pilots are too dumb to fit blasters in this kind of fight...
You fail.
Isnt this because amarr snipers max range ends up around 150km? Therefor its not odd that they are doing the most damage because other snipers have longer then 150km range = less damage at 150km....
|
Ogul
Caldari ZiTek Deepspace Explorations Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 14:53:00 -
[779]
Originally by: Angelic Eviaran
Isnt this because amarr snipers max range ends up around 150km? Therefor its not odd that they are doing the most damage because other snipers have longer then 150km range = less damage at 150km....
So the only way to make Amarr competitive is to give them the most damage AND the longest range?
--- This is a war declaration, issued from your alt corp. It is used to gank people in high sec. |
Angelic Eviaran
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 15:02:00 -
[780]
Originally by: Ogul
Originally by: Angelic Eviaran
Isnt this because amarr snipers max range ends up around 150km? Therefor its not odd that they are doing the most damage because other snipers have longer then 150km range = less damage at 150km....
So the only way to make Amarr competitive is to give them the most damage AND the longest range?
We like to make stuff up, yes? Longest range, lol.
|
|
Ogul
Caldari ZiTek Deepspace Explorations Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 15:21:00 -
[781]
Originally by: Angelic Eviaran
Originally by: Ogul
So the only way to make Amarr competitive is to give them the most damage AND the longest range?
We like to make stuff up, yes? Longest range, lol.
Having the most damage and less range didn't seem fair enough to you.
--- This is a war declaration, issued from your alt corp. It is used to gank people in high sec. |
Angelic Eviaran
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 15:31:00 -
[782]
Originally by: Ogul
Originally by: Angelic Eviaran
Originally by: Ogul
So the only way to make Amarr competitive is to give them the most damage AND the longest range?
We like to make stuff up, yes? Longest range, lol.
Having the most damage and less range didn't seem fair enough to you.
I still dont make stuff up like you. Apoc is fine. The other snipers werent nerfed. Stop whining and back to your caves.
|
Lexiana Del'Amore
Gallente Nouvelle Rouvenor
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 18:58:00 -
[783]
In conclusion
We are boosting Amarr by nerfing the armour tank on every single ship flown in eve
|
Aidonis Heideran
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 21:06:00 -
[784]
Quote: I still dont make stuff up like you. Apoc is fine. The other snipers werent nerfed. Stop whining and back to your caves.
Exactly. Rokh still better due to being able to hit about 250km anyway IMO.
Quote: In conclusion We are boosting Amarr by nerfing the armour tank on every single ship flown in eve
Apparently. Not too great of a nerf though seriously. Oes Noes 10% off EM which was very high anyway.
|
Valadeya uthanaras
Killjoy.
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 21:11:00 -
[785]
Originally by: Lexiana Del'Amore In conclusion
We are boosting Amarr by nerfing the armour tank on every single ship flown in eve
I dont like the therm "NERFING" all armor tank....
ATM the only source of EM damage in PVP is laser, drone and missile not being used in most cases
It is not like its gonna affect your "FOTM Dominix" vs "I-Win megathron" fight in any way....... unless you start using EM drone , and I dont think that's going to happen.... so The In reallity, yes , ITs an amarr boost, cause
Caldari rarely use EM missile Gallente rarely use EM drone Minmatarr Rarely use EMP...they use Phased plasma and barrage But Amarr Use laser and are stuck with it
Get your tought straight the only time you will receive EM damage is going to be agaisnt a DDD or an amarr player, And in the case of the amarr player, It is intended to boost him.
So No its not much of an armor nerf , It more of a EM damage boost.....
and to the caldari whiner......
From whom exactly do you receive so much explosive damage........ Drone?, Minmatarr???, I mean Its base 50% now, hardly any nerf you can feel....considering most of the damage done in eve is kinetic and thermal.
Valadeya
|
Elrinarie
Gallente Freelancers Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 23:06:00 -
[786]
great val, so then why the nerf to explosive on shields?
How does that boost amarr? Creator of another Mining Calculator |
Valadeya uthanaras
Killjoy.
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 23:23:00 -
[787]
Originally by: Elrinarie great val, so then why the nerf to explosive on shields?
How does that boost amarr?
Explosive damage does not boost amarr , unless you use explosive drone, witch is more than likely,
But it balance the armor EM reduction, because Minmatarr mainly do Explosive, and had the same problem with the high explosive sheild resist, except they could change their damage more than Amarr
Like I said earlier, If you read properly..... DO YOU REALLY receive that much explosive damage??? NO!!! , so why complaining, For sake of balance he reduce the explosive resist on sheild so that gameplay remain moslty unchanged.
And don't forget that its WAY easier to omnitank sheild than armor, these tasty invulnaribility feild II .... can put it way on top of other resist, like omni-tanking in armor did for EM....
Valadeya
|
Tadius Rhain
Amarr Kalear Fleet Systems
|
Posted - 2008.02.05 01:34:00 -
[788]
(originally posted here but that was a waste of time. Here's hoping it's worth something here...)
EM should be a viable damage type. Theory says low EM resists in shields makes this damage type useful, especially with shields starting at 0% combined with stacking penalties.
I think the problem is in the ratio of shield tankers to armour tankers. All Amarr ships armour tank and as I understand it most Gallente and Minmatar ships also armour tank though I admit I don't know other (lesser) races so well.
I suspect the (proposed?) changes will make EANMs even more favourable. They are enormously powerful modules. And the end result will be proportionally harder for Amarr. I hope I'm proved wrong on this...
I'm not too concerned about T2 Minmatar resists since they are hit pretty hard by stacking penalties when looking at armour tanking. This makes the 90% EM resist irrelevant when they struggle to counter the other damage types. Min-maxing is the opposite to omni tanking and there's a penalty for it!
Comparatively, T2 Amarr armour tanks well because the bonuses boost the weakest types, reducing the affect of stacking penalties and improving the balance for omni tank setups. That and the massive number of low slots, allowing flexibility to chose between resist tank (specific hardeners/membranes) or HP regen tank (omnis, multiple reppers & CPRs). But the issue at hand is the amarr damage type...
In my ideal Eve world Amarr would armour tank, Gallente would shield tank (weakly against EM), Caldari would tank by EW and Minmatar would tank with speed. I think that would mean changing a lot of game rules though. Introduce new forms of EW such as chance based 'break locks on me' which Caldari were skilled with (or something?) and all the MWD and webber rules would have to change for speed tanking to become viable.
One last consideration: Caldari is Amarr's biggest Ally and yet with their shield tanking, they are the most opportune targets for Amarr . I realise this is not too important today but thinking ahead to if/when faction warfare comes in.. it's clear something needs to change. ____________________________________________
|
galphi
Gallente Galactic Accord Senate Accord Corporate Enterprise Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.02.05 05:07:00 -
[789]
So does the change to base resists on armour and shields affect NPC's as well? Or do Amarr mission runners still have to burn through 90% em resist on Angel battleships
Oh and while you're fixing that, are you going to shorten the range on NPC torps as well?
|
tamaz
|
Posted - 2008.02.05 10:41:00 -
[790]
Edited by: tamaz on 05/02/2008 10:41:05
Originally by: galphi So does the change to base resists on armour and shields affect NPC's as well? Or do Amarr mission runners still have to burn through 90% em resist on Angel battleships
Oh and while you're fixing that, are you going to shorten the range on NPC torps as well?
I second this, amarr mission ships are also seriously under powered compared to other races, even with 30 mil more SP and a couple of bil in faction fittings, a noob in a T1 raven goes through missions much quicker than an amarr ship of any type.
If you take a look at the distribution in the player base, there are lots of people NPC'ing and doing missions, it would be nice not to ignore them when trying to 'fix' amarr.
But top marks and thanks for listening to the players (finally) and trying to rebalance amarr ships :)
|
|
Sky Marshal
Aeden Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.02.05 13:03:00 -
[791]
Edited by: Sky Marshal on 05/02/2008 13:04:55 Edited by: Sky Marshal on 05/02/2008 13:03:47
Originally by: Valadeya uthanaras Like I said earlier, If you read properly..... DO YOU REALLY receive that much explosive damage??? NO!!! , so why complaining, For sake of balance he reduce the explosive resist on sheild so that gameplay remain moslty unchanged.
And don't forget that its WAY easier to omnitank sheild than armor, these tasty invulnaribility feild II .... can put it way on top of other resist, like omni-tanking in armor did for EM....
...
Cerberus lost, 4 Matars on 10 Cerberus lost, 5 Matars on 11 Rokh lost, 6 Matars on 24, but they hurt Rokh lost, 2 Matars on 10, but one of them really hurt Rokh lost, 5 Matars on 19, but they are not bad at damage dealers
Of course, this exemples are NOT a reference and NOT a generality. I have in my losses some counter-exemples, but Matar threat don't have to be minimized, and after this nerf, it will be 25% worse same with some "tasty" Invulnerability Field...
The more annoying, is not that CCP want balance, but that they tell us than "the largest problem is that armor tanking is quite a lot more popular than shield tanking", and after that, nerf it anyway instead of justly, take this occasion to "balance" it for make them interresting.
They laugh of us. _______
16/20 Dragon : œ Great Game + 14/20 Revelations : œ Desyncs... + 11/20 Trinity : œ BBSOD, Bugs, Desyncs, F*** Nerfs + 10/20 v1.1 : œ [...] + EXP shield nerf +
CCP, you are tiring. |
Kel Dario
Amarr Blue Sky Inc
|
Posted - 2008.02.05 13:48:00 -
[792]
After I done some experimenting with tanking setups on amarr, gallente and minnie ships I'm starting to believe that the -10% EM-nerf is a good idea, as long as it only affect tech 1 ships.
EM are already the lowest or the next lowest resistance on tech 2 armor tanking ships, after you plugged their inherent racial weakness. Adding more resistance after that point would not make much sense for a player unless he wants to give up damage for only a few percentage more.
Since tech 2 armor tanked ships are already more or less pefectly balanced nerfing their EM-resistance would give Amarr laserships (or other EM-weapons) an unfair edge over them.
Overall this change have been a bit to swallow and digest but it starting to look good, zulupark. Now you just have to reduce fitting requirements and cap-usage on the lasers.
PS. tell Fendahl to give the harbinger a bit more CPU plz.
|
Mourn Navarre
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.02.05 15:07:00 -
[793]
Originally by: DigitalCommunist
I'd also like to suggest the following ideas for making shield tanks more common in EVE:
- introduce new HIGH SLOT warp disruptor that requires more powergrid and cap, but gives -2 at 25% more range - make one for frigate, one for cruiser and one for battleship - switch the medium and low slots of the Muninn around; atm both minnie HACs armor tank, and terribly - but at least the vaga has speed - consider giving shield modules the highest overloading bonuses - make low slot signal amps comparable to mid slot sensor booster - consider adding natural shield recharge to the boost amount and giving PDUs a lower HP bonus but higher recharge bonus
Sensor booster and warp disruptor are pretty necessary for pvp ships, so if you can solve that its going a long way. Minmatar ships should be able to do both, but the majority are still armor tankers which I feel is wrong.
I like those ideas. I like them alot. Pump the minmatar shields to protect their rusty hulls.:)
Those comments suddenly make me remember that years ago I was of the mind that high slots were something that affect others, medium slots affect yourself and low slots require no cap and provide passive boosts to your ship. But that was back in beta when I had no real understanding of the game. Looking at things now, it is a shame they did not actually do that. Ah well.
|
Lil Mule
|
Posted - 2008.02.05 15:57:00 -
[794]
Originally by: Tadius Rhain (originally posted here but that was a waste of time. Here's hoping it's worth something here...)
EM should be a viable damage type. Theory says low EM resists in shields makes this damage type useful, especially with shields starting at 0% combined with stacking penalties.
I think the problem is in the ratio of shield tankers to armour tankers. All Amarr ships armour tank and as I understand it most Gallente and Minmatar ships also armour tank though I admit I don't know other (lesser) races so well.
I suspect the (proposed?) changes will make EANMs even more favourable. They are enormously powerful modules. And the end result will be proportionally harder for Amarr. I hope I'm proved wrong on this...
I'm not too concerned about T2 Minmatar resists since they are hit pretty hard by stacking penalties when looking at armour tanking. This makes the 90% EM resist irrelevant when they struggle to counter the other damage types. Min-maxing is the opposite to omni tanking and there's a penalty for it!
Comparatively, T2 Amarr armour tanks well because the bonuses boost the weakest types, reducing the affect of stacking penalties and improving the balance for omni tank setups. That and the massive number of low slots, allowing flexibility to chose between resist tank (specific hardeners/membranes) or HP regen tank (omnis, multiple reppers & CPRs). But the issue at hand is the amarr damage type...
In my ideal Eve world Amarr would armour tank, Gallente would shield tank (weakly against EM), Caldari would tank by EW and Minmatar would tank with speed. I think that would mean changing a lot of game rules though. Introduce new forms of EW such as chance based 'break locks on me' which Caldari were skilled with (or something?) and all the MWD and webber rules would have to change for speed tanking to become viable.
One last consideration: Caldari is Amarr's biggest Ally and yet with their shield tanking, they are the most opportune targets for Amarr . I realise this is not too important today but thinking ahead to if/when faction warfare comes in.. it's clear something needs to change.
Someone at CCP Give this man a job. Seriously, this is what Ive been harping out for quite some time too - in essence, PLANNING is the biggest problem with CCP and their ship types/damage types, nerfs and constant changes. There is no clear coherent plan as to which race should specialize with what, its a hodge podge, it changes by the day, seemingly on a whim, and its getting worse and worse. (I could submit many many examples - The Curse and Pilgrim, since when were the Amarr specialists at energy nuetralization? Im not saying its a bad thing, but it was kind of just 'dumped' in there because they couldnt think of what else to give them as a Force Recon. Assault Frigates are another example - no clear role, and no indication from CCP that this will ever be cleared up - just added, not planned. Destroyers - what are they used for really? Destoyers are another legacy ship type that has no clear role anymore because other ship classes do it better. Battleships, useful yes, but previously referenced at their time of release as the ultimate capital ship, which clearly demonstrates that there was no PLAN for actual capital vessels which we now have. The Amarr race in general, no clear idea of what they should be good at and for what reason - there is no focus there. etc etc etc - I could literally spend the next hour documenting EVE inconsistencies which is a direct result of lack of planning and a coherent vision).
I think there are major underlying incosnistencies in EVE which need to be addressed first, and a PLAN needs to be developed to clearly spell out which races do what in a consistent and clear manner, instead of doing these one off fixes, which will never satisfy anyone ultimately. -----------------------------------------------
People enjoy flying Amarr for the same reason they like being tied up in leather, whipped and called names
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.05 23:37:00 -
[795]
Originally by: Sky Marshal minmitar on killmails
Explosive damage is going to be over-represented on shield tanks due to the low armor resists.
|
Wesley Baird
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.02.06 00:00:00 -
[796]
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.
Is this to prevent the overwhelming use of Ravens in PVP?!?! This makes no sense at all, given how little shield tanking is done in the game in terms of pvp...all it does is nerf shield tanks more...not they they weren't the least effective in pvp to begin with
|
Tadius Rhain
Amarr Kalear Fleet Systems
|
Posted - 2008.02.06 01:48:00 -
[797]
Originally by: Lil Mule Someone at CCP Give this man a job.
CCP, I am for hire. No, seriously. (thanks Lil Mule)
Originally by: Lil Mule Seriously, this is what Ive been harping out for quite some time too - in essence, PLANNING is the biggest problem with CCP and their ship types/damage types, nerfs and constant changes. There is no clear coherent plan as to which race should specialize with what, its a hodge podge, it changes by the day, seemingly on a whim, and its getting worse and worse. (I could submit many many examples - The Curse and Pilgrim, since when were the Amarr specialists at energy nuetralization? Im not saying its a bad thing, but it was kind of just 'dumped' in there because they couldnt think of what else to give them as a Force Recon. Assault Frigates are another example - no clear role, and no indication from CCP that this will ever be cleared up - just added, not planned. Destroyers - what are they used for really? Destoyers are another legacy ship type that has no clear role anymore because other ship classes do it better. Battleships, useful yes, but previously referenced at their time of release as the ultimate capital ship, which clearly demonstrates that there was no PLAN for actual capital vessels which we now have. The Amarr race in general, no clear idea of what they should be good at and for what reason - there is no focus there. etc etc etc - I could literally spend the next hour documenting EVE inconsistencies which is a direct result of lack of planning and a coherent vision).
I agree with many of these sentiments. Sometimes it feels like CCP is trying out new game mechanics after having a chat at the water cooler (the Amarr recon ships is a prime example) rather than reading from their gameplay vision documents and strategy documents that they (of course) developed years ago over many planning sessions with whiteboards and stuff. I know a lot of thought goes in to gameplay and balance but it does need more of that holistic, long term planning Lil Mule is talking about.
Originally by: Lil Mule I think there are major underlying incosnistencies in EVE which need to be addressed first, and a PLAN needs to be developed to clearly spell out which races do what in a consistent and clear manner, instead of doing these one off fixes, which will never satisfy anyone ultimately.
First comes the vision then comes the strategy then the development starting with proof of concept and testing. CCP needs to work on the vision for Eve in terms of gameplay mechanics (eg: What are the varieties of EW that we want to include and how should they function?), tech levels (T3, HEAT etc) and storyline (eg: Jove introduction). Then for each aspect you develop a strategy for moving the game from what it is now towards the vision in a timely, realistic manner. And yeah, it evolves over time but in a managed way. ____________________________________________
|
Alocian
Path of Light R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2008.02.06 06:45:00 -
[798]
You admittedly state that armor tanking is far more popular than shield tanking. With the proposed changes, you will be making armor tanking even more popular because shield tankers loose 10% off their explosive resists which will make them even weaker to other races, thus further perpetuating the in-balance problem to other races.
While you may be addressing a fix towards the Amarr race, you will be nerfing other races which do not need nerfing and many months from now you will be trying to correct this mistake.
/me sells my caldari character for a armor tanker race
-= ALWAYS PRIMARY =- |
Sevro
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.02.06 10:01:00 -
[799]
Edited by: Sevro on 06/02/2008 10:02:45 In the Dev blog it says:
The issues These are the issues that we've identified with Amarr:
Some ships could need lovin' Cap usage on Energy Weapons may be too high in some cases Fitting requirements on some Energy Weapons need adjusting Base EM resistances on armor are very high
Now,
You've addressed the ships needin some lovin with the omen, zealot, and apoc. (Tick) You've addressed the EM resistance on armour tanks. (Tick) Boosted TD. (Tick)
What I would like to know is, are you guys going to address the fitting issues of lasers and Cap usage of lasers?
I feel what you've done for Amarr so far is great, but there is still a lil ways to go with the lasers themselves.
|
Karma
Vortex Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.02.06 10:56:00 -
[800]
that you're trying to boost the effectiveness of EM-damage and make it useful again is commendable... but this fix is purely a PvP-fix.
will you be making lasers work in PvE as well?
As it is now, once the NPC-ship's shields are gone, you might as well be shooting with bananas.
I dug up an old list of NPC Weaknessess: Amarr Navy - EM (shield) - Explosive (Armor) Angel - EM (Shields) - Explosive (Armor), Blood - Thermal Caldari Navy - Explosive, Gurista - EM (Shields) - Explosive (Armor), Khanid - EM (Shields) - Explosive (Armor) Mercenary - Explosives Mordus - EM (Shield) - Explosive (Armor) Rogue Pirate - EM (Shield) - Explosive (Armor) Sansha - Thermal Serpentis - Thermal Zazzmatazz - EM (Shield) - Explosive (Armor) (I'm not sure why the gallente and minmatar fleets aren't on that list)
only 3 out of 12 are marginally weak against lasers past shields, and even then, the usefulness of the laser is very diminished (large crystals go from 28em/20thermal to 20em/0thermal damage)
... the concept of making EM be the 'amarr damage type' is somewhat ludicrous, since two of the four races can choose freely what damage to do, and the remaining one does Kinetic/Thermal (~60%/40%) both of which work excellent against shields and armor.
Amarr clearly lost the damage-type lottery.
I still maintain that lasers doing primarily thermal damage would make more sense, since they BURN through things... BURN = HEAT = THERMAL.
|
|
Angelic Eviaran
|
Posted - 2008.02.06 14:46:00 -
[801]
Originally by: Wesley Baird
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.
Is this to prevent the overwhelming use of Ravens in PVP?!?! This makes no sense at all, given how little shield tanking is done in the game in terms of pvp...all it does is nerf shield tanks more...not they they weren't the least effective in pvp to begin with
Uhm what are you talking about?
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.02.06 14:50:00 -
[802]
Originally by: Karma that you're trying to boost the effectiveness of EM-damage and make it useful again is commendable... but this fix is purely a PvP-fix.
will you be making lasers work in PvE as well?
As it is now, once the NPC-ship's shields are gone, you might as well be shooting with bananas.
I dug up an old list of NPC Weaknessess: Amarr Navy - EM (shield) - Explosive (Armor) Angel - EM (Shields) - Explosive (Armor), Blood - Thermal Caldari Navy - Explosive, Gurista - EM (Shields) - Explosive (Armor), Khanid - EM (Shields) - Explosive (Armor) Mercenary - Explosives Mordus - EM (Shield) - Explosive (Armor) Rogue Pirate - EM (Shield) - Explosive (Armor) Sansha - Thermal Serpentis - Thermal Zazzmatazz - EM (Shield) - Explosive (Armor) (I'm not sure why the gallente and minmatar fleets aren't on that list)
only 3 out of 12 are marginally weak against lasers past shields, and even then, the usefulness of the laser is very diminished (large crystals go from 28em/20thermal to 20em/0thermal damage)
... the concept of making EM be the 'amarr damage type' is somewhat ludicrous, since two of the four races can choose freely what damage to do, and the remaining one does Kinetic/Thermal (~60%/40%) both of which work excellent against shields and armor.
Amarr clearly lost the damage-type lottery.
I still maintain that lasers doing primarily thermal damage would make more sense, since they BURN through things... BURN = HEAT = THERMAL.
You have a valid point about the usefulness, or lack of it, in pve, but you undermined your own argumentation with a wrong assumption: npcs have the same resists on their shields and armor. ------------------------------------------
What is Oomph? It the sound Amarr players makes when they get kicked in the ribs. |
Karma
Vortex Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.02.06 15:16:00 -
[803]
Originally by: Shadowsword You have a valid point about the usefulness, or lack of it, in pve, but you undermined your own argumentation with a wrong assumption: npcs have the same resists on their shields and armor.
Oh. I stand corrected. you mean an NPC that has a weakness against explosive has that weakness on both shields and armor? odd... must be the 'hitting a wall after downing their shields'-issue I had must've been cause their armor has more HP or something. *shrugs*
eeeeither way, yeah. IF that list is correct, then none of the NPCs have a weakness against EM beyond shields... 3 have a weakness against thermal, and 9 have a weakness against explosive. and if that list is wrong, then we can't trust anything that list is saying, so my whole argument falls flat on it's arse.
|
Megan Maynard
Minmatar Clearspace Operations Carpe Diem.
|
Posted - 2008.02.06 15:45:00 -
[804]
Edited by: Megan Maynard on 06/02/2008 15:46:00 Edited by: Megan Maynard on 06/02/2008 15:45:27
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Originally by: Elmicker
So, as you think this is the best solution. What was the reasoning against swapping em/therm on the guns and lowering fitting costs? While this would still have left EM as the least useful damage type, it would actually have made Amarr useful in the mean time.
