EVE Search - Base resi change is on sisi

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Base resi change is on sisi

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.01.31 10:41:00 - [61] Originally by: Mrski Okupator Originally by: Cpt Cosmic cosmic fail 1. Stealth minmatar boost? They got the lowest overall dps. So I'm quite OK with this. 2.OK. Amarr do more dmg to armor. Repeat after me; Amarr do more dmg to armor. 3. Gallente stays the same. On top of its game. Fine. I never whined I needed the best stuff, just to be competitive. 4. Caldari shield tanks lost nothing. Em is still their largest hole and Kin/Therm their second largest concern (yes, Frenchies). And no, they do not fear minmatar. This results in: 1. Amarr gets boosted a little. Minmatar a bit too. Good. 2. Gallente still top dog, Amarr gettin there. But mid slot gimpage is always gonn bring us down. 3. Amarr will still have some problems with cap and fittings. True. Note that I have AWU5 and stuff and still have fitting issues. Mainly beams/tachs, and with any fit on any cruiser/frigate. Note also that fixing fitting is on the to do list. Zealot! 4. Caldari are the same. Torp boosted recently same. And as for tackling goes, let me use the phrase oh so many times used to discredit amarr midslot whinage; get a tackler. Overall, this is a step in the right direction. What pains me tho, I fear after this half-boost its gonna stop there. Never again shall we see an atempt to boost Amarr. And them issues are many with nerf after nerf over the years. your annalysis wil ony be true if no one changes their setups. This will not happen. For smaller ships that used to have only 1 EANM + DC tank you are right. But for bigger shisp that used to have 3 HArdeners + EANM (for a very very balanced resist overall, but with EM as lowest) this wont be true. Won 't be true because no one in their sane mind will fly with EM resist under 60%. So they will all use Omni Tanks. That will nullify the "amarr boost " and will help gallente and minmatar. Again, when next time you see a typhoon in batle and he is using 3 EANMII + DC II. Don 't complain of stupid Em resists. In past he would be using only 1 DC to boost his EM Resists. Simply changing EANM to give 15% EM resist and 20% resist to others. Would have solved all this OmniTank problem. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Aki Corrino	Posted - 2008.01.31 10:53:00 - [62] I dont understand why they dont just give energy weapons a damage modifier boost. Changing something fundamental like all races base armor/shieldresists is asking for unwanted side effects.
Jonny JoJo Amarr The Imperial Guards	Posted - 2008.01.31 11:10:00 - [63] Edited by: Jonny JoJo on 31/01/2008 11:11:07 Originally by: Aki Corrino I dont understand why they dont just give energy weapons a damage modifier boost. Changing something fundamental like all races base armor/shieldresists is asking for unwanted side effects. That is exactly what they have done, except they did it in a rather strange way. Reducing Em resist by 10%, is exactly the same as increasing the em damage portion. However, insted of increasing the damage output of lasers or fixing Armour Compensation SKills (thus removing EANM issues overnight), they are changing ships basic resists. So yeah, while your Amarr ship fires for a couple of minutes then does 0dps after it runs out of cap, while Minmatar gain massivly as republic L is very viable. In the end, the Laser Thorax will still beat the Laser omen so nothing has changed - Amarr are still broken Sig locked, lack of Eve content
Durao Amarr	Posted - 2008.01.31 11:11:00 - [64] Originally by: Aki Corrino I dont understand why they dont just give energy weapons a damage modifier boost. Changing something fundamental like all races base armor/shieldresists is asking for unwanted side effects. But EM damage was gimped against armor as a whole. Not just lasers. Yes, the patch boosts Amarr, but it also helps anyone who happens to use EM Missiles, yes - some Minmatar ammo, maybe even Amarr drones etc.
Saietor Blackgreen	Posted - 2008.01.31 11:15:00 - [65] Ok, lets set it once again. Problem to solve - increase efficiency of lasers (EMP damage) against popular PvP omnitanks in comparance to other weapons, thus increasing popularity of laser platforms. Source of problem was that EANM omnitanking - one of the most popular PvP tanking schemes - leads to unbelievably high EM resists as a side effect (as in example with typhoon with 3eanms+dc above). Also, inherent resists of armor to EM are so high, that 3hardeners+DC setup has no major hole in EM. AFTER change in resists we have: EM resists lowered on EANM omnitanks - check! - 25% more DPS from EM here. EM hole in 3hardeners+DC setup increased in size - check! - 25% more DPS from EM here. Explosive resists reduction decrease leads to minmatar primary weapon systems more effective against shieldtanks. Is that a problem? As far as I remember, PvP shieldtankers have never been concerned about explosive damage, and they STILL wont be - its their highest resist anyway. Tanking Angels will get harder in PvE - thats for sure :)
Saietor Blackgreen	Posted - 2008.01.31 11:19:00 - [66] Increasing damage mod on lasers will increase their effectiveness against armor, but also incredibly boost their efficiency against shields, so solution of "increase damagemod on lasers" is not as obvious as it seems. Though I still think its better option, that can be done in a balanced way. I still say that this resists change, if implemented, will not "OMG ruin everything". It has drawbacks - so does any other change.
Kykio Caldari Megadodo Publications The Sphere Confederation	Posted - 2008.01.31 11:48:00 - [67] Originally by: Cpt Cosmic Edited by: Cpt Cosmic on 31/01/2008 08:34:36 Originally by: Saietor Blackgreen stuff 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) 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 looks even worse now for pvp. Its just one reason more to fit 2 eanm and a dc. and btw l2dothemathright because your forget that lasers do therm dmg too and the dev blog says "Adjust the ratio of EM/Thermal in crystals to be Thermal heavier or at least 50/50 split" now try again. This!
Discombulator	Posted - 2008.01.31 12:09:00 - [68] What about this is not only boost to matar, but nice nerf too? Matar armor resists are 70% em, 10% exp, 25% kin, 35% therm Gallente armor resists are 60% em, 10% exp, 35% kin, 35% therm So matars have 10% more in em, then in kin (over gallente). Now they take 10% em from gallente, but 20% from matar. I'm not sure if i'll like it...
kessah Blood Corsair's Blood Blind	Posted - 2008.01.31 12:14:00 - [69] Gah, i dont care about this tbh, even as An Amarr player. All i want is the Apoc boosted. I hate not having all three ships usable.
Cpt Branko The Bloody Red	Posted - 2008.01.31 12:16:00 - [70] Originally by: Discombulator What about this is not only boost to matar, but nice nerf too? Matar armor resists are 70% em, 10% exp, 25% kin, 35% therm Gallente armor resists are 60% em, 10% exp, 35% kin, 35% therm So matars have 10% more in em, then in kin (over gallente). Now they take 10% em from gallente, but 20% from matar. I'm not sure if i'll like it... If they don't give Minmatar ships their 10% more EM resist, then we quite definitely need it given somewhere else, because having 10% less resists then everyone else (even if they're stupid EM resists, give me kinetic any day) is idiotic. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint

Kykio Caldari Megadodo Publications The Sphere Confederation	Posted - 2008.01.31 12:24:00 - [71] Originally by: Cpt Branko Originally by: Discombulator What about this is not only boost to matar, but nice nerf too? Matar armor resists are 70% em, 10% exp, 25% kin, 35% therm Gallente armor resists are 60% em, 10% exp, 35% kin, 35% therm So matars have 10% more in em, then in kin (over gallente). Now they take 10% em from gallente, but 20% from matar. I'm not sure if i'll like it... If they don't give Minmatar ships their 10% more EM resist, then we quite definitely need it given somewhere else, because having 10% less resists then everyone else (even if they're stupid EM resists, give me kinetic any day) is idiotic. Not realy ,because matar ships have the smallest signature radiuses. So if you count that they are harder to hit by guns and take less damage from missiles, their resist even higher than the other 3 races ships. I would give matar much less resist.
AFTRUNX Human Liberty Syndicate	Posted - 2008.01.31 12:26:00 - [72] hmm.. i dont know if change resists is really the solution.. for me as a Caldari shield Tanker AMARR is the hardest enemy in the Game.. also on T2 ships.. And Matar also with EMP Ammo.. Best i can deal is Angel (only in Missions) and Hybrid on PVP... For me the best solution is to give more crystals (Explo or Kin) and really to reduce the cap need for the guns! I have really good Engineering skills, but it's difficult for me to keep alive a good tank and deal damage.. and due lack of mid slots in some ships you have to choise between a AB or a Cap booster.. :/ AFT PS: sorry for my bad English --------------------------------------------
Cpt Cosmic	Posted - 2008.01.31 12:34:00 - [73] Originally by: Mrski Okupator I have not points in my arguments haha you ever heard of people changing their setups?
6Bagheera9 Foundation R0ADKILL	Posted - 2008.01.31 12:52:00 - [74] Just flip the EM/Thermal damage ratio for lasers ffs!
Kaileen Starsong Amarr Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2008.01.31 13:08:00 - [75] Originally by: 6Bagheera9 Just flip the EM/Thermal damage ratio for lasers ffs! That'll be much more ******** than