Every race has "its" damage type. For Amarr that's EM. It just wouldn't make much sense to effectively remove one damage type from the game instead of trying to make it useful again. Also, what would then happen to EM drones and EM missiles?
WHAT??? You don't have to remove it at all, or make it a secondary damage type! Just balance it more! Amarr crystals have the highest concentration of one damage type then any other turret system. And the Gallente, who are thermal, have a gun that shoot primarily kinetic! (Yes, blasters are the primary weapon of most pvp gallente.) This isn't hard to figure out. EM damage works well against shields, not armor. Explosive is the other way around, the other two are balanced. That seems like a balanced system to me.
The problem, once again I'll say this, is the balance of the amarr ammo. 7 out of 8 of the crystals have 70% or more EM damage. NONE of the other turret ammo comes close to that, they are all close to 50/50. (Which is WHY they work.) Miz Stelth Bomerz iz the ****nit. |
SiJira
|
Posted - 2008.02.06 21:24:00 -
[805]
please ccp i want to remain the underdog in eve and i dont want to find out that you need to nerf me or buff every other race against me to balance things again
dont overboost me please - giving the omen a new turret slot with the proposed resistance changes makes it too powerful and thats more apparent with the zealot Trashed sig, Shark was here |
Magnelien
Caldari The Circle STYX.
|
Posted - 2008.02.07 00:29:00 -
[806]
Uhm ive been flying only caldari ships now for soonish 2 years...
I tried to rat in raven against sansha, well they do em damage... and well shield has 0% em resist... and armor "has" 60% atm. shield tanking is HARD ! ! ! specially after the torp nerf wich was horrible. makeing us fit ab/mwd wich removes 1 "tank slot" and uses cap wich is our tank. Well then i tried armor tanking the raven... sadly dont have that good armor tanking skills but still i finally after putting ccc rigs on it and haveing 2x large armor reppers i managed to tank tripple 1.85m spawn... and now you want to decrease the raven tank'ability or basically caldari to em even MORE... caldari's resist on em is BAD ENOUGH !
|
Zamolxiss
|
Posted - 2008.02.07 13:50:00 -
[807]
I'm extremely disappointe... i actualy feel sick... Whytf do i feel that the peolple RESPONSIBLE with developing EVE keep playing bad jokes on us.. this is not balacing, this is leveling witch is NOT needed. wanted. cool. interesting or justifiable for that mater.. on the same note why not take all shield/armor resistances to 0.00 so that everyone does, feels and looks the same... em as a specialized shield damage is excelent, the way that explosive is for armor, and kin/thermal is equaly balanced for both... the problem isn't with the damage tipe but with the lack of options.. the way that everyone else can swich for multiple types of damage (gallente DRONES+hybrids, caldari MISSILES+hybrids, minnie PRJECTILES+some drones and missiles in moast cases)... this nerf makes everyone weeker.. this is a boost to ganking( a needed one ofcourse ), this does nothing good to amarr what so ever... if u wanna boost amarr give them some drones... lasers are cool as they are in terms of damage... the cap consuption sucks but that's another issue... if u wanna do more armor damage train some other race, if u don't wanna' train another race, get creative... if u can't, quit eve and move to WOW.. but don't level everyone else cause some lame skunk got his Punisher blown up by a Rifter and started sceaming.. LASERS SUCK.. AMARR IS NERFED.. This is not smart, not creative, not wnated or needed.. this is a bad solution for a problem that needs a little more brains to solve... Stop breaking this game..
|
Emveedee
Caldari Filiolus Of Bellum
|
Posted - 2008.02.07 16:14:00 -
[808]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Quote:
Here's something I've never understood. Why does armor have 20% extra resists on baseline T1 compared to shields?
Shields compensate for armor extra resistances by always having a natural recharge rate.
T1 Armor reppers rep more armor than they use cap for. T1 shield boosters use as much cap as they boost shield. I'd say that compensates for shield recharge rates.
|
Rastigan
Caldari Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.07 19:00:00 -
[809]
Originally by: Emveedee
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Quote:
Here's something I've never understood. Why does armor have 20% extra resists on baseline T1 compared to shields?
Shields compensate for armor extra resistances by always having a natural recharge rate.
T1 Armor reppers rep more armor than they use cap for. T1 shield boosters use as much cap as they boost shield. I'd say that compensates for shield recharge rates.
Thats not exactly true if you set it up properly.. A T2 large shield booster with a T2 boost amplifier reps better than two T2 medium (its Powergrid equivalent) armor repper 2's for almost exactly the same amount of cap usage per second..
The same applies to XL-Boosters and Large reppers, of course XL-boosters are a pain to fit CPU wise.
|
Kowaii Hitori
StoneDogS Sylph Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.07 21:21:00 -
[810]
I always though that EM should cause devices to malfunction. Like if I hit someone with EM, it can cause a module to not be as effective or work at all.
But also, isn't an explosion partially kinetic and thermal damage(friction) anyhow, so why do we need the explosive damage type, we could drop it to 3 dmg types.
Sig removed, inappropriate content. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Cortes |
|
Steve Clone
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.02.07 22:54:00 -
[811]
Originally by: rgreat Edited by: rgreat on 03/02/2008 13:58:35
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: rgreat
No point to use 'long range' t2 ammo for blasters. Not much of a difference.
This is not true.
Null M ammo - 25% range bonus (opt+fallof). (effective range 5 km -> 10 km compared to Antimatter ammo) Scorch M Cristals - 50% range bonus (optimal). (effective range 15 km -> 38+ km compared to Multifreq Cristals)
10 km for Null blasters = still point blank 'web' range, only with less damage and tracking compared to AM. No use for it. Zealot user with Scorch can fire Pulses earlier, and from 'safe' range. Deimos pilot with null ammo - can't. Think again.
Why do Gallente believe they can win ALL 1v1? Good Zealot pilots WILL use Scorch range as their advantage... Good Deimos pilot will know when not to run face down (like a bull) towards a Zealot...
Gallente should not complain when Amarr is using their 'range' advantage... Amarr should not complain when they get BBQPWN at close encounters...
BTW Use ECM drones...Deimos > Zealot
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 00:43:00 -
[812]
Originally by: Steve Clone
Why do Gallente believe they can win ALL 1v1? Good Zealot pilots WILL use Scorch range as their advantage... Good Deimos pilot will know when not to run face down (like a bull) towards a Zealot...
Gallente should not complain when Amarr is using their 'range' advantage... Amarr should not complain when they get BBQPWN at close encounters...
BTW Use ECM drones...Deimos > Zealot
You see amarr has been sucking for so long that when people see an amarr ship win an engagement against a gallente or minmatar ship the conclusion is that the other ship needs a buff. -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
Tobber Harley
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 00:58:00 -
[813]
Hmm, this sounds like a really stupid solution.
If you are going to boost Amarr, then boost Amarr! Don't boost all Minmatar/Angel damage outputs against shield tanks.
Why nerf shield tanks if you already know that most people prefer armour tanking???
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 04:56:00 -
[814]
Originally by: Emveedee
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Quote:
Here's something I've never understood. Why does armor have 20% extra resists on baseline T1 compared to shields?
Shields compensate for armor extra resistances by always having a natural recharge rate.
T1 Armor reppers rep more armor than they use cap for. T1 shield boosters use as much cap as they boost shield. I'd say that compensates for shield recharge rates.
Neither of thse modules are good to fit in the majority of PvP situations.
|
Karma
Vortex Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 09:16:00 -
[815]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer You see amarr has been sucking for so long that when people see an amarr ship win an engagement against a gallente or minmatar ship the conclusion is that the other ship needs a buff.
ROFL. so dang true.
|
Yazmina
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 16:10:00 -
[816]
Originally by: Karma
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer You see amarr has been sucking for so long that when people see an amarr ship win an engagement against a gallente or minmatar ship the conclusion is that the other ship needs a buff.
ROFL. so dang true.
LOL, That is hilarious but soooo true. These are the developers:
AHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!! Amarr won!!! HURRY, buff the looser quick!!! This couldnt possibly be right....
The sad thing is amarr has sucked for years and ccp does nothing. Gallente ship loses to amarr for the first time in years and ccp buffs the gallente ship immediately. Fortunately the buff turned out to be a nerf but the thought was there. Nice try ccp, but please- we hope you can do better with amarr to make them competitive. Oh and in case you didnt catch the message in the last umpteen pages here it is again:
REDUCE CAP FOR LASERS 25%-50% ELIMATE CAP REDUCTION BONUS AND GIVE A REAL ONE REDUCE PG/CPU REQUIREMENTS FOR LASERS 25% MORE MID SLOTS FOR AMARR!
THANKS |
Zamolxiss
Amarr Falcon Advanced Industries
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 16:14:00 -
[817]
CCP please look at this vid http://go-dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/dancetroll/ARMAGEDDON.mkv And please don't tell me that the first thing that comes to your mind is.."Mehh, i know what we can do, let's nerf the resistances, this should balace things out.." This is ridiculous, Amarr has enough gank, allways had.. Let's take for example the most succesfull pvp ships outhere.... the Domi, Ishtar, Myrm, Vaga, Sleip etc... the diference betwin them and the Amarr roundup is not the ressistance to a certin tipe of damage, it's just stupid to think that... the diference is Versatility.. the fact that besides gank they cam bring to the table Speed, Ewar, a full Tackle... things that most amarr ships can't.. It is absolutly ridiculous to think that LEVELING everything in EVE would satisfy anyone.. I for one... expected a little more thought and respect from the people that DEVELOP this game, regarding us, and the TIME and money we've invested in it.. Please stop breaking this game !
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 21:32:00 -
[818]
Originally by: Zamolxiss
CCP please look at this vid http://go-dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/dancetroll/ARMAGEDDON.mkv And please don't tell me that the first thing that comes to your mind is.."Mehh, i know what we can do, let's nerf the resistances, this should balace things out.." This is ridiculous, Amarr has enough gank, allways had.. Let's take for example the most succesfull pvp ships outhere.... the Domi, Ishtar, Myrm, Vaga, Sleip etc... the diference betwin them and the Amarr roundup is not the ressistance to a certin tipe of damage, it's just stupid to think that... the diference is Versatility.. the fact that besides gank they cam bring to the table Speed, Ewar, a full Tackle... things that most amarr ships can't.. It is absolutly ridiculous to think that LEVELING everything in EVE would satisfy anyone.. I for one... expected a little more thought and respect from the people that DEVELOP this game, regarding us, and the TIME and money we've invested in it.. Please stop breaking this game !
*Bullzhit-meter explodes*
Dont talk crap, amarr needs every bit of these boosts. Go back to teh cave plx. -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
Melwitax
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 07:13:00 -
[819]
Armor resists are already typically 10% higher then shield resists to begin with. Using the raven as an example. The raven's armor resists are kinetic: 45%, thermal 25%. For shields it's 40 & 20% respectively. Lowering the em resist on armor would simply mean that the cumulative total of resists is now the same.
I also have to say that I'm plain tired of the nerf bat swinging. In an MMO where player's choices are dictated in race and class an adjustment of one class neccessitates a balance of all classes in order to be fair. If one class gets an uber skill, then all must get new skills to compensate. Plus there is a need to keep each class distinct and integral, a mage can never use a sword because then he'd be a fighter, a fighter can't cast spells because he'd then be a mage.
To nerf something in any game strains the willing suspension of belief that forms the foundation of any fictional world. In a fantasy universe one can make this argument by saying magic has changed the rules (although this rationale stretches thin after a few uses). In a sci-fi universe, the laws of physics shouldn't change on a whim. Moreover, one would expect the improvement, not decline of items over time (torpedoes anyone?).
Since there are no classes in Eve and there are no restrictions in what skills players can and can not learn, then the swing of the nerf bat should be rare to non-existent. The answer instead should be to introduce new technology to compensate for the defect or deficiency. If Amarr ships are suffering from a lack of e-war capability because of their fewer medium slots, then high and low slot e-war devices should be introduced. If nosferatus are so powerful, then anti-nos devices should be created to compensate. If pvpers need a higher yielding/faster torp, then a new missile class should be added. If carriers are so deadly, then there should be ships designed specifically to counter them. Such an approach is not only more player friendly, it's also more consistent with the internal logic of the game. One would expect that the Amarr would adjust their technologies over time to compensate for Caldari, Minmatar and Gallente advantages, one would not expect the engineers of other empires to dumb down their ships to be nice to the Amarr.
This approach has an advantage for the devs as well, it places the power (and responsibility) of choice in the hands of the players. If a fix is available and the player chooses not to use it, then he or she can whine all they want, the fault is theirs' and no one else's, they made their decision and will just have to live with the consequences. Whereas with a nerf no one makes a choice, for better or worse, everyone has to deal with it and the devs usually end up getting blamed for it.
My 2 cents.
- Mel
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 12:58:00 -
[820]
Originally by: Melwitax Armor resists are already typically 10% higher then shield resists to begin with. Using the raven as an example. The raven's armor resists are kinetic: 45%, thermal 25%. For shields it's 40 & 20% respectively. Lowering the em resist on armor would simply mean that the cumulative total of resists is now the same.
- Mel
hahahahahahah, yeah its good that you dont work as a balance dev.
Youre plainly forgetting and ignoring the fact that shields have inherent recharge for FREE and that you can setup passive tanks for several hundred dps that DOESNT USE CAP AT ALL.
Yeah its supposed to be lower total resists on shields. -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
|
Zamolxiss
Amarr Falcon Advanced Industries
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 14:53:00 -
[821]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Zamolxiss
CCP please look at this vid http://go-dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/dancetroll/ARMAGEDDON.mkv And please don't tell me that the first thing that comes to your mind is.."Mehh, i know what we can do, let's nerf the resistances, this should balace things out.." This is ridiculous, Amarr has enough gank, allways had.. Let's take for example the most succesfull pvp ships outhere.... the Domi, Ishtar, Myrm, Vaga, Sleip etc... the diference betwin them and the Amarr roundup is not the ressistance to a certin tipe of damage, it's just stupid to think that... the diference is Versatility.. the fact that besides gank they cam bring to the table Speed, Ewar, a full Tackle... things that most amarr ships can't.. It is absolutly ridiculous to think that LEVELING everything in EVE would satisfy anyone.. I for one... expected a little more thought and respect from the people that DEVELOP this game, regarding us, and the TIME and money we've invested in it.. Please stop breaking this game !
*Bullzhit-meter explodes*
Dont talk crap, amarr needs every bit of these boosts. Go back to teh cave plx.
I don't like caves m8 cause they're filled with peolple like u.. If u see any "Amarr boost" in Zulupark's blog u either fail to understand the basics of EVE or u simply have the brain power or roadkill... no offence :P
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 16:56:00 -
[822]
Originally by: Zamolxiss
I don't like caves m8 cause they're filled with peolple like u.. If u see any "Amarr boost" in Zulupark's blog u either fail to understand the basics of EVE or u simply have the brain power or roadkill... no offence :P
No offense but youre the person with the brain power of a roadkill if you think a movie proves anything at all. Are you full of it? Check. Are you trolling others? Check. Should you be in your cave? Check. -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
Zamolxiss
Amarr Falcon Advanced Industries
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 17:20:00 -
[823]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Zamolxiss
I don't like caves m8 cause they're filled with peolple like u.. If u see any "Amarr boost" in Zulupark's blog u either fail to understand the basics of EVE or u simply have the brain power or roadkill... no offence :P
No offense but youre the person with the brain power of a roadkill if you think a movie proves anything at all. Are you full of it? Check. Are you trolling others? Check. Should you be in your cave? Check.
rofl U know m8 that there is a psychiatric term that defines peole who answer theyr own questions in the maner that u do.. they ussualy end up commiting hideus things but hey sick people should be allowed to have oppinins also.. it's for free ain't it !!!? :PP
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 17:26:00 -
[824]
Originally by: Zamolxiss ...troll...
I get to vote in real life, why shouldnt I be sane enough to express my thoughts about internet space ships when Im a paying customer like everyone else? -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
Yazmina
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 17:31:00 -
[825]
Originally by: Melwitax Armor resists are already typically 10% higher then shield resists to begin with. Using the raven as an example. The raven's armor resists are kinetic: 45%, thermal 25%. For shields it's 40 & 20% respectively. Lowering the em resist on armor would simply mean that the cumulative total of resists is now the same.
I also have to say that I'm plain tired of the nerf bat swinging. In an MMO where player's choices are dictated in race and class an adjustment of one class neccessitates a balance of all classes in order to be fair. If one class gets an uber skill, then all must get new skills to compensate. Plus there is a need to keep each class distinct and integral, a mage can never use a sword because then he'd be a fighter, a fighter can't cast spells because he'd then be a mage.
To nerf something in any game strains the willing suspension of belief that forms the foundation of any fictional world. In a fantasy universe one can make this argument by saying magic has changed the rules (although this rationale stretches thin after a few uses). In a sci-fi universe, the laws of physics shouldn't change on a whim. Moreover, one would expect the improvement, not decline of items over time (torpedoes anyone?).
Since there are no classes in Eve and there are no restrictions in what skills players can and can not learn, then the swing of the nerf bat should be rare to non-existent. The answer instead should be to introduce new technology to compensate for the defect or deficiency. If Amarr ships are suffering from a lack of e-war capability because of their fewer medium slots, then high and low slot e-war devices should be introduced. If nosferatus are so powerful, then anti-nos devices should be created to compensate. If pvpers need a higher yielding/faster torp, then a new missile class should be added. If carriers are so deadly, then there should be ships designed specifically to counter them. Such an approach is not only more player friendly, it's also more consistent with the internal logic of the game. One would expect that the Amarr would adjust their technologies over time to compensate for Caldari, Minmatar and Gallente advantages, one would not expect the engineers of other empires to dumb down their ships to be nice to the Amarr.
This approach has an advantage for the devs as well, it places the power (and responsibility) of choice in the hands of the players. If a fix is available and the player chooses not to use it, then he or she can whine all they want, the fault is theirs' and no one else's, they made their decision and will just have to live with the consequences. Whereas with a nerf no one makes a choice, for better or worse, everyone has to deal with it and the devs usually end up getting blamed for it.
My 2 cents.
- Mel
This guy makes a lot of sense. If this was implemented it would be a lot more believable and adaptable. People could choose to overcome the challenges with new technologies and these technologies could balance the game without taking away individual designs. This really is a good idea and would keep CCP from nerfing everything in sight. Instead of a nerf a new technology would be implemented to either make possible a counter to something overly strong or improve a ship or technology that isnt pulling its weight. Please listen to this ccp, it just might save you in the end. |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 19:23:00 -
[826]
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 09/02/2008 19:22:57
Originally by: Yazmina
This guy makes a lot of sense.
No he doesnt, he totally fails to understand why shield resistance total needs to be a bit less then armor res total. -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
HayesDuSid
Federation Fleet Chaos Incarnate.
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 20:03:00 -
[827]
Much discussion so I bet this will be over looked, but long ago, back when EvE was an elitist wet dream with few people and a gentleman's club like set up...
Laser boats were deemed the simple hammer. No finesse, no sensors/ew/speed tricks. Just pure brutal gank or insane tank. Please note, I said OR.
Anyways, the point of the reminiscing is: Change the cap use bonus.
The reason we got it was because lasers did more damage and then everyone fitted them. Old school amarr boats had a 5% extra damage per level bonus on their boats. Then everyone used them for no ammo and similar damage, so lasers were boosted to do 25% more damage base but used double cap and our ships were given the current 10% less cap use bonus.
However, later yet, lasers were nerfed for damage, and damage mods were stacking nerfed. Yet the double cap and 10% cap reduction stayed. It's like a vestigial limb we just forgot the origins of.
So my suggestion is 2 fold:
1. Return the 25% damage bonus, cut cap use by 50% and remove the 10% cap use per level bonus. (OMG, he's talking about over powering amarr!)
But how does this help? Everyone will fit lasers, and we will be back at square one. Well, thats where part 2 comes in.
2. Cut all optimal ranges on lasers by 50% and give amarr boats a 10% optimal range bonus to lasers per level (please note: not size specific please, otherwise fitting smaller guns for amazing tank becomes stupid.)
So what this works out to:
1. 25% damage increase on lasers. 2. No one but amarr would use them due to lasers being terrible compared to near every other weapon unless on a laser bonused boat.
So why the 25% damage bonus? With the lowered cap and removal of the 10% of cap use, we are changing nothing. Adding a 50% range increase while cutting laser range in half...does nothing. The 25% damage bonus merely comes out to everyone elses 5% damage automatically and forcibly given to amarr at level 5, while if you do not have level 5 of every amarr class of ship around, you will be seriously disadvantaged. Essentially forcing specialization in the amarr pilots, while allowing new pilots (those in frigates) to experience amarr truely.
Explain:
Frigate ranges are miniscule anyways. Cutting 1,4 km range to 0.7 to a newbie does very little. However, giving a newbie 25% more damage lets said pilot really feel what we do. Enforcing specialization within amarr pilot skill training is very much a part of the race in it's current incarnation.
Battleship pilots however, really feel the difference. Range is so important to a BS pilot that he is almost forced to train Amarr BS to 5 asap. This is perfectly within amarr ideology as far as I understand. Our battleships tend to be pretty amazing, as the big guns strategy really works for us on the larger boats. Forcing more training to gain that power is to be expected. This also might make it easier for the Dev's to lower fitting reqs on large beam lasers. They're beyond silly at this point. They're actually crippling. Giving amarr more low slots just so we can fit more fitting mods to fit our guns, isn't giving us more lows at all. It's cutting into our slots, and lowering our effectiveness. Please, look into this.
It's a common complaint that amarr need more sp to compete with other races. Personally, I find it attractive that we start out weaker but at max skills can be superior to another pilot with max skills.
This is my opinion, if you want to disprove it, feel free, it doesn't bother me. I just wanted to throw my 2c in and hope to be of assistance in the development process of my beloved amarr. Good luck to the devs. Some of the responses I've seen make me fear for my belief that EvE attracts more intelligent people on average.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 20:07:00 -
[828]
Originally by: HayesDuSid ...
Intresting idea. -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
Karma
Vortex Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 21:13:00 -
[829]
Originally by: HayesDuSid ... [ snip ] ...
some thoughts... considering that CCP seems bent on fixing the EM damage-type... the 25% damage increase across the board might be over-doing it.
Here's a thought on that: with lasers taking up less CAP, amarr pilots need no more fill up their low- and mid-slots with cap rechargers and capacitor power relays. and add in useful things like heat sinks and whatnot. that's a damage increase right there... especially to the smaller ships with very few low-slots.
I am slightly concerned that it is just flipping one place-holder bonus for another though... if all of the amarr ships get one bonus that is the same for virtually EVERY ship in the amarr fleet... then that leaves each ship with only one bonus to specialize themselves with.
|
Sky Marshal
Aeden Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 21:37:00 -
[830]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer No he doesnt, he totally fails to understand why shield resistance total needs to be a bit less then armor res total.
Hum... I guess you never use a shield tank.
The Shield Regen acts like the Capa Regen, so if you are at 30% Shield to have the maximum of Hp/s, it is that you will die shortly anyways.
And same if it don't use capacitor, it requires, for a good efficiency, to use some low slot module, but I need to fit some BCS.
So for my Cerberus, I has... 22 HP/s at 30% Shield, or 6/7 at 75%, as I want a DPS like the Zealot, who can repair his tank by 35 HP/s with a correct fit (medium repairer).
Yeah, this free regen is really great and really helpful...... It is good only in a Drake. _______
16/20 Dragon : œ Great Game + 14/20 Revelations : œ Desyncs... + 11/20 Trinity : œ BBSOD, Bugs, Desyncs, F*** Nerfs + 10/20 v1.1 : œ [...] + EXP shield nerf +
CCP, you are tiring. |
|
HayesDuSid
Federation Fleet Chaos Incarnate.
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 21:50:00 -
[831]
You get regen and the ability to rep...just like that zealot. Also, there is no Repair Amplifier for armor.
What it comes down to, is that armor tanking slows you down, and after modules and skills, ends up taking more cap.
Slow = dead currently. (Except in fleet)
Most zelot pilots I know btw, use speed fits. No repper on board. Thats an advantage to the shield tankers, if they leave, they can wait somewhere, get their shields back and then try to leave the system or attack again. The Armor repper who tries to speed tank has to carry a repper in a low or just keep his damage.
Anyways, this is more of a rant, so I'll stop here. This is not the thread for shield vs. armor tanking. Please start a new thread where our discussion doesn't go off topic.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 22:18:00 -
[832]
Originally by: Sky Marshal
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer No he doesnt, he totally fails to understand why shield resistance total needs to be a bit less then armor res total.
Hum... I guess you never use a shield tank.
The Shield Regen acts like the Capa Regen, so if you are at 30% Shield to have the maximum of Hp/s, it is that you will die shortly anyways.
And same if it don't use capacitor, it requires, for a good efficiency, to use some low slot module, but I need to fit some BCS.
So for my Cerberus, I has... 22 HP/s at 30% Shield, or 6/7 at 75%, as I want a DPS like the Zealot, who can repair his tank by 35 HP/s with a correct fit (medium repairer).
Yeah, this free regen is really great and really helpful...... It is good only in a Drake.
No I havent used a shield tank before, It would have been nice to afk kill lvl 4 missions with a 900dps passive tank though.
Shields are fine, armor are fine. -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
Sky Marshal
Aeden Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 22:20:00 -
[833]
You are right, it is not the good topic, or I would say that shield amplifier use too much cpu and not great in pvp etc...
In my opinion, shield tank need some love, like Amarr players think that their race need some too. But well, CCP know that but nerf it anyways.
I didn't think that some Zealot users would be speed fitted, but I am not Amarr, this is normal ^^ _______
16/20 Dragon : œ Great Game + 14/20 Revelations : œ Desyncs... + 11/20 Trinity : œ BBSOD, Bugs, Desyncs, F*** Nerfs + 10/20 v1.1 : œ [...] + EXP shield nerf +
CCP, you are tiring. |
HayesDuSid
Federation Fleet Chaos Incarnate.
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 22:57:00 -
[834]
Hey, me again.
Random post, but it works in my opinion. Since amarr have always been almost anti ew, how about "our" ew be to lower our sig rad instead of make someone else's ship work worse. It's very amarr. We don't bother with those silly things, instead we make ourselves less susceptible to weapons fire via alternate means.
Essentially, lower sig rad so its harder to track us, and it effects missile damage against us. There were rumors of a mod like this already, make it an ew for the amarr.
Not saying tracking disruptors are useless, just somehow...not different enough for amarr ew. My suggestion is give it to the minmatar (makes sense to give the speed freaks tracking disruption), make target painters generic, so they finally have a good ew.
Make the self buffing sig reduction one amarr but everyone can use, just certain amarr boats use it better. Its different enough to be something the slow to evolve amarr would do. They've always watched the other races do something, watched them develop it, then come up with one of their own.
So goes the storyline anyways.
Comments?
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.10 00:45:00 -
[835]
Originally by: HayesDuSid (makes sense to give the speed freaks tracking disruption), make target painters generic, so they finally have a good ew.
Well racial ew is supposed to work good against your own race. Thats why minmatar have webs and amarr nos. It could be debateable if this is great or not but its not a mistake, its deliberate. -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
HayesDuSid
Federation Fleet Chaos Incarnate.
|
Posted - 2008.02.10 02:32:00 -
[836]
Well, IMO, target painters barely help minmatar, if at all. TDing something orbiting you (i.e. faster than you) ruins its chance of hitting you as well as TDing something you are orbiting.
They'd keep webs.
Amarr would keep Nos and lose TD for sig drop. If I'm not mistaken, that lowers the effect of big guns, and the chance for a "strikes perfectly" that we almost rely on.
This isn't a particularly well thought out plan, but it's a suggestion with the need for more development. Honestly, EW has needed work for a while. While amarr are getting some balance changes, it might as well also be time to get their ew changed. To be more inline with the amarr ideal (which appears to be look inward and try to be perfection incarnate).
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2008.02.10 21:32:00 -
[837]
Originally by: SiJira please ccp i want to remain the underdog in eve and i dont want to find out that you need to nerf me or buff every other race against me to balance things again
dont overboost me please - giving the omen a new turret slot with the proposed resistance changes makes it too powerful and thats more apparent with the zealot
please ccp i urge you not to bring the collective amarr hopes up and then bash them because well need a nerf Trashed sig, Shark was here |
Steve Clone
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.02.10 22:44:00 -
[838]
SiJira, dont be a fool
|
Steve Clone
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.02.10 22:44:00 -
[839]
Originally by: Steve Clone SiJira, dont be a fool
I concur
|
Praxis1452
The Bastards
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 02:31:00 -
[840]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Zamolxiss
CCP please look at this vid http://go-dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/dancetroll/ARMAGEDDON.mkv And please don't tell me that the first thing that comes to your mind is.."Mehh, i know what we can do, let's nerf the resistances, this should balace things out.." This is ridiculous, Amarr has enough gank, allways had.. Let's take for example the most succesfull pvp ships outhere.... the Domi, Ishtar, Myrm, Vaga, Sleip etc... the diference betwin them and the Amarr roundup is not the ressistance to a certin tipe of damage, it's just stupid to think that... the diference is Versatility.. the fact that besides gank they cam bring to the table Speed, Ewar, a full Tackle... things that most amarr ships can't.. It is absolutly ridiculous to think that LEVELING everything in EVE would satisfy anyone.. I for one... expected a little more thought and respect from the people that DEVELOP this game, regarding us, and the TIME and money we've invested in it.. Please stop breaking this game !
*Bullzhit-meter explodes*
Dont talk crap, amarr needs every bit of these boosts. Go back to teh cave plx.
lol...! Everyone knows your just a boost amarr troll. You know you'd be perfectly happy if amarr was the only race you could pvp efficiently in.
LOL! at you criticizing other people ôHe who must expend his life to prolong life cannot enjoy it, and he who is still seeking for his life does not have it and can as little enjoy it.ö
|
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 04:57:00 -
[841]
Originally by: Praxis1452 lol...! Everyone knows your just a boost amarr troll. You know you'd be perfectly happy if amarr was the only race you could pvp efficiently in.
LOL! at you criticizing other people
Someone that thinks videos are something to take into consideration while balancing is living in a world far beyond trolls and magix methinks. -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 06:19:00 -
[842]
Originally by: Sky Marshal
Hum... I guess you never use a shield tank.
The Shield Regen acts like the Capa Regen, so if you are at 30% Shield to have the maximum of Hp/s, it is that you will die shortly anyways.
And same if it don't use capacitor, it requires, for a good efficiency, to use some low slot module, but I need to fit some BCS.
So for my Cerberus, I has... 22 HP/s at 30% Shield, or 6/7 at 75%, as I want a DPS like the Zealot, who can repair his tank by 35 HP/s with a correct fit (medium repairer).
Yeah, this free regen is really great and really helpful...... It is good only in a Drake.
Fit a medium shield booster, 5 HAMs and 3 damage mods. You will have Zealot like DPS and 35 hp/second repair.
The passive effect of shields does not add much to fights[but it does add enough], what it really does is allow passive tanked shield based ships to disengage then return without needing friends to repair them[and their friends dont need to use the fitting for the remote rep mod, or play the online/offline game] While passive plated setups cannot.
The passive regen has helped my armor tanked ships. If its not helping shield tanked ships then i dont know what to say.
|
Sky Marshal
Aeden Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 12:27:00 -
[843]
Edited by: Sky Marshal on 11/02/2008 12:28:41
Quote: Fit a medium shield booster, 5 HAMs and 3 damage mods. You will have Zealot like DPS and 35 hp/second repair.
Indeed you are right, but this is 35/36 HP/s with the Shield regen (6/7 max in my case), and with lesser resists than an Armor ship (Ouf, there are rigs to compensate), and your fit will require some sacrifices (no damage control, less HP, etc...).
The Zealot (in my fit, not a speed one...) has 35 HP/s without shield regen. With, it is 38/39, and a better resist as they have some shield resistance too that I have to crush before attack his armor.
The Shield regen complements an active shield tank, but can't give a critical advantage as with an active tank, the regen is really low, and shield boosters repair less than similar armor repairers, but of course this depends of the ship type. _______
16/20 Dragon : œ Great Game + 14/20 Revelations : œ Desyncs... + 11/20 Trinity : œ BBSOD, Bugs, Desyncs, F*** Nerfs + 10/20 v1.1 : œ [...] + EXP shield nerf +
CCP, you are tiring. |
ProfitMan
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 13:30:00 -
[844]
Suggest something or not, it's already done. It's kill an idea about shield omnitanks. Mb even someone of you dreams about Caldari pvp ships (like marauders) - Forget it, because of a hole in the explosive shield's resists.. and then...They gave an explosive lasers to Amarr. So, for example if it was 78% to all shield resists and now it come to 78% to em,therm and kin, but only 68% to explosive and it's only 10 to explosive at armor. So any Amarr with mighty new lasers or Minmatar with explosive ammo (native for them) can use that hole easily. And Widows or Golems has only 2 rigs,so you can't cover it there. And,yes...there is some nerf on em armor, but 90 to 80 not same as 78 to 68. P.S. Sorry for my English.
|
Yazmina
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 16:03:00 -
[845]
Edited by: Yazmina on 11/02/2008 16:05:07 While I agree that the shield resists should have been left as they were I dont think it is something to cry about. If i could shield tank on my amarr ship I would. I think it is superior in many aspects to armor tanking. The passive shield regen alone is enough to tank lvl 4 missions and in pvp you have to get past that just to make any headway. Plus the shield booster goes off like every 3 sec compared to 9 or so for an armor repper with decent skills.
Plus there is the invulnerability field, I wish I had an active tank that would cover all resistances like that. Shield tanking, imo, takes less cap too, especially becuase it is usually on ships that dont need cap for weapons. This means that you can run your tank for longer, or indefinitely if your passive. With my amarr ship and guns going and one repper going i run out of cap in just a few minutes. That is with 4 cap recharger 2 and 3 ccc rigs, (abaddon, no cap reduction bonus).
There is also the fact that once your tank fails you still have your armor, when ours does all we have is our hull. hmm, somehting to think about.
So stop whining about the shield nerf, its done and i doubt ccp will reverse it(even though I hope they will to diversify the player base more.) Shields are the equal to if not the better of armor tanks.
BOOST AMARR!!!
|
Zamolxiss
Amarr Falcon Advanced Industries
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 21:55:00 -
[846]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Praxis1452 lol...! Everyone knows your just a boost amarr troll. You know you'd be perfectly happy if amarr was the only race you could pvp efficiently in.
LOL! at you criticizing other people
Someone that thinks videos are something to take into consideration while balancing is living in a world far beyond trolls and magix methinks.
As a principle i don't loose any time reasoning with roadkill... cause theyr world is flat and smels like burned rubber... but if u took the time to read my first poast before trolling the second one u'd have at least a vague ideea about why that link is there... on the other hand u prolly lack the brain anyway.. trolling public forums all day long kinda points that out... on the other hand i guess ur right in a way... my world is far beyond ur means... fly safe... u should, ur flat
|
Sky Marshal
Aeden Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.02.12 14:35:00 -
[847]
Edited by: Sky Marshal on 12/02/2008 14:36:13
Originally by: Yazmina I think it is superior in many aspects to armor tanking
Hum...
It would be better to post something with a real experience of shield tank than give a mere opinion and some false constatations, same if you are GaYente.
I will agree with you in one point : - CCP don't care. And they are idiots. _______
16/20 Dragon : œ Great Game + 14/20 Revelations : œ Desyncs... + 11/20 Trinity : œ BBSOD, Bugs, Desyncs, F*** Nerfs + 10/20 v1.1 : œ [...] + EXP shield nerf +
CCP, you are tiring. |
Jill Antaris
|
Posted - 2008.02.12 15:12:00 -
[848]
Edited by: Jill Antaris on 12/02/2008 15:13:13 Well I realy like the change. Less tanking is allways good and puts back flavour in PVP especialy for Ships that try to go for gank. Yes all the good Amarr Ships go for gank because of the Cap Problems when trying to tank.
I donŠt think Amarr needs something like Explosive Crystalls(mayby a little switch from some points EM Damage on the Crystalls to Thermal would be enught instead of the general resistance change) to bring Lasers back to her former glory.
I realy hope the Ships finaly drop the Cap Bonus, reduce Laser Cap use and give a real Bonus for Lasers instead(like Optimal or Tracking, even 5% would be wonderfull) to improve the PVP and PVE abiltiys in Med and Short range combat, like you did with the Apoc for the long Range. Also this would make it easyer for people with low Skills to maintain the Weapons and would give a good reason to use Lasers instead of other Weapons on ships without a damage Bonus.
Atm Im using a Navy Apoc(because I donŠt want to fit Cap Rechargers in the Meds) with dual Trackingcomputers for PVE. It is amazing to blow up Ships with Puls at 60km and having the ability to kill orbitting Cruisers simply by changing the Scripts. Range or Tracking would be very good aditions to Laser Ships, in neraly every PVE/PVP situation especialy at med Range Combat(where Amarr should be superior). Nerf Lasers! Thay need far to less CPU and Grid to Fit. Still using not enught Cap and do far to mutch Damage. O wait... they allready did... =( |
Yazmina
|
Posted - 2008.02.12 15:41:00 -
[849]
Originally by: Sky Marshal Edited by: Sky Marshal on 12/02/2008 14:36:13
Originally by: Yazmina I think it is superior in many aspects to armor tanking
Hum...
It would be better to post something with a real experience of shield tank than give a mere opinion and some false constatations, same if you are GaYente.
I will agree with you in one point : - CCP don't care. And they are idiots.
Ummm, I have a caldari alt that sheild tanks. I do know how it works. He is just around 1.5m sp and he can passive tank (drake) and kill easily all lvl 3 missions. On 1.5M SP!! I sure couldnt do that on an armor tanker, at least not as well. HERE'S the kicker though, he can do it WITHOUT USING ANY CAP AT ALL! So he can go on indefinately while an armor tanker has to fit tons of cap mods to even have a chance at a sustained tank.
So please dont assume that I dont know about sheild tanking just becuase I disagree with your pathetic little opinion. Go sit in your cave please. |
Angelic Eviaran
|
Posted - 2008.02.12 18:06:00 -
[850]
Originally by: Yazmina
Ummm, I have a caldari alt that sheild tanks. I do know how it works. He is just around 1.5m sp and he can passive tank (drake) and kill easily all lvl 3 missions. On 1.5M SP!! I sure couldnt do that on an armor tanker, at least not as well. HERE'S the kicker though, he can do it WITHOUT USING ANY CAP AT ALL! So he can go on indefinately while an armor tanker has to fit tons of cap mods to even have a chance at a sustained tank.
So please dont assume that I dont know about sheild tanking just becuase I disagree with your pathetic little opinion. Go sit in your cave please.
nice job shutting him up.
|
|
Sky Marshal
Aeden Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.02.12 21:04:00 -
[851]
Edited by: Sky Marshal on 12/02/2008 21:04:45
Originally by: Yazmina Ummm, I have a caldari alt that sheild tanks. I do know how it works. He is just around 1.5m sp and he can passive tank (drake) and kill easily all lvl 3 missions. On 1.5M SP!! I sure couldnt do that on an armor tanker, at least not as well. HERE'S the kicker though, he can do it WITHOUT USING ANY CAP AT ALL! So he can go on indefinately while an armor tanker has to fit tons of cap mods to even have a chance at a sustained tank.
Yes, in PVE, and with a Drake. it is not the case of all ships, and in PVP it is an another history, as passive tank means less DPS, and sometimes need some sacrifices, like a worse capacitor regen, not great with a MWD or others (sometimes replaced by an LSE to improve passive effect), so it is not great.
Invulns use cap, unlike an EANM II, or you don't need more than 15% bonus (EANM : 25). At least we can overload it, that it is dangerous when it lags so we will avoid it. And Invulns need more CPU too.
Oh yes, I forgot that they can give 30% instead of 25%. This compensates a few the fact that I don't have some armor hp before the shield to tank some damages from an enemy, unlike an armor tanker who can count about his shield a few instant, with sometimes some good resists (Zealot, Š70% with kinetic).
Quote: Plus the shield booster goes off like every 3 sec compared to 9 or so for an armor repper with decent skills.
Yes, but this don't necessary save you of a bad situation. Also, armor repairer give more hp/s than a shield booster (Medium T2 : 90/3 so 30, Armor T2 : 320/9 so Š 35...). The shield regen help a few, but it helps also the armor tanker.
Quote: There is also the fact that once your tank fails you still have your armor, when ours does all we have is our hull.
Well, I am unlucky because when my shield is done, generally I instapop... _______
16/20 Dragon : œ Great Game + 14/20 Revelations : œ Desyncs... + 11/20 Trinity : œ BBSOD, Bugs, Desyncs, F*** Nerfs + 10/20 v1.1 : œ [...] + EXP shield nerf +
CCP, you are tiring. |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 01:03:00 -
[852]
Edited by: Goumindong on 13/02/2008 01:04:05
Originally by: Sky Marshal Edited by: Sky Marshal on 11/02/2008 12:28:41
Quote: Fit a medium shield booster, 5 HAMs and 3 damage mods. You will have Zealot like DPS and 35 hp/second repair.
Indeed you are right, but this is 35/36 HP/s with the Shield regen (6/7 max in my case), and with lesser resists than an Armor ship (Ouf, there are rigs to compensate), and your fit will require some sacrifices (no damage control, less HP, etc...).
No, you still get the damage control, the cerb has 4 lows. You get even more EHP since the invulns are better than EANMs and arent skill dependent. You lose about 10% dps under 10km and flight time based DPS over about 20km by about 1 minute of firing[how long it takes you to catch up with your higher dps].
The passive regen helps you more due to the shield resists. Remember the Zealot wont get a plate with its current PG.
Remember that is 4/5 hp/second at 1/3 shield. So unless the Zealot has a way to get its shield from zero to 1/3 then it doesnt get the benefit of the regen.
edit: In PvP a passive tank means EHP, and shield tanks below battleships are excellent at racking up EHP.
|
Cailais
Amarr VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 01:18:00 -
[853]
Hmm. From what Ive seen on sisi some of these changes are pretty, well...drastic. I generally fly a curse, and well its not great but it can just about survive some engagements pre nerf/boost.
Now it gets 2 shot volleyd to bits by an apoc that it cant even target its so far away.
Im not sure where the devs are going here - kinda worried really. Like "subscription in doubt" worried, and I never figured Id say that...
C.
Improved Low Sec Idea!! |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 03:25:00 -
[854]
Originally by: Cailais Hmm. From what Ive seen on sisi some of these changes are pretty, well...drastic. I generally fly a curse, and well its not great but it can just about survive some engagements pre nerf/boost.
Now it gets 2 shot volleyd to bits by an apoc that it cant even target its so far away.
Im not sure where the devs are going here - kinda worried really. Like "subscription in doubt" worried, and I never figured Id say that...
C.
Curse gets pwnd by injected zealots and harbingers aswell. The problem arent the other ships, its in the curse itself. Its EW isnt strong enough to protect it from harm. -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
DanMck
Amarr Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 12:05:00 -
[855]
still nothing on cap reduction ?
em/thermal ratio ?
beams fitting ?
|
Sky Marshal
Aeden Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 13:20:00 -
[856]
Edited by: Sky Marshal on 13/02/2008 13:23:45
Originally by: Goumindong No, you still get the damage control, the cerb has 4 lows.
This depend of what you fit all empty slots. If I add a MWD, and a Capacitor Booster to be able to tank a reasonable amount of time, then the Reactor Control become necessary, so or I forget the Damage Control, or I forget one BCS, or I use an HP tank instead.
Originally by: Goumindong You get even more EHP since the invulns are better than EANMs and arent skill dependent.
Hum, 30% instead of 25% with low skills, but at the cost of worse CPU needs and some capacitor who can't be reduced, so some skills must be trained to balance the needs. And when the capa is out, that fall to 15%, if I have all Shield compensation skill at lvl V. Each module have some advantages and insufficiencies.
Quote: You lose about 10% dps under 10km and flight time based DPS over about 20km by about 1 minute of firing[how long it takes you to catch up with your higher dps].
I have to admit that I don't understand this sequence
Quote: The passive regen helps you more due to the shield resists. Remember the Zealot wont get a plate with its current PG.
The passive helps in my case, but also the enemy. T2 ships has some good shield resists too (Vagabond in EM, Zealot in Kinetic...) who can absorb some damages, especially if I use a ship who have the wrong bonus ^^ _______
16/20 Dragon : œ Great Game + 14/20 Revelations : œ Desyncs... + 11/20 Trinity : œ BBSOD, Bugs, Desyncs, F*** Nerfs + 10/20 v1.1 : œ [...] + EXP shield nerf +
CCP, you are tiring. |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 13:49:00 -
[857]
Originally by: DanMck still nothing on cap reduction ?
em/thermal ratio ?
beams fitting ?
That cap reduction is really needed. -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
DanMck
Amarr Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 14:25:00 -
[858]
i am not one to moan but tbh after almost 3 years time to start a wee complaint....
Adjust the ratio of EM/Thermal in crystals to be Thermal heavier or at least 50/50 split = still nothing on this apart from a tiny adjustment on ships em resistance. this was not needed the ratio should go back higher thermal than em with tech II cystals same as when they first made it in game. (why was it ever nerfed ?)
Introduce Explosive damage crystals (never going to happen after you proposed ships changes and is not needed if you correctly adjust the thermal/em ratio)
Reduce the cap penalty on the high damage crystals (all crystals use way too much cap , and we don't have enough base cap to start with after being the "cap kings"
Remove the energy turret capacitor need bonus and replace it with more damage bonuses (doesn't have to be damage what about tracking ? ew drone bonus ? tracking disruptor ?)
Increase the base damage mod of energy weapons (yep and reduce the rof to save cap)
Amarr need more midslots Need more midslots to fit Ewar/tackling gear (yep )
really what i am trying to say is that the main 3 problems
1 cap 2 em/thermal 3 beams fitting
are still going to be an issue even after all these proposed changes.
giving the zealot an un*****ble turrent and making the apoc fire from far away don't help cap ? or that 1400mm II's will still be a better choice and/or still give you more cap to tank with
i am lost , you no the problem but seem to want to change everything around the issue apart from the problem itself.
leave other races ships alone and boost us and the game will feel better balanced.
if you think that the amarr whiners (with cheese yum) will stop after these change they won't and you will still end up with another 60 page thread on the same complaints as before.
please be careful and adjust what is at the heart of the problem
we need cap ! either overall in the ships cap or via less cap usage for modules
we need more damage on armor , 2.5% on a jag/vaga etc does not balance it thermal has to return to being higher than em
we need to be able to fit beams as they barely get used and think of the sp people have put into that tree for the guns to be ignored.
help us on this issue , and imo we will shut it as it will be blanced.
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 16:30:00 -
[859]
Originally by: Sky Marshal
This depend of what you fit all empty slots. If I add a MWD, and a Capacitor Booster to be able to tank a reasonable amount of time, then the Reactor Control become necessary, so or I forget the Damage Control, or I forget one BCS, or I use an HP tank instead.
You are fitting an mwd a medium booster and your guns dont need cap. You can run the booster long enough without an injector.
Are you seriously complaining about the cap use on invuln fields over the cap use on 5 heavy pulse lasers?
30% vs 25%[which is unrealistic as that is 4 high rank skills to 5, its like 2-3 months to train it, lvl 4 is more reasonable] is a 7.1%[or 6.3 depending on which way you are going, the eanm takes 7.1% more damage per mod] increase in strength per module. At reasonable skills its 8.5% per invuln/eanm.
The sequence is regarding the DPS that each does regarding the flight time of the missiles. The cerb is slightly ahead in DPS but will take a bit to catch up between 10 and 30km due to the time it takes the missiles to hit the target.
I dont understand your last sentence, are you saying that other shield tanking ships that arent the cerberus also gain benefit from passive shield regen?
|
Xavier Korg
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 17:39:00 -
[860]
if you increase dmg i don't think you should be reducing power consumption...
|
|
Stephanie Cormak
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 21:38:00 -
[861]
Hmm, caldari shield tanking already sucks. I think the minus 10% from explosive resist will hurt that race's tank even more. I know caldari is not really a pvp race, at least not solo, but some people still use them for pvp, it needs all the help it can get for its tank in my opinion.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 21:41:00 -
[862]
Originally by: Stephanie Cormak Hmm, caldari shield tanking already sucks. I think the minus 10% from explosive resist will hurt that race's tank even more. I know caldari is not really a pvp race, at least not solo, but some people still use them for pvp, it needs all the help it can get for its tank in my opinion.
Oh really? Odd because I sure see ALOT more drakes EVERYWHERE then for example harbingers. They cant suck that much... -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
Stephanie Cormak
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 21:52:00 -
[863]
LOL, fit any tackle mods and your tank is gone. Most people pick caldari becuz they look like a good race at first. Just about every time a shield tanker goes head to head against a armor tanker, the shield tanker is dead, even against amarr ships, yes I said amarr ships. Drakes rely on passive tank, and as one player already said, with passive your dps suffers
|
Veryez
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 22:36:00 -
[864]
While I agree with the change to armor resists (I don't like it, but at least I agree). The changes to shield resists and the reasons are dead wrong. Even after the armor changes, shield tanking is inferior for PvP without changing the exp resistance. The reason 'to maintain the balance' is poor, it's really to maintain the 'imbalance'. And where did you get the impression that Minmatar ships need this boost (since they are the primary users of explosive ammo)? In truth it's both a boost and a nerf to minmatar ships, since the majority of t2 minmatar ships shield 'tank' (which is also a lie since most people don't consider 1 or 2 LSE's to be much of a tank).
Since your on ship changes so much, when are you going to swap the shield and armor HP's on the typhoon? Nobody shield tanks it. If you're looking at fitting problems with beams, prehaps you could take a gander at fitting problems with artillery too? And finally if you're looking at tweaking some ships, consider removing target painter bonuses from all minmatar ships. They are far more useful on caldari ships then on minmatar ships, give our recons an agility or speed bonus, something we could actually use...
|
Stephanie Cormak
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 22:48:00 -
[865]
I totally agree! Well said!
|
Amira Shadowsong
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 22:52:00 -
[866]
Originally by: Veryez And finally if you're looking at tweaking some ships, consider removing target painter bonuses from all minmatar ships. They are far more useful on caldari ships then on minmatar ships, give our recons an agility or speed bonus, something we could actually use...
How about you get TDs + nos as recon ew bonuses and amarr gets webs and TPs. We wouldnt complain.
|
Sioluk
Minmatar Oser's Shipping and Manufacturing Inc. Endless Horizon
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 22:55:00 -
[867]
while some changes are definately welcomed.. i have a few things to say.. again..
First.. Zulupark.. *everything* you touch has ****ed the player base off in some form or another.. myself included.. you've spearheaded the nerfs of *every* ship i favored and/or wanted to get since i started. Get off your high horse sooner or later, before you are to blame for thousands of lost subscriptions.
Second. I refuse to believe that you will change 10% cap reduction per level to a dmg mod.. Hello?? Zealot with 2 dmg mods?? Absolution with 2 dmg mods?... are you Insane? The only ships i fight that I fear are Amarr, and your going to make thier dmg boats even stronger?
Third... Explosive Crystals? how the @#%$!@ do you get Explosive from LASERS?.. Let them change thier dmg types with drones like Gallente do.. Hybrids only do Kin/Therm, what makes amarr so freaking special that thier LASERS will magically do EXPLOSIVE dmg? eh?.. is your head on straight matey?
I fly every race, so I'm not opinionated/biased towards any single race, while I prefer minmatar, most of your changes will make it harder for the poor matari to survive. Its bad enough that you have to train for ages just to be effective in the ships we have, where most other races can do it with little effort. after 2 years, i still have a hard time tanking a matari ship as well as gallente or caldari.. Amarr i leave out of that, because if it could tank as well as amarr, the universe would be afraid. While i am happy that CCP finally gave minmatar a ship with useful bonuses. (Broadsword) it makes me sick to think that i can *PASSIVE* tank a sleipnir better than I can active tank it... do you see something wrong iwth that picture? because I sure as hell do, considering its got a Shield Boost bonus.. (which is utter crap btw.)
You make it hard for me to want to play this game.. you and you alone ruin this for me Zulupark. As i'm sure you've ruined the gaming experience of many before me, and many more to follow.
Please... Stop.... Stop trying to pretend you play this game, and make changes based on your *personal opinions*..
and while we're at it..
Fix the Dictors Dont even think about putting your hands on the carriers Put Tuxford back in control of the Nerf Bat.. at least when he manhandled it, the results were.. Livable.
You make our lives hell. I seriously hope you get moved out of balance/design team, and just take up a job answering phones.
there are many many other things that you've done or talked about that has made me question why i pay for a single account, nevermind as many as I do.
-------
[-Sio-] Oser's Shipping and Manufacturing Inc., CEO Endless Horizon |
Shira Rayborn
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 22:57:00 -
[868]
Edited by: Shira Rayborn on 13/02/2008 22:57:22
Originally by: Stephanie Cormak LOL, fit any tackle mods and your tank is gone. Most people pick caldari becuz they look like a good race at first. Just about every time a shield tanker goes head to head against a armor tanker, the shield tanker is dead, even against amarr ships, yes I said amarr ships. Drakes rely on passive tank, and as one player already said, with passive your dps suffers
Maybe dont go fit every caldari ship with cookie cutter i-only-fit-tank-because-im-so-afraid-of-dying. Fit active shield and damage mods and stop complaining so much. Passive tank is meant for pve, if you use it for pvp dont cry.
|
SirDanceAlot
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 23:01:00 -
[869]
Originally by: Sioluk
First.. Zulupark.. *everything* you touch has ****ed the player base off in some form or another.. myself included.. you've spearheaded the nerfs of *every* ship i favored and/or wanted to get since i started. Get off your high horse sooner or later, before you are to blame for thousands of lost subscriptions.
This shows more that there is a problem with your style tbh. As you said, you fly all the races and are not biased. Question is why do you fly all races? So you can fly the best of each class ofcourse. Is it so odd that ALL your best ships got nerfed? Because its no secret that there are (were alot more before eos and myrm nerf) alot of imba ships. You have yourself to blame.
|
Delphi Disra
Dawn of Fire Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 23:11:00 -
[870]
How about not nerfing ships like you promised? Just boost the ones that lack firepower.
Boo on nerfing resists, just give the amarr better firepower if thats what you think is needed.
Personally a well skilled ammarr pilot is by far way more effective than any other race i can think of.
|
|
Stephanie Cormak
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 23:19:00 -
[871]
LOL shira, like i said there is no room to fit a good tank for cadari with tackle mods, whether u active or passive tank. and the reists nerf dont help any. Duh, like I said,any armor tank ship is gonna beat a shield tank ship, unless of course the armor tank pilot really sucks. Just goes to show that armor tanking is superior to shield tanking.
|
Adreena Varule
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 23:20:00 -
[872]
Originally by: Sioluk while some changes are definately welcomed.. i have a few things to say.. again..
First.. Zulupark.. *everything* you touch has ****ed the player base off in some form or another.. myself included.. you've spearheaded the nerfs of *every* ship i favored and/or wanted to get since i started. Get off your high horse sooner or later, before you are to blame for thousands of lost subscriptions.
Second. I refuse to believe that you will change 10% cap reduction per level to a dmg mod.. Hello?? Zealot with 2 dmg mods?? Absolution with 2 dmg mods?... are you Insane? The only ships i fight that I fear are Amarr, and your going to make thier dmg boats even stronger?
Third... Explosive Crystals? how the @#%$!@ do you get Explosive from LASERS?.. Let them change thier dmg types with drones like Gallente do.. Hybrids only do Kin/Therm, what makes amarr so freaking special that thier LASERS will magically do EXPLOSIVE dmg? eh?.. is your head on straight matey?
I fly every race, so I'm not opinionated/biased towards any single race, while I prefer minmatar, most of your changes will make it harder for the poor matari to survive. Its bad enough that you have to train for ages just to be effective in the ships we have, where most other races can do it with little effort. after 2 years, i still have a hard time tanking a matari ship as well as gallente or caldari.. Amarr i leave out of that, because if it could tank as well as amarr, the universe would be afraid. While i am happy that CCP finally gave minmatar a ship with useful bonuses. (Broadsword) it makes me sick to think that i can *PASSIVE* tank a sleipnir better than I can active tank it... do you see something wrong iwth that picture? because I sure as hell do, considering its got a Shield Boost bonus.. (which is utter crap btw.)
You make it hard for me to want to play this game.. you and you alone ruin this for me Zulupark. As i'm sure you've ruined the gaming experience of many before me, and many more to follow.
Please... Stop.... Stop trying to pretend you play this game, and make changes based on your *personal opinions*..
and while we're at it..
Fix the Dictors Dont even think about putting your hands on the carriers Put Tuxford back in control of the Nerf Bat.. at least when he manhandled it, the results were.. Livable.
You make our lives hell. I seriously hope you get moved out of balance/design team, and just take up a job answering phones.
there are many many other things that you've done or talked about that has made me question why i pay for a single account, nevermind as many as I do.
Sioluk, I like you /signed
honestly i could live with all the changes accept the resist nerfs. If you are going to nerf it.. . if u absolutly have to break it then at least redestribute the points in other resistances (ohh idk like -10 from em and +10 to explosive on armor and maybe -10 explosive on shields and +10 thermal... idk w/e id rather u not "fix" whats not broken.)
|
Dlardrageth
Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 23:29:00 -
[873]
Originally by: Delphi Disra [...] Personally a well skilled ammarr pilot is by far way more effective than any other race i can think of.
How's that?
And don't please give me some line about PWNing everyone in PvP with maxed skills here and there. Amarr have not only a role as DPS support and bait tank in EVE-O. At least that wasn't what was written in the blog. And apart from all the PvP issues that still remain for Amarr (mainly in cruiser-sized vessels and with beam lasers), PvE in an Amarr laserboat is still hardcore, especially with the ton of Gurista missions you get in Amarr space. But ofc... mining-wise all races are balanced...
|
Durao
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.02.14 01:31:00 -
[874]
Originally by: Sioluk Second. I refuse to believe that you will change 10% cap reduction per level to a dmg mod.. Hello?? Zealot with 2 dmg mods?? Absolution with 2 dmg mods?... are you Insane? The only ships i fight that I fear are Amarr, and your going to make thier dmg boats even stronger?
Third... Explosive Crystals? how the @#%$!@ do you get Explosive from LASERS?.. Let them change thier dmg types with drones like Gallente do.. Hybrids only do Kin/Therm, what makes amarr so freaking special that thier LASERS will magically do EXPLOSIVE dmg? eh?.. is your head on straight matey?
Umm...I really hope you aren't suggesting that Zulupark's blog said he is going to 1) take away the -10% cap bonus and replace it with another bonus or 2) give Amarr explosive crystals. Those were ideas that he rejected in place of the other Amarr buffs. Those were some player-suggested ideas (from the forums) that the devs didn't see as the solution.
Please take a step back and actually read the blog. |
Joe Martin
|
Posted - 2008.02.14 01:51:00 -
[875]
Edited by: Joe Martin on 14/02/2008 01:53:40
Originally by: Sioluk while some changes are definately welcomed.. i have a few things to say.. again..
First.. Zulupark.. *everything* you touch has ****ed the player base off in some form or another.. myself included.. you've spearheaded the nerfs of *every* ship i favored and/or wanted to get since i started. Get off your high horse sooner or later, before you are to blame for thousands of lost subscriptions.
Second. I refuse to believe that you will change 10% cap reduction per level to a dmg mod.. Hello?? Zealot with 2 dmg mods?? Absolution with 2 dmg mods?... are you Insane? The only ships i fight that I fear are Amarr, and your going to make thier dmg boats even stronger?
Third... Explosive Crystals? how the @#%$!@ do you get Explosive from LASERS?.. Let them change thier dmg types with drones like Gallente do.. Hybrids only do Kin/Therm, what makes amarr so freaking special that thier LASERS will magically do EXPLOSIVE dmg? eh?.. is your head on straight matey?
I fly every race, so I'm not opinionated/biased towards any single race, while I prefer minmatar, most of your changes will make it harder for the poor matari to survive. Its bad enough that you have to train for ages just to be effective in the ships we have, where most other races can do it with little effort. after 2 years, i still have a hard time tanking a matari ship as well as gallente or caldari.. Amarr i leave out of that, because if it could tank as well as amarr, the universe would be afraid. While i am happy that CCP finally gave minmatar a ship with useful bonuses. (Broadsword) it makes me sick to think that i can *PASSIVE* tank a sleipnir better than I can active tank it... do you see something wrong iwth that picture? because I sure as hell do, considering its got a Shield Boost bonus.. (which is utter crap btw.)
You make it hard for me to want to play this game.. you and you alone ruin this for me Zulupark. As i'm sure you've ruined the gaming experience of many before me, and many more to follow.
Please... Stop.... Stop trying to pretend you play this game, and make changes based on your *personal opinions*..
and while we're at it..
Fix the Dictors Dont even think about putting your hands on the carriers Put Tuxford back in control of the Nerf Bat.. at least when he manhandled it, the results were.. Livable.
You make our lives hell. I seriously hope you get moved out of balance/design team, and just take up a job answering phones.
there are many many other things that you've done or talked about that has made me question why i pay for a single account, nevermind as many as I do.
I never thought someone could fit so much self-ownage into a single post.
For all your vast EVE experience you forgot to train "Reading."
|
Gallen Cross
Gallente Fusion Enterprises Ltd Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2008.02.14 03:30:00 -
[876]
Originally by: Adreena Varule
honestly i could live with all the changes accept the resist nerfs. If you are going to nerf it.. . if u absolutly have to break it then at least redestribute the points in other resistances (ohh idk like -10 from em and +10 to explosive on armor and maybe -10 explosive on shields and +10 thermal... idk w/e id rather u not "fix" whats not broken.)
I agree, i like the other ideas fine.. im actually training for amarr and ive been planning that way before any of this news came out and i think that the resist idea is pretty sucky, but i guess if they have to tamper and break somthin they could at least put the points back into a different resist type. |
Shira Rayborn
|
Posted - 2008.02.14 17:47:00 -
[877]
Originally by: Stephanie Cormak LOL shira, like i said there is no room to fit a good tank for cadari with tackle mods, whether u active or passive tank. and the reists nerf dont help any. Duh, like I said,any armor tank ship is gonna beat a shield tank ship, unless of course the armor tank pilot really sucks. Just goes to show that armor tanking is superior to shield tanking.
You do know many amarr ships for example, hacs cruisers, just fit a 100dps tank sometimes? Every friggin caldari tank i see is several hundred dps. If you always go for a tank like that you have nothing to complain about. Sorry.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.14 17:59:00 -
[878]
Originally by: Delphi Disra How about not nerfing ships like you promised? Just boost the ones that lack firepower.
Boo on nerfing resists, just give the amarr better firepower if thats what you think is needed.
Personally a well skilled ammarr pilot is by far way more effective than any other race i can think of.
If they raise amarr damage to get same overall effect as the EM armor nerf then youd cry when mega pulses start 2 volleying non tanked ships of any class. I think the resist changes are a better way to go. -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
Young DrPhil
Caldari Fusion Enterprises Ltd
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 00:40:00 -
[879]
Originally by: Gallen Cross
Originally by: Adreena Varule
honestly i could live with all the changes accept the resist nerfs. If you are going to nerf it.. . if u absolutly have to break it then at least redestribute the points in other resistances (ohh idk like -10 from em and +10 to explosive on armor and maybe -10 explosive on shields and +10 thermal... idk w/e id rather u not "fix" whats not broken.)
I agree, i like the other ideas fine.. im actually training for amarr and ive been planning that way before any of this news came out and i think that the resist idea is pretty sucky, but i guess if they have to tamper and break somthin they could at least put the points back into a different resist type.
/Signed |
Veryez
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 04:12:00 -
[880]
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong
Originally by: Veryez And finally if you're looking at tweaking some ships, consider removing target painter bonuses from all minmatar ships. They are far more useful on caldari ships then on minmatar ships, give our recons an agility or speed bonus, something we could actually use...
How about you get TDs + nos as recon ew bonuses and amarr gets webs and TPs. We wouldnt complain.
I'd accept in a heartbeat, where can I sign up?
|
|
Ira Theos
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 05:02:00 -
[881]
Said by others here, and I agree,
IT IS RIDICULOUS TO NERF THE TARGET WHEN THE REAL PROBLEM IS THE GUN IS SHOOTING BLANKS....
WHY DON'T YOU JUST INCREASE AMARR DPS DIRECTLY RATHER THAN TRYING TO BACK THE HORSE INTO THE BARN THRU A HOLE IN THE ROOF?? OR IS THIS SOME QUAINT QUIRK IN ICELANDIC LOGIC THAT MAKES YOU DO THINGS THIS WAY??
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 05:17:00 -
[882]
Originally by: Ira Theos Said by others here, and I agree,
IT IS RIDICULOUS TO NERF THE TARGET WHEN THE REAL PROBLEM IS THE GUN IS SHOOTING BLANKS....
WHY DON'T YOU JUST INCREASE AMARR DPS DIRECTLY RATHER THAN TRYING TO BACK THE HORSE INTO THE BARN THRU A HOLE IN THE ROOF?? OR IS THIS SOME QUAINT QUIRK IN ICELANDIC LOGIC THAT MAKES YOU DO THINGS THIS WAY??
You LOLed me -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
BhallSpawn
|
Posted - 2008.02.17 20:13:00 -
[883]
so rather than boost ammar with cap stuff you nerf resists on other ships to thereby make amarr appear better.
right.
that makes no sense.
Your kid is in school, and he's got a learning disablity (ie amarr) The teacher basically encourages the other kids (other races) to not do as well so that your kid won't feel as bad..... cause afterall, he can't do as good on tests and stuff.
That's basically what CCP is doing Dumbing down standards instead of lifting up the weak link.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.19 22:48:00 -
[884]
Originally by: BhallSpawn
Your kid is in school, and he's got a learning disablity (ie amarr) The teacher basically encourages the other kids (other races) to not do as well so that your kid won't feel as bad..... cause afterall, he can't do as good on tests and stuff.
I dont think its the same thing. Ships dont have feelings do they? -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
Adreena Varule
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 01:42:00 -
[885]
Edited by: Adreena Varule on 20/02/2008 01:42:09
Originally by: BhallSpawn so rather than boost ammar with cap stuff you nerf resists on other ships to thereby make amarr appear better.
right.
that makes no sense.
Your kid is in school, and he's got a learning disablity (ie amarr) The teacher basically encourages the other kids (other races) to not do as well so that your kid won't feel as bad..... cause afterall, he can't do as good on tests and stuff.
That's basically what CCP is doing Dumbing down standards instead of lifting up the weak link.
..yea somthin like that... i understand what you're sayin and i agree totally. Interesting analogy however. |
1157767
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 02:26:00 -
[886]
lets not mention all the minmatar pilots who are secretly giggling in anticipation of the soon to be devastating effects of EMP-L and EMP-M.
honestly - just raise the dps or raise r0f or lower the cap usage
|
Sylthi
Minmatar Coreward Pan-Galactic
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 07:48:00 -
[887]
So let me get this straight....... Your answer to years of pleeding from Amarr pilots to get a little love is to: NERFBAT....... EVERYONE?!?!? I have to give that a giant WTF!??!?
This is the saddest excuse for a boost I have EVER heard of... BAR NONE.
First you nerfbat the NOS, which was a mainstay on many laser (cap dependant) builds. Now you call this a "boost"?
Whatever the guys are smoking in the "balance" room needs to get passed around, because that must be some really good mind-altering schyte.
Really, CCP, passing off a MASSIVE nerf as a boost? That is really a new low, even for you.
*
* |
Shira Rayborn
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 18:20:00 -
[888]
Maybe now the alliance of three (minmatar, gallente, caldari) have learned not to smack down amarr boost threads with "your ships are fine, you just suck at pvp" comments. For 2 years amarr has been trying to get a fix.
Justice has been served and it tastes sweet. You should have been more humble before, now its too late.
|
Caliglia
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 21:54:00 -
[889]
I have ben playing Amarr and only amarr for over 1 year only using amarr ships i find that lazers compared to other turrets are more of a precision weapon and if uses right can do same or more dmg the problem is tho that amarr ships uses so mutch cap to start with. and that setting items to boost the bad sides of lazer turrets removes the cap rechargers and cap power relays we have to use now to bring our ships up to the same standart as other racers. i truly belive that nerfing every ones ships is a big mistake course in pvp and PVR(player vs rat) galliente,caldary and mimatar is quit ballanced. so what id say in sted is that we need the ones good side amarr has boosted alot more. galliente has more armor repair and drons, and hypred turrets. caldary has long range missiles and hybrids. mimatar has high movement speed projektile turrets and some missiles. amarr has large cap lazers and high powergrid. this is offcourse not totaly right and stuff but it more or less definds the racers only amarrs cap use in any setup is high every high. other racers dont use alot of cap for other than tanking but amarr uses it for weapons to and fankly i find lazers to be have manny great sides only we die if trying to use them right.
hmm long talk for nothing.
what i surgest is that amarr cap ammounts are boosted even more (not the cap recharge time just the cap ammount) i find that manny other racers ships have same ammount of cap and that leaves amarr abit in troubel course we use alot so mutch chat our ships are all about cap. plz stop nerf and replace it with an over all boost of amarr ships cap in the end this will make every one happy and lazer uses can start to use more lazer turret boosting items insted og all thos cap rechargers.
ps. any one thinging this is unfair need to take a long hard look on how little cap there ships use on weapons and how easy it is for them to make there tank run none stop with the cap they have now. offcourse i dont belive in honnest people so i guess ill just have to take lame ass flames HIT ME !
|
Maire Devylin
Amarr AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 00:35:00 -
[890]
Calling this an Amarr boost is like calling Pro Wrestling real.
|
|
Back Again
Caldari Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 01:41:00 -
[891]
Haha, I want to invite everyone to a ride in Sisi. So, you think it's only the base resistance of ships that changed?
Just take a look in some shield resistance amplifiers there, fanction and officers. Compare them to the armor counterparts. After this, just log in TQ and see the same items again.
If you don't want to go to Sisi right now, just take a look in this thead.
It's good being Caldari, isn't it?
Well, at least I can crosstrain for other race... it will take me some more months to be effective, sadly. And it seems this is what CCP want us to do, or I'm lost here?
About the statement of shield natural recharge rate, Zulupark forgot to mention that every ship has shields, no matter the race.
No signature here, only the bright light of a ship exploding right in front of me... Ohhh, wait, I'm in a pod!! It was my ship!!! |
Sylthi
Minmatar Coreward Pan-Galactic
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 05:15:00 -
[892]
Edited by: Sylthi on 21/02/2008 05:20:49 I took a look at SiSi, like the guy above suggested, and SERIOUSLY:
THIS WHOLE NERFTRAIN NEEDS TO STOP! NOW! BEFORE YOU RUIN STANDARDS THAT HAVE STOOD FOR ALMOST 5 YEARS.
He's absolutly right about what he said about the Caldari. If half the Caldari pilots out there knew about what you were doing with their resists, CCP HQ would have been burned to the ground by now by somebody who takes the game a little too much to heart. Seriously.
It's not JUST the Caldari either. This so called Amarr "boost" is nothing short of the most MASSIVE "stealth" NERF CCP has ever attempted. It is going to affect EVERYONE in EVERY RACE, all in a NEGATIVE fashion.
Ok, sure, some have pointed out that the Minis are going to get an effective damage boost out of this for their EMP ammo, and that is true. BUT, they are also going to get hit with the resist nerfbat, and so their tanks (which are not the best in the game to begin with) are going to get that much weaker. Not to mention the fact, that I thought we were boosting the AMARR, not the MINMATAR!!!
Seriously communnity, you NEED to start reading what this is about NOW! You NEED to start doing the research! You need to make your voices heard if we have a prayer of stopping this insanity.
This is just disgraceful......
After all CCP, what makes the Amarr so different? EVERY OTHER SINGLE RACE that has claimed to have a weapon problem, (over the past FIVE YEARS) you have either done NOTHING or adjusted the weapons, or the ammo, or the ship skill bonuses. WHY FOR THE LOVE OF ALL THAT IS HOLY, has the Ammar "boost" turned into a massive resist killing NERF nuclear detonation?
*
* |
Persefona
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 12:39:00 -
[893]
I totaly agree with Sylthi. This is not a boost obviously this is a nurf. I my self ammar, I am playing ammar as my main and if this hits live all I will do is to delete this cahr and start another one. This is a joke.
|
Jarek Konecnik
CHON
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 13:32:00 -
[894]
Rofl, yeah, you won't have 70%+ explo resist with one invul on your raven, I'm so with you... whiners
The only real nerf gets the deimos, so deimos pilots can whine, the rest just sux imo :)
|
Sylthi
Minmatar Coreward Pan-Galactic
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 13:35:00 -
[895]
Originally by: Jarek Konecnik Rofl, yeah, you won't have 70%+ explo resist with one invul on your raven, I'm so with you... whiners
The only real nerf gets the deimos, so deimos pilots can whine, the rest just sux imo :)
So, in the middle or your trolling, you agree that this is a "stealth" nerf (on some level) and NOT a boost.
Thank you for agreeing with us and making your voice heard on this important subject.
*
* |
Jarek Konecnik
CHON
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 13:42:00 -
[896]
Originally by: Sylthi
Originally by: Jarek Konecnik Rofl, yeah, you won't have 70%+ explo resist with one invul on your raven, I'm so with you... whiners
The only real nerf gets the deimos, so deimos pilots can whine, the rest just sux imo :)
So, in the middle or your trolling, you agree that this is a "stealth" nerf (on some level) and NOT a boost.
Thank you for agreeing with us and making your voice heard on this important subject.
Well it's obvious nerf, but who the hell cares. Nothing really changes. Amarrs and minmatars get slightly boosted, but nothing biggie. You are whining about nothing.
|
Sylthi
Minmatar Coreward Pan-Galactic
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 13:51:00 -
[897]
Edited by: Sylthi on 21/02/2008 13:52:10
Originally by: Jarek Konecnik
Originally by: Sylthi
Originally by: Jarek Konecnik Rofl, yeah, you won't have 70%+ explo resist with one invul on your raven, I'm so with you... whiners
The only real nerf gets the deimos, so deimos pilots can whine, the rest just sux imo :)
So, in the middle or your trolling, you agree that this is a "stealth" nerf (on some level) and NOT a boost.
Thank you for agreeing with us and making your voice heard on this important subject.
Well it's obvious nerf, but who the hell cares. Nothing really changes. Amarrs and minmatars get slightly boosted, but nothing biggie. You are whining about nothing.
YOU will care, when you wake up one day and relise that you got hit by it too, and that your ship's stats are lower than they were the day before. Don't you undertand? They are NOT done nerfing. This is a MASSIVE nerf in progress. Everyone is (or will be) getting hit by what they are doing, if the devs blogs are to believed. They are messing with the very core of game system-wide combat balance; and doing it in a bad (VERY dangerous) way. If you don't see that, then you haven't done your research properly sorry to say.
Finally, since when is LOWERING anyone defined as a "boost" for someone else? So NO, Amarr and Minis are NOT getting boosted. EVERYONE is getting nerfed. It is NOT the same thing at all. If you can't see THAT, then I don't know what else to say to you honestly....
*
* |
RAMANAK
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 14:03:00 -
[898]
I have always been told that amarr were the weakest race. even before i started playing or even made my character..i purposley chose Amarr for the challenge.. I found out they aren't that bad. With this new patch though Amarr will finally be able to hold there heads up in a pvp battle. I think these new changes will be great for the players and eve altogether. Thanks for the help guys!
|
Jarek Konecnik
CHON
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 14:09:00 -
[899]
Originally by: Sylthi Edited by: Sylthi on 21/02/2008 13:52:10 YOU will care, when you wake up one day and relise that you got hit by it too, and that your ship's stats are lower than they were the day before. Don't you undertand? They are NOT done nerfing. This is a MASSIVE nerf in progress. Everyone is (or will be) getting hit by what they are doing, if the devs blogs are to believed. They are messing with the very core of game system-wide combat balance; and doing it in a bad (VERY dangerous) way. If you don't see that, then you haven't done your research properly sorry to say.
Finally, since when is LOWERING anyone defined as a "boost" for someone else? So NO, Amarr and Minis are NOT getting boosted. EVERYONE is getting nerfed. It is NOT the same thing at all. If you can't see THAT, then I don't know what else to say to you honestly....
No, I won't. There will be more fitting options = the game will be more interesting. Em armor hardeners and explo shield hardeners won't be so useless as they are now. I agree, that the principle of boosting someone by nerfing the others isn't nice, but sometimes it's just the best way. For example if you would like to boost all amarr em damage, you can't just boost laser weapons, as there are some ships with em missile bonuses. So either you change 1337 things, or you change one and see what happens - resists overall in this case. End of story :p
|
Sylthi
Minmatar Coreward Pan-Galactic
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 14:11:00 -
[900]
Originally by: RAMANAK I have always been told that amarr were the weakest race. even before i started playing or even made my character..i purposley chose Amarr for the challenge.. I found out they aren't that bad. With this new patch though Amarr will finally be able to hold there heads up in a pvp battle. I think these new changes will be great for the players and eve altogether. Thanks for the help guys!
Read my post directly above. I totally agree with the Amarr needing to be balanced, and get some love, but the devs are going about it in a toally wrong and dangerous way. Amarr are not the ONLY people that are going to be "boosted" by this not so "stealth" nerf. Your EM resist on your Amarr ships is going to go down too, along with everyone elses. Which will make you more vulnerable to Mini and Caladri EM damage. So, with greatest respect: I don't see how your point of this making Amarr more competative in PvP is vaild. Perhaps if you explained more about something I have obviously missed, if your statement is correct?
*
* |
|
Sylthi
Minmatar Coreward Pan-Galactic
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 14:15:00 -
[901]
Edited by: Sylthi on 21/02/2008 14:15:58
Originally by: Jarek Konecnik
Originally by: Sylthi Edited by: Sylthi on 21/02/2008 13:52:10 YOU will care, when you wake up one day and relise that you got hit by it too, and that your ship's stats are lower than they were the day before. Don't you undertand? They are NOT done nerfing. This is a MASSIVE nerf in progress. Everyone is (or will be) getting hit by what they are doing, if the devs blogs are to believed. They are messing with the very core of game system-wide combat balance; and doing it in a bad (VERY dangerous) way. If you don't see that, then you haven't done your research properly sorry to say.
Finally, since when is LOWERING anyone defined as a "boost" for someone else? So NO, Amarr and Minis are NOT getting boosted. EVERYONE is getting nerfed. It is NOT the same thing at all. If you can't see THAT, then I don't know what else to say to you honestly....
No, I won't. There will be more fitting options = the game will be more interesting. Em armor hardeners and explo shield hardeners won't be so useless as they are now. I agree, that the principle of boosting someone by nerfing the others isn't nice, but sometimes it's just the best way. For example if you would like to boost all amarr em damage, you can't just boost laser weapons, as there are some ships with em missile bonuses. So either you change 1337 things, or you change one and see what happens - resists overall in this case. End of story :p
It's like we're not both speaking english. Have you logged into SiSi to see for yourself what they are doing? Have you seen the fact that they are messing around with, and for the most part, LOWERING the resists on the same armor and shield hardeners you are talking about?
I don't think you and I are going to find any middle ground on this one are we? Especially since it seems you are not talking from a point of having looking into the issue very deeply.
*
* |
Jarek Konecnik
CHON
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 14:27:00 -
[902]
Originally by: Sylthi Edited by: Sylthi on 21/02/2008 14:15:58 It's like we're not both speaking english. Have you logged into SiSi to see for yourself what they are doing? Have you seen the fact that they are messing around with, and for the most part, LOWERING the resists on the same armor and shield hardeners you are talking about?
I don't think you and I are going to find any middle ground on this one are we? Especially since it seems you are not talking from a point of having looking into the issue very deeply.
:)) For me it looks like you are fan of conspiracy theory. "Have you seen what they are doing right now?" or even better "They are here to ruin our beloved game!". Yeah, we probably won't find any middle ground on this one :p
|
Sylthi
Minmatar Coreward Pan-Galactic
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 14:37:00 -
[903]
Edited by: Sylthi on 21/02/2008 14:44:22
Originally by: Jarek Konecnik
Originally by: Sylthi Edited by: Sylthi on 21/02/2008 14:15:58 It's like we're not both speaking english. Have you logged into SiSi to see for yourself what they are doing? Have you seen the fact that they are messing around with, and for the most part, LOWERING the resists on the same armor and shield hardeners you are talking about?
I don't think you and I are going to find any middle ground on this one are we? Especially since it seems you are not talking from a point of having looking into the issue very deeply.
:)) For me it looks like you are fan of conspiracy theory. "Have you seen what they are doing right now?" or even better "They are here to ruin our beloved game!". Yeah, we probably won't find any middle ground on this one :p
Especially since it seems you prefer to troll rather than talk about the issues and facts around this problem. Oh well, I wish I could have made you see reason and actually take this issue seriously. But, obviously I am not equipped to properly deal with this.. uh.. you. So, I'll turn the forum back over to everyone else since you and I have been hogging it for a while. In the end, people come here to read about the issues, not get entertained watching you troll bait me. At any rate, my ulcer is acting up over this, and really, how important should it be to me how CCP chooses to ruin their own game? Answer: Not very.
Someone else carry the torch for a while. My typing fingers are tired.
One final word: It's doesn't fall under the definition of "conspiracy" if what they are doing is plain to see for anyone who cares to look and actually research the issue. I think you could have chosen a better bait word than that one.
Peace out.
*
* |
Jarek Konecnik
CHON
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 15:14:00 -
[904]
Originally by: Sylthi Edited by: Sylthi on 21/02/2008 14:49:14 Especially since it seems you prefer to troll rather than talk about the issues and facts around this problem. Oh well, I wish I could have made you see reason and actually take this issue seriously. But, obviously I am not equipped to properly deal with this.. uh.. you. So, I'll turn the forum back over to everyone else since you and I have been hogging it for a while. In the end, people come here to read about the issues, not get entertained watching you troll bait me. At any rate, my ulcer is acting up over this, and really, how important should it be to me how CCP chooses to ruin their own game? Answer: Not very.
Someone else carry the torch for a while. My typing fingers are tired.
One final word: It doesn't fall under the definition of "conspiracy" if what they are doing is plain to see for anyone who cares to look and actually research the issue. I think you could have chosen a better bait word than that one.
Peace out.
hah, this whole thing is like
A: it's bad B: it's not A: it's bad B: it's not A: you suck B: I rock, you suck ....
Tbh I'm not trolling, I just write, what I think about it. Why can't you convince me? Coz you didn't write any reasonable facts. Your arguments are like it's bad because it's bad. No real why. :)
|
Sylthi
Minmatar Coreward Pan-Galactic
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 15:46:00 -
[905]
Edited by: Sylthi on 21/02/2008 15:52:42
Originally by: Jarek Konecnik
Originally by: Sylthi Edited by: Sylthi on 21/02/2008 14:49:14 Especially since it seems you prefer to troll rather than talk about the issues and facts around this problem. Oh well, I wish I could have made you see reason and actually take this issue seriously. But, obviously I am not equipped to properly deal with this.. uh.. you. So, I'll turn the forum back over to everyone else since you and I have been hogging it for a while. In the end, people come here to read about the issues, not get entertained watching you troll bait me. At any rate, my ulcer is acting up over this, and really, how important should it be to me how CCP chooses to ruin their own game? Answer: Not very.
Someone else carry the torch for a while. My typing fingers are tired.
One final word: It doesn't fall under the definition of "conspiracy" if what they are doing is plain to see for anyone who cares to look and actually research the issue. I think you could have chosen a better bait word than that one.
Peace out.
hah, this whole thing is like
A: it's bad B: it's not A: it's bad B: it's not A: you suck B: I rock, you suck ....
Tbh I'm not trolling, I just write, what I think about it. Why can't you convince me? Coz you didn't write any reasonable facts. Your arguments are like it's bad because it's bad. No real why. :)
You last statement is one of the first things you have said that is COMPLETELY false. My "convincing" you has always been for you to "look for yourself." Why can't I convince you, because you REFUSE to do that.
Just saying since we are being so honest with each other.....
I really should stop. There is obviously no talking with you. And playing the "who gets the last word" game with you is getting really old. Believe what you want, join the rest of us in the pain when you finally realise the truth. I just really don't care about continuing this game of wits with an unarmed opponent.
Post whatever you want as a retort, and prove you are a person who insults and argues just because they can; without any reason or hope of helping with the problem. I really just don't care about what you have to say at this point and want to hear from other people who can reason, think, and offer facts to back up their arguments. Even when they don't agree with my viewpoints.
*
* |
Silver Serephynn
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 16:40:00 -
[906]
I think some people need to calm the F down and stick to the issues. Unfortunately, dispite the psychobabble above, I am going to have to come down heavily on the side that this Amarr thing is pretty crappy as it stands.
One of the posts, before the soap opera insued, was right on the money: If you want to boost Amarr, then DO IT. BOOST AMARR. Don't nerf everybody else to make Amarr not seem so bad.
My two isk.
|
Back Again
Caldari Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 18:48:00 -
[907]
Calm down dudes, I'm pretty sure this is some type of mistake and lemme explain why I think this way:
1) Not long ago we had a boost to all ships HP, including the NPCs, with the intention of making the fights less "instantaneous";
2) In this Dev Blog, Zulupark (CCP) identified the issues with Amarr:
Quote: # These are the issues that we've identified with Amarr:
# Some ships could need lovin' # Cap usage on Energy Weapons may be too high in some cases # Fitting requirements on some Energy Weapons need adjusting # Base EM resistances on armor are very high"
And with the "BALANCING" excuses they will screw the explosive resistances of shields, although this was NEVER identified as some issue, but now, as we can see in Sisi, there is no BALANCE problems if CCP nerf the shield amplifiers and the armor counterparts remain untouched... You will all agree that this is some sort of misunderstand of the so called "BALANCING", don't you?
Lemme go further in this problem: the reduction in the resistance values of shield amplifiers were not made only in the explosive side of the equation but ALL DAMAGE TYPES!!!! The worst thing that can happen now is some Dev come here and say that they will do some "BALANCING" in the armor resistance modules... what was the point of giving us a lot more HP and now take resistances from us?
That is why I'm convinced that all this talking about giving Amarr a boost nerfing and screwing EVERYONE and, harder, the shield tankers (that already sucks) is a HUGE MISTAKE.
No signature here, only the bright light of a ship exploding right in front of me... Ohhh, wait, I'm in a pod!! It was my ship!!! |
Jarek Konecnik
CHON
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 19:49:00 -
[908]
Originally by: Sylthi Edited by: Sylthi on 21/02/2008 16:07:14 Had some stuff here to shoot back at Jarek, but, no point though really. Everything in his last post proves my suspicions about him as a poster. I.E. "All wind, no facts." I would like to start hearing from people who can counter my points with facts instead of recriminations and off the hip trolling. I WANT to be wrong about this issue, but nothing I have heard or seen has shown me that I am. Someone, ANYONE, please, PROVE me wrong, with FACTS. Don't just say "You're wrong because your stupid and you suck." Like what I have been dealing with for the last few hours.
Thanks to anyone who actually puts some EFFORT into this issue.
:)))) Just got back home and your post really made my day. Recrimination :)) ok. By the way where exactly did you see the "You're wrong because your stupid and you suck" thing. Let's look on the facts. Your only facts you are still repeating are, that massive nerfbat is bad and I'm a forum troll, that doesn't take it seriously. Right, it's not "MASSIVE" nerfbat but only a puny adjustment that in consequence will slightly boost amarrs and minies. If you really want to discuss it, why don't you show results of your uber effort... and yeah, I'm a forum troll, that doesn't take it seriously, coz nothing really changes.
From the way you write (like repeating still the same things or replying on something I didn't say) you are either one of the few girls that play this game, or there is something wrong with your translator. In the first case: calm down, everything shall be fine, nothing is really happening, everyone loves you. In the second case, learn reading in english or get a new translator.
Anyway, got stuff to do, so thanks for good laugh and find someone else to talk with, darling :))
|
Alassra Eventide
Kiith Paktu Nex Eternus
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 21:22:00 -
[909]
Alright, this was way too much whining to actually read through, and most anyone who reads this is going to realize it anyhow, but...
Have you actually calculated the differences in Resists pre-change and post-change? You're looking at less than 2% difference on most tanks across the board, unless you don't put resistance mods on the ships. Granted, there are a few changes that are as much as 7% in one resist only after it's all said and done, but with active hardeners, or passive amps, shield and armor both, there's not that much of a massive difference.
Less than 5 % for nearly all ships, regardless.
If you fly around and tank without Res mods, you really have bigger issues than your base Res getting thrown about, and need to relearn how to tank.
|
Back Again
Caldari Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 22:33:00 -
[910]
Originally by: Alassra Eventide Alright, this was way too much whining to actually read through, and most anyone who reads this is going to realize it anyhow, but...
Have you actually calculated the differences in Resists pre-change and post-change? You're looking at less than 2% difference on most tanks across the board, unless you don't put resistance mods on the ships. Granted, there are a few changes that are as much as 7% in one resist only after it's all said and done, but with active hardeners, or passive amps, shield and armor both, there's not that much of a massive difference.
Less than 5 % for nearly all ships, regardless.
If you fly around and tank without Res mods, you really have bigger issues than your base Res getting thrown about, and need to relearn how to tank.
Why you bother to post saying it's a general whining thread if you, actually, didn't read the posts, as you said?
Coming here and saying such things only proved:
1) You don't read the forum and/or the Dev Blogs;
2) You are happy with the general stealth boost on Minmatar, as you, in fact, fly it - Linkage
3) You don't have a single clue of what is happening in Sisi or you would not show such lack of information.
No signature here, only the bright light of a ship exploding right in front of me... Ohhh, wait, I'm in a pod!! It was my ship!!! |
|
Valasaria
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 04:13:00 -
[911]
"Boost Amarr." Hmmm... sounds pretty straight forward. ONLY CCP, could turn boost one race into nerf ALL races.
If your going to boost the Amarr then do it CCP. If your not, then do NOTHING. What you are doing now is WORSE than nothing.
In other words, if you are not going to approach the situation in a constructive manner then leave well enough alone.
At least, that's what I think.
|
Sylthi
Minmatar Coreward Pan-Galactic
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 04:17:00 -
[912]
Originally by: Alassra Eventide Alright, this was way too much whining to actually read through, and most anyone who reads this is going to realize it anyhow, but...
Have you actually calculated the differences in Resists pre-change and post-change? You're looking at less than 2% difference on most tanks across the board, unless you don't put resistance mods on the ships. Granted, there are a few changes that are as much as 7% in one resist only after it's all said and done, but with active hardeners, or passive amps, shield and armor both, there's not that much of a massive difference.
Less than 5 % for nearly all ships, regardless.
If you fly around and tank without Res mods, you really have bigger issues than your base Res getting thrown about, and need to relearn how to tank.
So, leaving aside your numbers, which I am not sure I agree with; you do see how this "boost" is in actuallity an "across the board" (your words) nerf? Just checking to see if I got what you are saying right.
*
* |
Kayla Starfire
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 06:13:00 -
[913]
Edited by: Kayla Starfire on 22/02/2008 06:14:25 I guess what has me so worried about this whole mess is the fact that the devs seem to be completely confused as to the actual definitions of "boost" and "nerf". The way they are proceeding, it looks like the devs seem to think they mean the same thing.
I really hope that what the guy further up on this page said is right, and this is all just a big mistake. Otherwise, I see dark times ahead for all races.
Devs, if you feel compelled to change things at all, make sure a BOOST is actually that. A BOOST. Not a nerf. Ask players about the difference if you are confused.
"Fixing" the Amarr by making everyone else weaker just doesn't make sense..... as has been said by so many others who have actually looked into this and not just chosen to rant emotionally or harrass other posters.
|
Sylthi
Minmatar Coreward Pan-Galactic
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 07:29:00 -
[914]
Originally by: Jarek Konecnik Rabble, Rabble.
Ok, Jarek. You asked for it. You want to talk facts huh? Ok then. ACTUALLY GO READ ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. Because, you OBVIOUSLY haven't. Aside from that, you also just lost ALL credibility, as if you had any to begin with. FACT: The only reason you don't think this issue is a "big" deal is because you think you are going to GAIN out of it. You are a Minmatar PvP combat pilot that uses Projectile weapons heavily, as can be seen: HERE
You think you are going to gain a damage buff out of the increased damage output of EMP projectile ammo. Plus, Minmatar have the highest EM damage resistances on armor in the game. So, you know a nerf there is going to hurt you the least of perhaps all players.
Therefore, all of your arguments (Wait did you ever make any besides "your stupid and you suck"?) are completely self-serving and lack no substance at all.
Oh, and where did I get the "you suck" from? Take a look at your OWN post at the top of the page genius.
"A: you suck B: I rock, you suck"
Ring any bells? You are the first person to bring the "suck" into this conversation. And, I mean that in more than one way.
GODS! Why isn't there an IQ test before people are allowed in the game.....
*
* |
Silver Serephynn
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 07:41:00 -
[915]
Originally by: Sylthi
Originally by: Jarek Konecnik Rabble, Rabble.
Ok, Jarek. You asked for it. You want to talk facts huh? Ok then. ACTUALLY GO READ ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. Because, you OBVIOUSLY haven't. Aside from that, you also just lost ALL credibility, as if you had any to begin with. FACT: The only reason you don't think this issue is a "big" deal is because you think you are going to GAIN out of it. You are a Minmatar PvP combat pilot that uses Projectile weapons heavily, as can be seen: HERE
You think you are going to gain a damage buff out of the increased damage output of EMP projectile ammo. Plus, Minmatar have the highest EM damage resistances on armor in the game. So, you know a nerf there is going to hurt you the least of perhaps all players.
Therefore, all of your arguments (Wait did you ever make any besides "your stupid and you suck"?) are completely self-serving and lack no substance at all.
Oh, and where did I get the "you suck" from? Take a look at your OWN post at the top of the page genius.
"A: you suck B: I rock, you suck"
Ring any bells? You are the first person to bring the "suck" into this conversation. And, I mean that in more than one way.
GODS! Why isn't there an IQ test before people are allowed in the game.....
I know I was one of the ones telling you guys to chill; and this post really has nothing to do with the issue. But, I just had to say that was an epic slam. Nice one Sylthi.
|
Jarek Konecnik
CHON
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 11:59:00 -
[916]
Originally by: Sylthi Edited by: Sylthi on 22/02/2008 08:06:12
Originally by: Jarek Konecnik Rabble, Rabble.
Ok, Jarek. You asked for it. You want to talk facts huh? Ok then. ACTUALLY GO READ ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. Because, you OBVIOUSLY haven't. Aside from that, you also just lost ALL credibility, as if you had any to begin with. FACT: The only reason you don't think this issue is a "big" deal is because you think you are going to GAIN out of it. You are a Minmatar PvP combat pilot that uses Projectile weapons heavily, as can be seen: HERE
You think you are going to gain a damage buff out of the increased damage output of EMP projectile ammo. Plus, Minmatar have the highest EM damage resistances on armor in the game. So, you know a nerf there is going to hurt you the least of perhaps all players.
Therefore, all of your arguments (Wait did you ever make any besides "your stupid and you suck"?) are completely self-serving and lack no substance at all.
Oh, and where did I get the "you suck" from? Take a look at your OWN post at the top of the page genius.
"A: you suck B: I rock, you suck"
Ring any bells? You are the first person to bring the "suck" into this conversation. And, I mean that in more than one way.
GODS! Why isn't there an IQ test before people are allowed in the game.....
Edit: Afterthoughs: Special thanks go out to Back Again for providing me with the idea of looking for character stats as a means to determine the REAL reasons behind people's posts. Your example above helped provide me with the "ammo" I needed to crush a minute bug I was having issues with. So, thank you Back Again.
Epic slam? Nope, epic lulz. Such an emotional post again. I guess I was right after all and you are a girlie. Regarding the "you suck" thing, you just can't read. You missed the previous part "hah, this whole thing is like". So if I use your logic, you started trolling first.
Wow, you can use google too! Ehm, not you, but your friendly googlemaster Back Again. Yeah, it's so bad, that your empire mission raven won't have such nice explo resist as it has now. I feel really sorry about it. Basically they are not trying to buff amarrs, but minmatars, coz they couldn't sustain my pro-minie petition spams. I knew I will prevail! Btw emp ammo sux, hail ftw.
And stop repeating the same things over and over again. It makes you look like you like to talk, but don't have anything to say. Instead of that show us some huge percentual resist changes with you current setup on your mission running ship. You have been researching it for so long and it's such a serious matter, you know...
|
Silver Serephynn
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 12:39:00 -
[917]
Actually, I think I am starting to get infected with this "trolling" thing. Because I can actually see how entertaining and sad it is when someone doesn't even realize how owned they've been, and how badly they have lost.
Damn. I need to stop reading this. I am enjoying watching Jarek make an idiot out of himself too much.
Chow everybody.
|
Sylthi
Minmatar Coreward Pan-Galactic
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 13:23:00 -
[918]
Originally by: Jarek Konecnik EVEN MORE, Rabble Rabble.
Why the hell should I spoon feed you when you have been this rude and inconsiderate? Because you ARE the child you are acting like? That is the only possible reason I can fathom. If you are too DAMNED LAZY to go read the stuff yourself (or log into SiSi yourself), I am certainly not going to quote, copy, or paste it for you.
Your arguments are entirely emotionally based, and don't contain a single fact, from a quoteable source. AND on top of that, they are OBVIOUSLY entirely motivated by personal gain.
There really isn't anything further to say on the subject. I will not be responding to any more posts of yours, so go ahead and get your last words in. I know you're childish pride won't let this drop. You know you just HAVE to have the last word. I know you do. So go ahead. I am big enough to let this drop before we take any more time away from the good people trying to come here for information. Are you? Of course your not. So post away and prove me having been right about you all along by doing so. Have fun playing by yourself from now on.
*
* |
Silver Serephynn
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 13:43:00 -
[919]
Really, Sylthi, you need to let it go. I can tell you mean well. But, the jacka s s is just baiting you to get his rocks off on getting you mad. That is what cheap little punks like that have to live for because they have no other life. Stop letting him get to you. He's winning at his sick little game everytime you post. Don't give him the pleasure. Let him go find flies to pull the wings off of or something....
Ok. OK. That's it. I REALLY need to go.... I can feel the troll taint coursing through me.
|
Jarek Konecnik
CHON
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 14:31:00 -
[920]
Originally by: Silver Serephynn Actually, I think I am starting to get infected with this "trolling" thing. Because I can actually see how entertaining and sad it is when someone doesn't even realize how owned they've been, and how badly they have lost.
Damn. I need to stop reading this. I am enjoying watching Jarek make an idiot out of himself too much.
Chow everybody.
I feel so owned :( *sadface*
Originally by: Sylthi Edited by: Sylthi on 22/02/2008 13:35:25
Originally by: Jarek Konecnik EVEN MORE, Rabble Rabble.
But the main point is (yes, as I have SAID before) your arguments are entirely emotionally based, and don't contain a single fact, from a quoteable source. AND on top of that, they are OBVIOUSLY entirely motivated by personal gain.
x))))) Too funny. So I'm the emo here. Repeating yourself isn't enough, so you have to use my own words? Isn't dictaphone your real name? I know what these changes are about, I've read the devblog and when ccp released it and I'm fully aware what does it mean for the game (for pvp) not only from minmatar view.
You talk about maulus like it was a dominix. I don't agree, so I'm the rude child? Trying to own me with talking about credibility? Do you think, that as a empire mission runner, who never saw pvp (or is an alt), you are more credible than semi suicide pvp pilot alias me?
To be honest the only reason I wrote here was, that the whining players here made me smile. Want me to not to write anymore? Stop replying on my posts with nonsense. How easy. Listen to this darling and think about it. If you respond, don't forget to use some capital letters and edit the whole post several times again. :)
|
|
Thawia
Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 15:12:00 -
[921]
Originally by: Sylthi .....
lolage after reading your whine I just cant help myself to reply
u still repeat how terible this resist change is and few lines later u admit that it will affect everyone.... x)) so WTF? do u kno what word balance means?
after this change amarr gets 10% more dmg on armor (which is amarr buff) and nothing else changes .... ok maby your mission running CNRlol but who cares ... PvE in EVE sux anyway
so go get few (actually more than few cuz u need some brain-formating) beers and stop taking this game too seriously m8 Please do not post pictures of players in your sig - Mitnal |
Law Enforcer
Deadly Addiction
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 17:58:00 -
[922]
Edited by: Law Enforcer on 22/02/2008 17:59:47 there's way to much whining going on in this thread.
amarr got boosted by making everyone else weaker to amarr. I don't see the problem? minmatar got a slight boost as well which was needed.
the devs went about this the best way possible. if they left EM armor resists as is and directly boosted amarr, it would have been a horrible blow to shield tanking.
|
Bloody Slave
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 18:05:00 -
[923]
Lolz!!!
As long you leave my ridiculous high EM resistances in armor alone it's fine x)) - they dropped from 92,5% to 90% x)))
I know that EM res in armor are the only issue with Amarr that will be "changed" with this patch and, "sure", is a "huge" Amarr "boost". x))
Ohh, and "balancing" the game with the less explosive resistances in shields are welcome too. x))
Who cares with the missionrunner CNRlol? They sux. x))
Stop whining and go drink some beer m8, you need to be drunk if you plan to play this game tanking shield. x))
BTW, I fly caldari a lot, 90% of the time I'm in a caldari shuttle. x))
|
Nattalia
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 19:03:00 -
[924]
yay amarr! |
Sylthi
Minmatar Coreward Pan-Galactic
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 20:43:00 -
[925]
Originally by: Thawia
Originally by: Sylthi .....
do u kno what word balance means?
Absolutely. Do you know what the word "boost" means? As in the raising there of, not the lowering? In actuallity, if CCP had just said "some amarr balances are coming in" I really wouldn't be on about this. But, them passing off a nerf as "some love" just really hacked me off.
You're right about one thing though. A beer does sound really good. Thanks for the idea. Cheers m8!
*
* |
Kayla Starfire
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 20:48:00 -
[926]
So, am I reading this right? People in here actually LIKE getting their elite mods and base stats nerfed? No matter by how much. Wow. That is a new one on me. CCP must be passing out some REALLY good happy pills to make everybody swallow this one. Where do I get in line for mine?
|
Valasaria
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 22:03:00 -
[927]
Edited by: Valasaria on 22/02/2008 22:06:38
Originally by: Bloody Slave Random "You suck, I rock" nonsense.
As if anyone cared about what a macromining alt has to say anyway. Don't bother denying it. I have personally bumped you off of roids in belts twice this month to break your macro. Guess what? It worked too. Guess you need to update that macro a bit there.
|
Valasaria
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 22:15:00 -
[928]
Originally by: Nattalia yay amarr!
Yay! Yet another macro mining alt who I have bumped off of belts..... CCP, you REALLY need to update your autodetection software. I can't keep reporting ALL of them. ;)
|
Bloody Slave
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 22:28:00 -
[929]
Originally by: Valasaria Edited by: Valasaria on 22/02/2008 22:06:38
Originally by: Bloody Slave Random "You suck, I rock" nonsense.
As if anyone cared about what a macromining alt has to say anyway. Don't bother denying it. I have personally bumped you off of roids in belts twice this month to break your macro. Guess what? It worked too. Guess you need to update that macro a bit there.
You seems to know a lot of macromining, don't you? Lemme tell you one thing, I'm just reporting you right now for harassment in the forum, I hope you have proof of what you are accusing me because, if not (and I'm sure you don't have any) you are in serious troubles.
|
Valasaria
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 22:36:00 -
[930]
Originally by: Bloody Slave
Originally by: Valasaria Edited by: Valasaria on 22/02/2008 22:06:38
Originally by: Bloody Slave Random "You suck, I rock" nonsense.
As if anyone cared about what a macromining alt has to say anyway. Don't bother denying it. I have personally bumped you off of roids in belts twice this month to break your macro. Guess what? It worked too. Guess you need to update that macro a bit there.
You seems to know a lot of macromining, don't you? Lemme tell you one thing, I'm just reporting you right now for harassment in the forum, I hope you have proof of what you are accusing me because, if not (and I'm sure you don't have any) you are in serious troubles.
How about screen shots forwarded to CCP along with my petition. Good enough proof? Sounds like it to me. Prolly want to actually think about WHO is in trouble. Enjoy your ban!
|
|
Bloody Slave
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 22:46:00 -
[931]
Originally by: Valasaria How about screen shots forwarded to CCP along with my petition. Good enough proof? Sounds like it to me. Prolly want to actually think about WHO is in trouble. Enjoy your ban! And yeah, I know a lot about macroers. I hunt them actively. Your ships just haven't ever had anything good enough on them to be worth my suicide poping them tbh.
Reported for continued harassment and flaming. You are lying and it's more than easy to proof that, it's just a matter of looking the logs on the server with this Char (me), you are, really, in serious troubles, dude.
|
Valasaria
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 22:49:00 -
[932]
I am sure CCP will sort it out one way or the other. No reason to go on about it. If I'm wrong, you have my apologies. I just don't think I am wrong. Nothing personal. Cheers.
|
Bloody Slave
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 22:58:00 -
[933]
Originally by: Valasaria I am sure CCP will sort it out one way or the other. No reason to go on about it. If I'm wrong, you have my apologies. I just don't think I am wrong. Nothing personal. Cheers.
I'm sure it will. Apologies accepted and let's stay in the topic of this thread, could we?
Let's go to Sisi and try to test the stuff out there, after all this was what Zulupark asked us to do.
|
Bilgen
Caldari Universal Agencies Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.02.23 05:24:00 -
[934]
I was not going to beat the dead horse any more, but I have to at least register my objection. As Caldari I must shield tank to get the most benefit out of my ship. You have stated that em is less useful then other damage types because of the higehr base resistence. So you reduce it some. That is logic. Unfourtanetly you apply no logic in lowering the explosive resist of shields. You say it is to keep the balance yet your armor example shows that the two were actually not in balance to begin with. What you are doing is reinforcing an already broken system. Ships that rely on explosive damage will still be the same amount better then the em ones after this fix. DUH!!!!!!!!!!! Vice Admiral Universal Agencies |
Ermijad
|
Posted - 2008.02.23 21:20:00 -
[935]
Its sad that the caldari have no lobby in CCP,what remains - patch after patch there are no good news for caldari a lot of frends change already to galente i think i will follow them soon.Some love for ammar ,good but why caldari must be involved with this?Shield tank its a little diferent or i must expect in other patch some love for caldari (shield em rezist from 0 to -minus 20)Still wonder if the CCP hate caldari so bad then delete the race and eve can go with other 3 race.HMM where its that CCP love for caldari - there its no love caldari pilots are like orfans.And 1 last thing if something works i mean shield tanking/not very well but works why must be changed?/.And after the torps massacre there come rezist massacre whats gona be next?
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.02.23 21:42:00 -
[936]
Originally by: Law Enforcer Edited by: Law Enforcer on 22/02/2008 17:59:47 there's way to much whining going on in this thread.
amarr got boosted by making everyone else weaker to amarr. I don't see the problem? minmatar got a slight boost as well which was needed.
the devs went about this the best way possible. if they left EM armor resists as is and directly boosted amarr, it would have been a horrible blow to shield tanking.
Exactly and this is what the caldari whine squad doesnt understand. Its prolly the same people that where whining about the "torp nerf" a while back. Sometimes i wish we could have it their way instead and then just laugh when they realise their failure. -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
Tekrog
|
Posted - 2008.02.24 10:12:00 -
[937]
I think CCP have failed to miss the point and this is from a amarr, sure compaiered to other armour tankers (Gallante) our ships are a little underpowered cpu and grid and our caps compaired to many gallante ships are underpowered, also why wasnt there ever a tachyon pulse laser introduced, we have no tech 1 frigates that a pure damage dealer, also we have less tech 1 frigates in our line up everyone else has 6 we have 5, industrials we have 2 everyone else has 3, i'll be honest the few changes that have been made to amarr have been great ie the harb and abby, but its seems to me as an amarr ccp slap dashed the entire race together and never really finshed us off as a complete race, signs of this is the arbitrater, u look at the ship in the classic gfx and you will notice two traingle on either side of the ship that go directly through the ship into space, turrets are also a problem the tech 2 version on small and meds are incorectly represented by there gfx and pulse laser gfx have been interchanged for beams etc, also many turrets on the cruisers simply float on the side of the ship they dont even look attached see the omen and maller for this but it's also apparent in the tech 2 line up, OK were slavers no one really like us but dont nerf everyone else over one mini ship also most people and this is pro amarr miss the point of amarr we have tons of lows to play with, sure we dont have many pure damage dealing ships but we have alot of scope for damage mods and passive tracking, also cap relays a amarr's bestr freind, common ccp if ur really serious about giveing amarr some lovin then finish us of as a race not nerf everyone else, common everyone gets atleast three types of turrets per class but in the L laser pulse class, I repeat dont nerf everyone with the res changed, just finish of what u started , rather than leaving amarr unfinshed,
|
Redback911
Malevolent Intentions
|
Posted - 2008.02.24 13:18:00 -
[938]
Changes look good. Sort out our recons and we're laughing.
|
Cailais
Amarr VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.02.25 11:59:00 -
[939]
When's the boost coming for the recons??? - specifically the pilgrim which is basically a joke of a ship at the moment.
C.
Improved Low Sec Idea!! |
Rakshasa
|
Posted - 2008.02.26 07:43:00 -
[940]
Edited by: Rakshasa on 26/02/2008 07:44:27 Edited by: Rakshasa on 26/02/2008 07:43:47 It's interesting that CCP's solution to the problem of weak Laser turrets could just as easily have been a solution to the problem of weak projectile turrets.
1. Projectile explosive damage is weak against shield tanks. 2. Reducing explosive resists of shields by 10% will increase effectiveness of projectile turrets. 3. To maintain balance between armor and shield tanks, armor EM resists will also be reduced by 10%.
End result is the same.
|
|
Mad Ilya
principle of motion Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.26 08:40:00 -
[941]
Tbh I'm too lazy to go through all the posts here. And tbh I'm at work atm and too lazy to do the maths now. So excuse me if this is already covered.
Wouldn't it make more sense to boost the damage of the laser weapons instead (either the damage modifier of guns or EM [maybe TH too] damage of crystals)? You tried to make armor tri-hardening more popular by adding CPU cost to EANMs. Now this is doing exactly the opposite. By lowering "best" resistances EANMs/Invuls help compensate that hole that is left from lower "best" resist. Who would want to use tri-hardening anymore when the last resist is going to be 50%?
Tbh this seems even more boost to caldari who can choose their damage type freely. (Ok everyone will be using omnitanks so resists are most likely pretty even but tri-hardened armor tank BS -> caldari could do EM to it's 50% resist. Or have EM/EX combination to rock on most situations..)
As I see it, shield and armor tanking are equally effective atm. Shield tanking just isn't that popular due to having less ships designed to do that and the tackling gear. After thinking, I wouldn't go change the resists but boost the damage instead. Would it make amarr too effective against shield tanks - I don't know. Or is there other worries related to that? Would be great to get that aspect explained - why change resists and not laser damage.
My 0.02 isks.
|
Rakshasa
|
Posted - 2008.02.29 03:41:00 -
[942]
Originally by: Corrupt Panda So ... in this Amarr fix:
Caldari get a 10% boost to EM and Exp damage with missiles. Gallente get a 10% boost to EM and Exp damage with drones. Minmatar get a 10% boost to EM and Exp damage with ... everything. 20% if you count EMP ammo. Amarr get a 10% boost to EM damage with lasers.
This is not an Amarr fix. This is a stealth Minmatar boost.
Good point! Ironically, Amarr lasers benefit the least from this supposed power buff. Amarr whiners are gonna love this... ;)
|
Aganola
Amarr Imperium Galactica Omega Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.29 11:56:00 -
[943]
Originally by: Rakshasa
Originally by: Corrupt Panda So ... in this Amarr fix:
Caldari get a 10% boost to EM and Exp damage with missiles. Gallente get a 10% boost to EM and Exp damage with drones. Minmatar get a 10% boost to EM and Exp damage with ... everything. 20% if you count EMP ammo. Amarr get a 10% boost to EM damage with lasers.
This is not an Amarr fix. This is a stealth Minmatar boost.
Good point! Ironically, Amarr lasers benefit the least from this supposed power buff. Amarr whiners are gonna love this... ;)
Sad but true!! we need a little more Amarr love that is for sure!!
----------------------------------------------- "I do not belive in reicarnation... I didn't believed in it in my previous lives either..."
|
GregorEisenhorn
Amarr Khanid Secret Service
|
Posted - 2008.03.01 15:41:00 -
[944]
PEOPLE WHO SAY "AND I'M AN AMARR" please read:
1) Your grammar is horrible. Often the spelling goes to hell with it. Please use something like this: "And I own/have/use/play/RP(etc) an Amarrian character!". 2) Post with your Amarrian character, and not some nameless alt who doesn't even have a million SP to his/her name and has been in a newbie-corp for years and years (or minutes and minutes). Oh wait what's that? You don't have one? Haha I can see through your "oh if they think I am an Amarrian character I have more credibility" act quite easily. ------------------------- Inquisitor Lord GregorEisenhorn, smiting Heretics and Mutants in the name of the Emperor since 2005. |
BABARR
PARABELUM-Project
|
Posted - 2008.03.02 13:01:00 -
[945]
Reducing the EM base resist don't going to help amarr. people don't going to fly whith a low EM resist. ALL traditional tank (3xhardener+EANM+Dmg control) got already a low EM resist, whith your change pilote going to fit more adaptive, or EM rig/hardener, and finally going to have more EM resist than before.
For T2 gallente and amarr ship, who are often tanked whith 2xEANM+1therm or explo hard, the EM change make a very low EM resist, so pilote, once again, going to fit another tank.
The probleme come from the "ommi tank", and maybe the energized adaptive, so, what can you do? Making tank whith armor hardener more atractive than tank whith EANM. Reduce once again the CPU need for armor hardener?, make a small powerrid requierment for EANM? Increase LP need for faction EANM and reduce LP requierment for armor hardener?
BTW, all the whiner who say amarr got a DPS issue are noob, amarr ship are very good in pvp (maybe not in 1VS1, but in gang/fleet...)
The apoc and zealot change are very good, but the baseresit change of all ship simply suck, it's going to change all tank setup of all pilot, and finally don't going to help amarr. If you want help amarr pilote, just change amarr stuff. ...
"Si vis pacem, parabellum" |
BABARR
PARABELUM-Project
|
Posted - 2008.03.02 13:08:00 -
[946]
Quote: our ships are a little underpowered cpu and grid and our caps compaired to many gallante ships are underpowered, also why wasnt there ever a tachyon pulse laser introduced, we have no tech 1 frigates that a pure damage dealer, also we have less tech 1 frigates in our line up everyone else has 6 we have 5, industrials we have 2 everyone else has 3
Yes amarr ship are often very low CPU, but powergrid??? Maybe you don't have a DPS frig, but you have the punisher, who is a very very good T1 frig. You don't have less T1 frig, Caldari got 5 too. And you don't have less industrial, caldari got 2 too. And the besto is a very good indus for the capacity and the sigil a very good one for small capacity/agility.
Stop crying and learn to play. ...
"Si vis pacem, parabellum" |
Tarron Sarek
Gallente Cadien Cybernetics
|
Posted - 2008.03.02 17:51:00 -
[947]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Law Enforcer Edited by: Law Enforcer on 22/02/2008 17:59:47 there's way to much whining going on in this thread.
amarr got boosted by making everyone else weaker to amarr. I don't see the problem? minmatar got a slight boost as well which was needed.
the devs went about this the best way possible. if they left EM armor resists as is and directly boosted amarr, it would have been a horrible blow to shield tanking.
Exactly and this is what the caldari whine squad doesnt understand. Its prolly the same people that where whining about the "torp nerf" a while back. Sometimes i wish we could have it their way instead and then just laugh when they realise their failure.
Quoted for truth. Many Caldari players seem to be from the wishful thinking "gimme more, gimme more" camp. Simply disregard what you have and focus on or whine about what you don't have. Way to improve balance.. If all races were perfect in every regard, they'd be exactly the same.
___________________________________ - Balance is power, guard it well -
Please stop using the word 'nerf' Nothing spells 'incompetence' or 'don't take me serious' like those four letters |
Silver Sarena
Caldari Coreward Pan-Galactic
|
Posted - 2008.03.02 20:53:00 -
[948]
So I have read and read in this thread, and have yet to see anything on the specific subject that I am looking for.... so I can only assume that no thought what-so-ever has been put into this part of the problem. (Devs not thinking a massive change through before ramming it live, OMG, that's NEVER happened before!) And as I have already read in MANY places in this thread, stated by many players: I already KNOW that no one cares about carebears and that we, in fact, "suck" just for being. So, no one needs to go on about that and tell it to me AGAIN.
Anyway, to my point. Lets ASSUME, for a minute, that what the devs are currently going to mess with is actually going to work, and it actually "boosts" the Amarr by nerfing everyone and everything else. That still leaves the PvEers out in the cold as far as I can tell. What about us? Are the NPC resists getting hit with the nerfbat too? Or is this just "Some love for the Amarr PvPers ONLY"?
Because as far as I have seen, the only thing these changes will affect is PvP. (And even THOSE changes have been poorly conceived, and even more poorly implemented.) I think they are going to be an epic fail on that front too. But, that is beside my main point for this post; which is: This "boost" (which in actuality is one of the largest nerf-holocausts to come down the pipes in a long while) is only aimed at the part of the community that PvPs and no one else.
So all of the other stuff aside, (i.e. calling a massive nerf a "boost", the fact that the changes are in areas that have NOTHING to do with boosting Amarr, nerfing Caldari shields for EXP resist as a boost for the Amarr which only do EM and THERM (Still wondering what they were smoking on that one), the fact that messing with core game mechanics that effect EVERYONE is just a plainly INSANE way to go about "boosting" a single race, etc. etc.) My question to the devs at this point is straight and simple: What are the PvEers getting out of this so-called "boost"? Or are we just getting thrown to the side and left out in the cold..... again?
*
* |
Kendolph
Caldari Bulgarian Mafia Squad
|
Posted - 2008.03.04 16:16:00 -
[949]
Yea nerf Caldari more more more , set EM shield resists to -50 and all other to 0 (at least) so if they sucked at PvP now they should totally suck at everything. I'm really wondering some times where CCP found those guys that are trying to "balance" the game ... and I won't write what my ideas are coz it could be considered an insult.
Regards
|
Rastigan
Caldari Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.03.06 02:24:00 -
[950]
Originally by: Corrupt Panda So ... in this Amarr fix: Caldari get a 10% boost to EM and Exp damage with missiles. Gallente get a 10% boost to EM and Exp damage with drones. Minmatar get a 10% boost to EM and Exp damage with ... everything. 20% if you count EMP ammo. Amarr get a 10% boost to EM damage with lasers.
This is not an Amarr fix. This is a stealth Minmatar boost.
QFT.
|
|
eliminator2
|
Posted - 2008.03.06 13:55:00 -
[951]
Edited by: eliminator2 on 06/03/2008 13:57:48 tbh i dnt get this blog thingy i mean i read ammar need more dps they get nice dps with proper skills and fittin but fare enough boost there dmg cause they need it but readin on i see ur nerfin the other ships like raven i mean come on torps nerf now shield nerf wat r u makin a raven into seems to me a frig.and if somethin needs boostin its minmatar's bs u dnt have much there at all for em gallenete r nicly ballanced sort of for now till u nerf em most likly but they could do with a bit more cpu or pg or sumert like that so stop nerfin things to make ammar more "damagin u say by nerfin shields"
p.s dnt listen to the whinin carebears that carnt kill rats properly if thats the case nerf rats and listen to the pvpers that fly and fight in the ships everyday that now wat needs doin
|
Orion Supernova
|
Posted - 2008.03.06 14:42:00 -
[952]
Edited by: Orion Supernova on 06/03/2008 14:45:01 gday guys, firstly i apologize if this has already been discussed, i just cbf reading 33 pages of ppl posting how much they think this is a stupid boost, and frankly im still undecided on this matter.
the point i'd like to make is this, i believe that the EW for Minmatar and Amarr are backwards, look at it this way; * Amarr are the cap race, their long range weapons have the best tracking, and their short range weapons the longest optimal. * Minmatar are the speed race and more of their ships than any other race have signature radius reduction bonuses. yet Amarr have the cap and turret tracking and range warfare moduals, and the Minmatar have the speed and sig radius warfare mosuals for their ewar.
Wouldnt it make more sense, since Amarr and Minmatar are now or were at one stage, at war with the each other, that they would have developed warfare to combat each other's strengths and attack their weaknesses.
I suggest a straight switch, The Huggin getting the tracking disruptor and nos/neut bonues, the rapier as well, and the curse/pilgrim getting the web/target painter bonuses.
They keep the cyno bonuses they have already, but the target painters on the pilgram/curse are to combat the smaller sig radiuses of things like the hyena and the skirmish warfare modual Evasive Maneuvers, and webs to combat the extreme speeds things like the vaga and claw can get up to. The nos/neuts are to combate the insane caps of things like the appoc, sac, malediction, abaddon and the suck, while the tracking disruptors cut the awesome tracking of the beams and the effective range of the pulse down to nearly nothing.
Also while im on the subject of pointing out mistakes that were and more than likely still are being over looked lets move onto what most ppl believe is a race that enjoys the spotlight of premier pvp race in the game, the gal, now before ppl rise up and call this a nerf gal post, i'd like to ask you to read what im saying and realise that i am merely looking at the intended roles of each ship and asking myself, why do ppl not fly them to those roles?
Problem: Now gal ships, what can i say, gallante are the best solo pvp race in eve simply for the following reason, they are able to very effectively fit an armor tank, with ewar in the mids (and a slot for a cap booster), most can feild an impressive array of drones for dps and/or extrended ewar capabilities, and ontop of that, they can fit a nice array of turrets, even the drone boats like the ishtar, myrm and domi have more than enough highs for dps to augment their drones, this means they have one of three options, drone and turret dps, drone ewar and turret dps, or drone dps and extended highslot ewar. Solution: Reduce the ammount of turrets on the drone boats, let them have their highs, but have them fit exclusively drone augmentations and/or more ew, this i believe will bring them further in line with other races as far as roles go. Amarr have the mid range weaponary with the super tanks of the game able to soak up huge amounts of damge in short amounts of time. Caldari are the EW race, able to neutralize a ship or four from a fight. Minmatar zoom around the feild dropping intense amounts of volly dmg with some EW. Gal sit in amoungst the fray sending out minions to do their bidding while adding to the ew and protected by intense tanks that can take lots of dmg over time.
These are just some suggestions, reverse the amarr/minmatar ew so theat they target each other's weaknesses and strengths, and give the gal a specific role in eve, rather than the be all and end all of solo PvP, like the caldari, give them a specific purpose.
|
Distrans
The Collective Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2008.03.06 21:42:00 -
[953]
hey can we get over this amarr thing? minmatar is the word ..
ááááááááá |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 00:26:00 -
[954]
Originally by: Distrans hey can we get over this amarr thing? minmatar is the word ..
They still havent fixed pilgrim and sentinel that cant run their EW without capping out within seconds. -------------------------------------- [Video]Skirmish Warfare |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 00:07:00 -
[955]
So, now that its official that this is coming out, can we have a logical reason for it happening?
|
Sylthi
Minmatar Coreward Pan-Galactic
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 05:19:00 -
[956]
"Ship resistances have been changed as detailed in Zulupark's Blog"
Well, so much for the "nerf free" patch we were promised.
Also, this flies DIRECTLY in the face of popular opinion. The numbers tallied from this thread were as follows: (at the time of polling there are 980 posts) 274 posts, or 27.9% were for the changes as proposed by the devs. 318 posts, or 32.4% were undecided, unsure, deleted by forum mods, or proposed handling the situation in a much different way than proposed by the devs. 388 posts, or 39.5% were directly opposed with the devs moving forward as they had originally proposed the resistance nerfs. The posts were tallied with an error margin of + or - 2%; with 0.2% of the posts falling outside the three listed types. (Yeah, I spent a couple of hours tallying these from random page samples and doing the math. I was THAT determined to finally have hard numbered proof that the devs don't listen to popular opinion.)
So much for the devs listening to the players. At least now there is concrete proof of that fact.
I guess the players NEED the council that is going to get elected to protect our interests up there in Iceland..... I just didn't know how BADLY they were needed until this moment.
Thanks for the MUCH needed, and ongoing, efforts with all the bugs devs. But, this mindless nerfing against the will of the player base has got to stop.
*
* |
Treelox
Amarr Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 06:22:00 -
[957]
once again more of Zulu's bovine scatology makes it through to TQ.
Seriously with the past wielders of the nerf bat, I may not have liked what they changed, but at least their logic made sense and their methods of balance worked well with that logic to fix the problem as they saw it. With Zulu, I feel like I am dealing with that guy at the bus stop who has been smoking PCP daily for the last 20 years. --
|
princess katie
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 09:05:00 -
[958]
I just want to know where do you get the right to change things that you put into space , and allowed us to buy them, then you decide that they will be changed.
I mean suppossing a pilot bought their ship because of the colour ( ie paladin) what dammed right and what the heck makes you think that now the colour needs changing, ? are you giving back refunds? And whats more is this the type of thing that is costing us 14 hours down time, because you dont like the colour?
Why not do something really constructive and fix the LAG. or dont you have the skill book for it yet? and futher more how do you class nerfing other ships to fix a opposite problem , isnt that like saying "oh that planet is square and all the others are round, ok lets make all the others square to, then they will be the same"
|
Jack Wolfslayer
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 09:41:00 -
[959]
Go ahead and fix or simply re-write the codes on amarr ships - what do I care either way? I dont fight them - I dont fly them. But leave my goddamn shield AND armor tanking caldari and gallente ships the hell alone! I worked long and hard developing a decent tank and now you ccp dudes wanna bugger up my resistances? I am not a PVP'r _ I am a mission and complex runner and I am sure the NPC's in 5/10's will thank you for the helping hand. If I lose an expensive ship cuz you couldnt leave things alone, in an activity I could previously do ok with, you will not be getting a further subscription from me - I have had enough of this meddling. |
Gorikan
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 11:24:00 -
[960]
Well your gonna go thru with it lets just make one point clear, ur gonna get a hell of alot more petitions of mission runners, as they lose there ships, enjoy wadeing through that lot (I think Not).
|
|
Gorikan
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 11:36:00 -
[961]
Further for UK players we have issue's with packet loss's due to virgin takeing over ntl's esoteric network, they have no idea how to get it running properly tbh, i suspect you will end up getting alot of petitions of UK poeple, a freind of mine has lost a nightmare and a raven to this problem already, this radical move to change resistances is just a fast solution to a other wise invented problem, players who have little imagination to there ship set ups, or understanding on how to set up a amarr ship correctly, rarley people bother tanking EM in pvp anyway, trust me i'm amarr all the way and have happily ripped to peices mini hacs and af's.
|
Lazal Nahn
Amarr Nebula Rasa Vanguard Nebula Rasa
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 11:48:00 -
[962]
A couple of years ago when I started playing EVE I chose Amarr because I liked the discription. Heavy tanks, suberb damage but nothing fancy to use being the downside and that is what I wanted. I wanted to pew pew.
Ok so lets compare to Gallente, more dmg(blasters), more midslots(versatility), drones!,the tanks are almost as good.
Also I've noticed the Apoc bonus has been changed to tracking spd bonus. Would anyone mind explaining to me why we should fly this new Apoc over lets say an Abbadon or even a Geddon?
|
Windjammer
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 20:10:00 -
[963]
Zulupark,
I've always felt the reason for a 60% EM base resist on armor was because there was a 0% EM resist on shield.
Armor tankers watch their shields melt like butter under a blow torch from EM damage because......well there's 0% resistance. Thus the only tank they have to EM is in their armor, unlike the other three damage types which are slowed a little by the resists.
Shield tankers have to actively try to boost that 0% EM resist and thus have to use a fair number of slots to do it. If the EM damage gets to the armor, there's no tanking going on so it penetrates very well even with the 60% resist.
In my life I've learned one supreme rule. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." There is nothing wrong with the armor resists as they are. Certainly nothing that justifies a 10% reduction. Despite your protestations to the contrary, this is a radical change to a long standing feature.
Nerfing has never been a palatable option to the player base, aside from those whom it benefits. I would have thought that lesson was learned with the carrier suggestions you made and how that blew up in your face. Boost Amarr? Okay, maybe some boost is justified, but to nerf others? It is far better to give a boost directly to the Amarr, much more controllable in its outcome and certainly easier for the subscriber base to accept.
Amarr ships in general are very potent as is. Their tanking ability is the stuff of legend and you can't help but notice that a lot of very experienced players favor them and favor them without complaint.
This general nerf of EM damage resist looks very much like a reaction to a campaign of petitions and other types of complaint. It isn't difficult to determine which alliance is the source of such a campaign. The tactic, is afterall, one of their favored tools as are the Amarr and Minmatar ships. If this is indeed the case, I would urge you and the rest of CCP to stand back and look at what you're doing. Look at the game and judge for yourselves rather than respond to an organized campaign by a special interest group.
EVE can be broken and the nerf bat can assist greatly in a premature demise. Making changes without full understanding of all the ramifications makes that bat a deadly threat.
Regards, Windjammer
|
BABARR
PARABELUM-Project
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 21:47:00 -
[964]
Finally, you are going to make this "nerf".... It's simply a big error. All guy who where in a 3xhardener+EANM tank going to move for a full EANM tank, cause you simply get more all around resist, and finally going to have more EM resist than before. I really don't understand why you make a patch for "boosting amarr" who don't going to work. You don't listening what a lot of player said. You make a "armor hardener are more crap than before patch" for nerfing EANM tank...
Sorry to say that, but sometime you are a bit strange.
Let's see in 6 month, i'am sure we are going to have a new patch about that. ...
"Si vis pacem, parabellum" |
Princess Lolita
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 11:10:00 -
[965]
Originally by: BABARR Reducing the EM base resist don't going to help amarr. people don't going to fly whith a low EM resist. ALL traditional tank (3xhardener+EANM+Dmg control) got already a low EM resist, whith your change pilote going to fit more adaptive, or EM rig/hardener, and finally going to have more EM resist than before.
This. Totally! Thank you CCP for another amarr NERF! *snip* Don't use the signature again -Eldo Davip([email protected])
Ebil Eldo-uncle touched my private places Q_Q |
Ashlee Darksky
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 14:26:00 -
[966]
I am utterly gob smacked. Rather than actually make modifications to specific Amarr items, ships, etc they decide to UBER NERF shield and armour tanking.
Way to go whingers, looks like you got your way and everyone else if paying for it! Are you happy now? Doubt it, onto your next topic for moaning then....
So the entire mechanics of the game are altered, across the entire universe affecting every ship because you can't setup *your* ship *correctly*. Try "learning" rather than whinging and you might get somewhere!
I know CCP is good and listens to it's community, but sometimes they need to discount the mass whining. This seems like a really bad idea to me, and it's going to affect everything and everyone.
It *really* annoys me that people cannot find a suitable way around a problem, so instead they jump on the moan bandwagon and keep moaning until they get their way - which usually involves nerfing everything else.
Next time CCP, please conduct a SURVEY and see what the WHOLE community thinks and feels rather than a ranting minority.
|
cptgone
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 14:35:00 -
[967]
Originally by: BABARR Reducing the EM base resist don't going to help amarr. people don't going to fly whith a low EM resist. ALL traditional tank (3xhardener+EANM+Dmg control) got already a low EM resist, whith your change pilote going to fit more adaptive, or EM rig/hardener, and finally going to have more EM resist than before.
it baffles me that CCP is actually gonna implement this even after all the flak/advice they got itt.
again, CCP messes up things for all of us, in an attempt to remedy something that affects few of us - it's like the mineral compression fix all over again.
|
Juang Mao
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 15:45:00 -
[968]
Amarr, PVP and the way to change the world!
Well, this is my first open forum post and given what i read, i just had to reply. Could someone explain to me why CCP and its Game Dev's insist that most of EVE is based in pvp and 0.0?
As such could they explain to me why its easier to majorly alter ALL ships in favour of ONE SINGLE RACE! - If Pvp'ers are that unhappy - leave, remove your subscription and find something else to whinge about.
I have no objection to reviewing the issues on amarr ships, having flown one i know the inherent flaws, but to alter the resists on every ship becasue the 'pvp-ers' are unhappy is completely without reason or foundation (unless the devs all want to fly amarr and cant beat the tank on a raven for example, as we all know a lot of them are also players).
Simply put this is a BAD fix for a minority that get everything they want. ... AGAIN!
|
iblabe
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 16:13:00 -
[969]
Edited by: iblabe on 11/03/2008 16:14:55 i think it's time for ccp to look at who plays the game and act acordingly. over half of the players in the game DON'T WANT TO PVP. just look at the last economics report on the numbers of people and where they are and it clearly shows that most of the eve player base lives in empire. why because THEY DON'T WANT TO PVP.
now we get another patch that changes alot of game mechanics in the name of BALANCE. now every MMO that has pvp in it looks for this mistical creature and you know wot just like a unicorn YOU'LL NEVER FIND IT. why because you fix one thing and another gets broken its that simple. people will always find the holes anytime you fix something and you'll just have to fix that and so on time after time. when does it stop?
|
Robogod
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 19:28:00 -
[970]
One thing I really don't personally understand is how weakening all of the races makes one race any stronger? I mean Amarr would still be weaker compared to other races, except everyone just dies faster... which creates more problems, if people die more mission running will be harder, plus if you ship can't last long you will need more ships to do the same damage as before (total damage/time) because if your dropping people to fast you can't sustain the same damage; so this seams to go against CCP's current goals... it will make PVP need bigger gangs and make the fights faster, but you can't have a small effectiveness roaming gang hit other small gangs for any thing remotely long worth of time if everything drops like flys, also EM damage tends to pass though the self regenerating shields rather fast... exp will go though faster but armor doesn't have any 0% resistances so it won't go though "quite" like butter but the armor EM resistance now would have near the lowest resistance so EM would rip though things much easy especially if they don't really have much tank fitted. the best way would be to instead give Amarr a bonus to EM damage to go over the em resistances instead of weakening then directly,maybe by ship bonuses, or better yet base crystal damage, or weapon damage multiplier, or tweak laser cycle time to fire faster and lower their cap cost so they fire faster but don't kill your cap any faster than already... it's one thing to fix one race by boosting it in it's own supposedly specific field and another to just weaken everyone evenly and sure it makes them stronger than before but still proportionally weak compared to the other races.
Thanks, -Robogod "The Machine" |
|
Marvin Jones
|
Posted - 2008.03.12 01:20:00 -
[971]
Have I got this wrong? The ships I've trained months for (including assoc weps skills etc) to be used for missions aswell as pvp, are being weakened overnight because a bunch of Amarr t**ts are moaning they don't do enough damage?
How does CCP expect a player to have faith in the long, long, long skill system if his/her efforts can be junked overnight?
I soooo didn't want to resort to a game with rapid skill progress, oh well, I won't be the first or the last to quit while shaking their head in frustration!
|
zero2espect
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 06:01:00 -
[972]
for the record noobs, no amarr pvp player asked nor endorsed the wholesale nerf of em resists. we all hate it, just as much as you whiners. i have personally posted several times saying its a lousy idea and suggested more direct (amarr only) measures. but, just like amarr every other time, you got nerfed this time. time to get over it.
and btw if you dont pvp then this change will most likely effect you absolutely zero. if your tanking your rat/mission ship against em/thermal you're gonna be filled to the brim with resist mods anyway.
i still think it's stupid but there's no reason to keep blaming us, the players.
//sometimes less is more...zero
|
Target pic
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 07:33:00 -
[973]
... resistance ...
can anyone here tell my why Minmatar have the moste ?
Hac resistance :
Amar S: 177.5% A: 227.5% all: 405% Cald S: 200% A: 208.75% all: 408,75% Gall S: 195% A: 211.25% all: 406,25% Minm S: 225% A: 202.5% all: 427,5% ???? 20% more then the others ?????
|
Adimes Mag
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 07:57:00 -
[974]
So form what i see 1 You are lowering the res as a hole in hopes to have more shield tanking? people like armor tanking because armor has better res, even after the nerf.
2 If ya wont more people to shield tank then give shields a 10% to EM and then I'm fairly shur that people will be more or less happy even with the change.
3 Are the dev's even on this topic any more?
4 So people have bean saying that this will not help for about 3 months and they still go through with it? this just dose not sound all that smart. i understand some of them but if people are this up in arms about it why did you go through with it?
In closing I'm just not shurr what this was sopos to help. as a long time player just answer me this is this the type of thing i and the community are to expect down the pipe or are you going to undo some of the changes like this? *** Weeeee I'm in a form now*** |
Tsu'ko
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 14:10:00 -
[975]
Originally by: iblabe Edited by: iblabe on 11/03/2008 16:14:55 i think it's time for ccp to look at who plays the game and act acordingly. over half of the players in the game DON'T WANT TO PVP. just look at the last economics report on the numbers of people and where they are and it clearly shows that most of the eve player base lives in empire. why because THEY DON'T WANT TO PVP.
now we get another patch that changes alot of game mechanics in the name of BALANCE. now every MMO that has pvp in it looks for this mistical creature and you know wot just like a unicorn YOU'LL NEVER FIND IT. why because you fix one thing and another gets broken its that simple. people will always find the holes anytime you fix something and you'll just have to fix that and so on time after time. when does it stop?
Yeah then let's remove PVP because the majority is always right, right?
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
The Amarr are the tanking and ganking floating rods of gold. Amarr simply sit there and charge their lasers, secure in their knowledge that God is on their side.
|
Windjammer
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 19:47:00 -
[976]
Originally by: Tsu'ko Yeah then let's remove PVP because the majority is always right, right?
-Edit Just wanted to add CCP personnel is doing a great job, this will certainly keep me playing
No, but the majority always have more money when in a stiuation like this. Money that can leave. Personally, I'd love it if CCP stopped listening to the bulk of the whines and coming up with nerfs. Starting with the release of Trinity, it's been a nerf fest as well as little boosts here and there that apparently are escaping much commentary.
I don't think the person you were responding to was advocating a removal of PvP from the game. That would be silly. I think what they were trying to say is that they're a little tired of the changes made in the name of finding a balance in PvP which nerfs the rest. PvPer's tend to be a very vocal minority and, apparently, CCP has been hearing a lot from the PvPer's who like to fly Amarr ships. By nature the PvPer's group together and tend to vote together. CCP needs to remember there is a very large, non vocal majority that are getting ticked off and starting to look at other games.
Regards, Windjammer
|
Nekopyat
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 02:11:00 -
[977]
Originally by: Juang Mao
Well, this is my first open forum post and given what i read, i just had to reply. Could someone explain to me why CCP and its Game Dev's insist that most of EVE is based in pvp and 0.0?
This actually why, as counter intuitive as it seems, you do NOT want game developers playing their own game. In theory it feels like it should gain them empathy, but in reality, unless you have a pretty diverse staff, you end up with devs with blinders on. They start thinking about the game through how they play it then get fueled by the my that playing gives them empathy thus their perspective must be accurate.
The devs PvP in 0.0. They designed the game around how they wanted to play it then made the mistake of sandboxing... which gave people the flexibility to play differntly and thus NOT how they would. Now, this isn't universal since obviously lots of work has gone into content for non 0.0 PvPers over the years, but that underlying assumption is still pretty common.
Just look at how they described 'balancing' it.. blowing each other up on a test server. They probably did not stop to do 'boring' things like PvE while doing this.
|
Sylthi
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 05:09:00 -
[978]
Originally by: Nekopyat
Originally by: Juang Mao
Well, this is my first open forum post and given what i read, i just had to reply. Could someone explain to me why CCP and its Game Dev's insist that most of EVE is based in pvp and 0.0?
This actually why, as counter intuitive as it seems, you do NOT want game developers playing their own game. In theory it feels like it should gain them empathy, but in reality, unless you have a pretty diverse staff, you end up with devs with blinders on. They start thinking about the game through how they play it then get fueled by the my that playing gives them empathy thus their perspective must be accurate.
The devs PvP in 0.0. They designed the game around how they wanted to play it then made the mistake of sandboxing... which gave people the flexibility to play differntly and thus NOT how they would. Now, this isn't universal since obviously lots of work has gone into content for non 0.0 PvPers over the years, but that underlying assumption is still pretty common.
Just look at how they described 'balancing' it.. blowing each other up on a test server. They probably did not stop to do 'boring' things like PvE while doing this.
QFT. Exactly!! Way to go and type it like it is dude. That is EXACTLY what the main problem is. The devs have blinders on for PvP and that is it. I mean, seriously, even if we buy into the load of crap that the resist nerf is in actuallity a damage "boost" for PvP, how do the devs explain what happens to the mission runners? I mean, how does the PvE player's tank resists going down, and the NPC's they fight resists staying the same (or going up) "boost" the PvEer's damage? How, EXACTLY? No one has been able to explain that one to me yet... funny enough. Maybe because, uh.... it's an F'ing NERF?!?!
* Please visit your user settings to re-enable images. * |
Marvin Jones
Tempered Steel Legion
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 12:00:00 -
[979]
Ok... I admit I was angry, and I won't quit because Eve is still an amazing game. But the Devs have got this one wrong; Amarr PVP should not effect all the boys and girls happily missioning in Drakes, Nighthawks etc
The Devs have simply passed the **** from one guy's yard into another guy's yard...re-think it!
|
Nekopyat
Moons of Pluto
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 17:39:00 -
[980]
Originally by: Sylthi
That is EXACTLY what the main problem is. The devs have blinders on for PvP and that is it.
What they should probably do is hire some 4X players as developers and have them bring some ideas to the table. Different class of game that would probably really help the industrial side of EvE. Not sure what type of gamer would be able to help with other areas of the game.
Quote: I mean, seriously, even if we buy into the load of crap that the resist nerf is in actuallity a damage "boost" for PvP, how do the devs explain what happens to the mission runners?
Mathmaticly they are not far off. Reducing a defensive bonus can actually be a good way to boost damage when done right. But it has to be done across the board (i.e. the PvE issue) otherwise yeah, it is simply a neft. it only works if the math is kept consistent.
Now, if they had done it as two different steps... reduce the defensive bonus, wait, then increase the NPC bonuses, THAT would have been a bit more acceptable.
On the PvE side, it almost sounds like they are trying to scale back the L4 'risk vs reward' abuse, but they are catching other levels in the same net. I for instance am probably months away from even TRYING L4, but my L3s are now more difficult for the same reward. And not more difficult in a fun or challenging way, just dragging out.
Quote: No one has been able to explain that one to me yet... funny enough.
This is a prime example of where a dev (or designer) chiming in would be good PR. By being silent what they communicate is 'yeah, you caught us, we have no excuse, so were are just not going to say anything'. Something their PR doesn't seem to have a good grasp on is that one says nothing people read in the worst.
|
|
Corvus Anderran
Liberty Rogues Rally Against Evil
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 20:21:00 -
[981]
Edited by: Corvus Anderran on 14/03/2008 20:21:58 So far the devs have been flamed for:
Not doing enough for Amarr. Doing too much in one patch. Nerfing Caldari. Stealth nerfing Amarr. Buffing Minmatar. Nerfing Minmatar. Nerfing PvE. Not listening to the community. Listening to only a specific part of the community. Listening to a majority of the community. Not playing their own game. Playing their own game.
If I was a dev I wouldn't want to reply to this thread either.
|
Sylthi
Coreward Pan-Galactic
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 21:38:00 -
[982]
Originally by: Corvus Anderran
So far the devs have been flamed for: Not doing enough for Amarr.
They didn't do enough for the Amarr, if you compare this boost to what some of the other races have gotten in the past from their "boost" patches. (Even though they weren't CALLED that at the time. The extra turret slots are of questionable use without more grid or CPU. The changes to the Apoc may, or may not, be of use depending on what you used it for before the change.
Originally by: Corvus Anderran
So far the devs have been flamed for: Doing too much in one patch.
This is OBVIOUSLY true. Look at how much trouble they are having. I.E. How many bugs cropped up, having to go through the multiple hotfixes to fix what they broke while "fixing" stuff. etc. etc.
Originally by: Corvus Anderran
So far the devs have been flamed for: Nerfing Caldari.
Absolutely true. Caldari can not tank (in PvP OR PvE) as well as they could before the patch. How messing with EXP resists has to do with "boosting" the Amarr is still a mystery to me. Yeah, yeah, people have said it was to keep armor and shield tanking in balance. But, again, what does THAT have to do with "boosting" the Amarr?
Originally by: Corvus Anderran
So far the devs have been flamed for: Stealth nerfing Amarr.
Not sure about the "stealth" part. It is perfectly obvious that Amarr tanks are weaker after the patch than before it.
Originally by: Corvus Anderran
So far the devs have been flamed for: Buffing Minmatar.
Also, very true. The Minmatar PvP damage has been boosted, arguably, more than anyone elses in this "love to the Amarr" patch.
Originally by: Corvus Anderran
So far the devs have been flamed for: Nerfing Minmatar.
The devs did this as well. Minmatar were far from the most ideal choice for running missions from all races in the first place, they will find they have an even harder time tanking the damage delt by the NPCs now.
Originally by: Corvus Anderran
So far the devs have been flamed for: Nerfing PvE.
This is perhaps the area where the devs are the MOST guilty of atrocious oversight. EVREYONE will now have a harder time tanking the damage dealt out by the NPCs.
Originally by: Corvus Anderran
So far the devs have been flamed for: Not listening to the community.
This has been mathematically proven to be true. See my post on page 33 of this thread for full details. I have done the math from three separate sample runs, and the numbers always come out the same. If you don't believe me, run the statistics yourself. Numbers don't lie. But, they DO reveal the harsh truth: The "balancing" devs could care less what the majority of the community wants.
Originally by: Corvus Anderran
So far the devs have been flamed for: Listening to only a specific part of the community.
This is true. The devs only seem to take into account the opinions of the players that are hard core PvPers.
Originally by: Corvus Anderran
So far the devs have been flamed for: Listening to a majority of the community.
This is the only point you made that I could find to be NOT true. They do NOT listen to the majority; as has been proven mathematically earlier. See above.
Originally by: Corvus Anderran
So far the devs have been flamed for: Not playing their own game.
This is true, in a way. The devs do not, and as far as I can tell, have not ever taken PvE into consideration when making changes. Zulu even admitted as much with his own typed words in his blog.
Originally by: Corvus Anderran
So far the devs have been flamed for: Playing their own game.
This is true, in a way as well; as a converse to the above. They only consider PvP in their changes, as that is all the devs play and test for.
So yes, I agree with you, I can see why the devs wouldn't WANT to post here if they are guilty of all of this. But, as said, they NEED to, if for nothing else PR. Otherwise, they just seem "above" it all.
The facts as I see them. Flame away. *
* |
Juang Mao
Veiled Conclave Initiative
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 22:56:00 -
[983]
Originally by: zero2espect for the record noobs, no amarr pvp player asked nor endorsed the wholesale nerf of em resists. we all hate it, just as much as you whiners. i have personally posted several times saying its a lousy idea and suggested more direct (amarr only) measures. but, just like amarr every other time, you got nerfed this time. time to get over it.
and btw if you dont pvp then this change will most likely effect you absolutely zero. if your tanking your rat/mission ship against em/thermal you're gonna be filled to the brim with resist mods anyway.
i still think it's stupid but there's no reason to keep blaming us, the players.
1) a) Ive been a member of the eve community since February 2004, this is an alt. b) Ive been in 3 alliances, been at war for over 18 months, fought in over 100 sorties, killed 28 pods. in that time. I FAIL to qualify as a noob.
2 ) It was pvp'ers that requested the change - as stated by CCP and Zulupark here...
Quote: reported by CCP Zulupark | 2008.01.30 16:56:16 | Comments http://myeve.eve-online.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=533 "There have been a lot of requests (to put it mildly) and petitions to do "something" about the so called Amarr problem. Most of those are about Amarr not being competitive when it comes to damage output and therefore not a viable race to fly in PVP."
If Pvp'ers werent the ones that mentioned it, are the dev's suffering from voices in the head?
Yes youre right, mission runners got nerfed, but as stated this nerf represnt an increse of 25% more damage. The issue isnt with the nerf, its with the change thats been made to ALL of the mentioned ships, in order to resolve one single race ship issue. As for getting over it - once something has been done the 'getting over it' seems irrelevant.
Blame is only aportioned to the 'petitons' as refered to in Zuluparks 'oomph' blog, and no one specifcally.
In summary, forums are designed for sharing opinions, all ,of which are valid.
Fly safe folks, if not learn to swim
|
Corvus Anderran
Liberty Rogues Rally Against Evil
|
Posted - 2008.03.15 03:42:00 -
[984]
Originally by: Sylthi The facts as I see them. Flame away.
For starters I want to say this was a big patch, with a big downtime. Asking why something was not done, whether it's a PG reduction on lasers, a shield tanking buff or an increase to EM drone base damage, is daft. That can all come later as a series of patches, and as mentioned right in the original blog, there's more coming.
Asking why something was done is of course a much more sensible question. For the record, I don't like the idea of killing off tri-hardener fittings in favour of EANM everywhere. I think that's where the actual discussion should be.
What boggles my mind is all the conflicting arguments people are throwing out left right and centre. You agree that not enough was done for Amarr but that too much was done in one patch? Amarr and Caldari were nerfed because their tanks are weaker, but the Minmatar, whose AFs took the biggest resist hit, are buffed because their damage output went up?
The "statistics" for listening to the community do not mathematically prove that the devs have not listened to the majority. A few hundred posts is not a representative sample of 200,000+ players whichever way you spin it. And regardless, who cares if they do or don't? People are stupid. There are some bright people who bring some good ideas to the table in these discussions, but do you really think that having every balance patch determined by popular vote would lead to a more balanced game? Because I certainly don't.
Lastly, I'll repeat what I started with. Don't cry that something didn't get done in a patch that already had a huge downtime and numerous post patch issues. PvE got a little bit harder as a result of a patch that was a) fully expected to have wide reaching balance implications beyond the scope of Amarr ships only and b) not directed at PvE. Which means it is hardly foolish to expect a nice PvE patch somewhere along the lines. The past history of game updates shows plenty of patches that changed NPC resists, NPC ewar, and NPC ships, so in the mean time, talk about what was in the patch, not what wasn't.
|
Sylthi
Coreward Pan-Galactic
|
Posted - 2008.03.15 04:42:00 -
[985]
Originally by: Corvus Anderran}[/quote And regardless, who cares if they do or don't? People are stupid. There are some bright people who bring some good ideas to the table in these discussions, but do you really think that having every balance patch determined by popular vote would lead to a more balanced game? Because I certainly don't.
People are stupid and democracy is irrelevant (or at the very least we shouldn't pay attention to it). Wow. Not quite sure what to say to that. I guess maybe: "It would simply be nice if CCP listened to the MAJORITY of what it's players want every ONCE in a while would be nice." Yeah. That's what I'll say. Because this is just ANOTHER in a long line of CCP NOT listening to the players. This is NOT the first time this has happened. I just have mathematical proof to back up my claims this time. So, I am going to crow about it a little, because CCP has gotten away with this so much in the past.
Originally by: Corvus Anderran}[/quote A few hundred posts is not a representative sample of 200,000+ players whichever way you spin it.
Ok. What number WOULD you consider representative? 1,000? 10,000? 50,000? 100,000? It really isn't that hard to adapt the statistic calculations to take into account your requirements. Make the call, PM me in game, and I will adjust them and take new samples. But, I have to warn you, I can already tell you via my advanced projections, you are NOT going to like the outcome.
Originally by: Corvus Anderran}[/quote You agree that not enough was done for Amarr but that too much was done in one patch? Amarr and Caldari were nerfed because their tanks are weaker, but the Minmatar, whose AFs took the biggest resist hit, are buffed because their damage output went up?
You must not have read my post very carefully. I explained everything line by line. Not sure how much more specific I could have been. Maybe, try re-reading it..... slowly? Dunno.
Originally by: Corvus Anderran}[/quote PvE got a little bit harder as a result of a patch that was a) fully expected to have wide reaching balance implications beyond the scope of Amarr ships only and b) not directed at PvE. Which means it is hardly foolish to expect a nice PvE patch somewhere along the lines.
Wow. You REALLY and HONESTLY expect CCP to "make this up" to the PvEers somewhere down the road? Yeah. Right. I've got a bridge in Brookland I want to sell you too. (American humor.) Why don't we all just try holding our breath until THAT happens, and see how it works out.
Originally by: Corvus Anderran}[/quote talk about what was in the patch, not what wasn't.
I'm confused. So, nerfs and Amarr changes DIDN'T go into the game with this last patch? That WAS what 7 out of the 12 original points were about, right?
Look dude. I am not saying you are off base in EVERYTHING you are saying. But, my main point is this: The more people that come here and sound off the better chance we have of CCP changing its ways. And it sounded like you were discouraging them from doing that, is all I was really saying.
Bottom line: Everything else aside, can we at least both agree that this patch wasn't a shining example to CCP as to how they should handle things in the future? IF we can at least agree on that, all the rest of it really doesn't matter a whole lot. Peace and Cheers.
*
* |
Corvus Anderran
Liberty Rogues Rally Against Evil
|
Posted - 2008.03.15 06:06:00 -
[986]
Originally by: Sylthi
People are stupid and democracy is irrelevant (or at the very least we shouldn't pay attention to it). Wow. Not quite sure what to say to that. I guess maybe: "It would simply be nice if CCP listened to the MAJORITY of what it's players want every ONCE in a while would be nice." Yeah. That's what I'll say. Because this is just ANOTHER in a long line of CCP NOT listening to the players. This is NOT the first time this has happened. I just have mathematical proof to back up my claims this time. So, I am going to crow about it a little, because CCP has gotten away with this so much in the past.
Why? Why should they listen? You didn't answer my question. You think it would be nice if CCP listened to the majority of the playerbase but there's nothing to show that the majority of the community knows what's better for the game than the devs do. As far as statistics go, an actual poll of players instead of a post count in a forums thread would be vastly more representative of the playerbase, but even then, I don't see why that necessarily validates your argument. You seem to be coming from the circular argument that listening to the majority is a good idea because democracy is nice. I don't even see the financial side of it, a big change might make 10,000 people leave but 30,000 new players join, and perfectly representative poll of the playerbase wouldn't reflect that.
Quote: You must not have read my post very carefully. I explained everything line by line. Not sure how much more specific I could have been. Maybe, try re-reading it..... slowly? Dunno.
You're switching the goalposts. You claim that Caldari and Amarr were nerfed because their tanks are worse, despite the fact that Minmatar tanks have been hurt more overall. You then claim that Minmatar have been buffed because they gain more advantage from the resist changes, while ignoring the effect of those changes on the Minmatar tanks.
Quote: Wow. You REALLY and HONESTLY expect CCP to "make this up" to the PvEers somewhere down the road? Yeah. Right. I've got a bridge in Brookland I want to sell you too. (American humor.) Why don't we all just try holding our breath until THAT happens, and see how it works out.
And you REALLY and HONESTLY expect them to put all the necessary PvE balances, individual ship fixes, drone fixes, everything else so that despite the unpredictable nature of balancing everything comes out all happy and dandy at the end of the patch? I'm sorry, but "it makes PvE a bit harder and I don't trust you to fix it later on" is not really a satisfactory argument against a patch. As I said, there have been numerous updates for PvE content and I'm sure there's more in the works. I see no reason to delay any change just because it might have short term effects on how difficult PvE is.
Quote: Look dude. I am not saying you are off base in EVERYTHING you are saying. But, my main point is this: The more people that come here and sound off the better chance we have of CCP changing its ways. And it sounded like you were discouraging them from doing that, is all I was really saying.
Bottom line: Everything else aside, can we at least both agree that this patch wasn't a shining example to CCP as to how they should handle things in the future? IF we can at least agree on that, all the rest of it really doesn't matter a whole lot. Peace and Cheers.
It's far from perfect, that's true. It's not easy to evaluate how good the patch really is because there's far too much reactionary whining without proper backing, and it's drowning out the real discussion. Of course I want to see balanced combat and I don't want to see the fun that some people enjoy in PvE ruined for no reason, but I don't think CCP did something fundamentally wrong with this patch. That stems from a big difference in our points of view, because I'm not convinced that listening to the majority is a good thing.
|
Sylthi
Coreward Pan-Galactic
|
Posted - 2008.03.15 06:31:00 -
[987]
Originally by: Corvus Anderran I don't think CCP did something fundamentally wrong with this patch. That stems from a big difference in our points of view, because I'm not convinced that listening to the majority is a good thing.
Yeah, these two points do seem to be the crux of our disagreement, tis true. Unfortunately, the way we (each individually) look at them stem from directly opposed points of view, (as you mentioned) based largely on belief systems. Therefore, I don't see much (easy) middle ground.
I think CCP was fundamentally wrong in the way they approached the "boost" patch all together. (I.E. Claiming that Nerfs to one stat equals and "boost" to another. Sorry, I am just never going to swallow that one. Plus not just SIMPLY focusing (ONLY) on ships and mod changes like they have done for every other racial boost they have ever done.) You disagree. I think that the masses should have a large (but not total) say in the development of the product they pay for. Again, you disagree.
Is it fair to say that about sums it up? Hope so. I would hate to think after all that typing between the two of us, we are STILL in a state of miscommunication.
Anyway, I enjoyed our little chat, even if we couldn't find common ground. Cheers till next time!
And for all time: POWER to the people! and DOWN with mindless CCP nerfs!
*
* |
Silver Serephynn
Viziam
|
Posted - 2008.03.15 06:44:00 -
[988]
I haven't read the 30 or more pages of shtuff here, but I would just like to chime in and say: I am Amarr, and I do not like the changes that have come my race's way. I wish CCP would rethink them and give us a real boost. Thanks.
|
Jim Sharpe
Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.15 14:23:00 -
[989]
I agree with Silver.
I am Amarr too and this is not a boost to Amarr.
A nerf to explosive(what lasers do explosive damage?) and em resistances is not the same thing as a boost to Amarr.
Pages and pages of complaints...-> reverse this nerf, and give Amarr a real boost.
|
DogSlime
Wilde Cards
|
Posted - 2008.03.18 19:18:00 -
[990]
There were many of us posting about the shield/armour nerf before it was implemented on TQ.
CCP asserted that it was a boost, and we were all just looking at it the wrong way.
Then of course, the faction module nerfs came out of the woodwork too, as one or two players found that their ships would no longer run with the modules fitted because they were using faction CPUs to enable the fit.
I suppose that was a "reverse boost" too?
They should have boosted Amarr - boosted them more, if necessary - but the nerfs are just stupid. I haven't seen any solid justification for them. It really does seem like they implemented the nerfs because they just wanted to...
Claiming that the patch had "not a single nerf" just rubbed it in. Could it be that a disgruntled CCP employee is attempting to sabotage the game and make it less popular?
As to the laughable "wingman" idea... I was discussing with a friend how he might like Eve on Saturday night. I Emailed him a link to the website, and (unfortunately) he spent some time browsing the forums. He also read about the boot.ini debacle.
I got a reply the next day asking why he should pay ú15 per month on a bug-ridden game where so many players seem to be ****ed off. Couldn't really counter him on any of his misgivings. CCP seem to bring a bull into their OWN China shop :(
|
|
Kethry Avenger
Angel Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.03.18 21:56:00 -
[991]
Well since you all locked the last live dev blog thread...
When and where is that recording going to be for the boost patch live dev blog. I was having trouble hearing you, followed you instructions and then couldn't hear you at all.
Thanks.
|
Drake reaper
GSX MINING INC.
|
Posted - 2008.03.23 19:12:00 -
[992]
this is a little off topic but a new alliance is beginning to take place. the miners who are subjected to the whim of the universal code. that if we the smaller corporations who have our members attack and decimated by roving pirates that belong to the larger corporations with the express purpose of not allowing us to form our own destinys are beginning to meet with the express purpose of wresting the control from those that would keep us in bondage. we will have meetings as to 1. that if a corporate ship is set upon by an indivtdual or groups that we have the ability for all ships in that corp to attack and defend our people.2 that we will petition to have court systems to hear our pleas. that thru alliances even us smaller corps will be able to defend ourselves even against the powerful eve lackeys who promote this terrorising of us smaller corporations. for now our ore can be stolen and our ships destroyed without the ability to defend our selves. maybe if we knew how the amarr stands on this issue we could form an even stronger alliance to remove the terror of losing our abilities to stand up to those who would usurp them. my mail is always open to suggestions. thankyou for your time . trade negotiator gsx corp.
|
annoing
MisFunk Inc. Daisho Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.03.23 21:21:00 -
[993]
I'm sorry I just couldnt resist .....
The whole "some love for the amarr" just made me laugh. CCP Devs are amongst the funniest people alive. If only that were that good at balancing ships and races as they are making me laugh.......
Dwi Cymraig According to the Pastafarian belief system, pirates are "absolute divine beings" and the original Pastafarians. Their image as "thieves and outcasts" is misinformation. |
Ephemeron
Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.03.25 17:54:00 -
[994]
I'm sorry I couldn't resist.. my resists have been nerfed by CCP!
seriously tho, bad move on this one from CCP. Game may be more balanced, but there are always alterative solutions and this solution wasn't good.
|
SERGI MANESTI
|
Posted - 2008.04.05 08:52:00 -
[995]
boohoo. i for one.. agree with the change.
|
Hab0k
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 15:47:00 -
[996]
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=627262&page=14
|
|
|
|
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] |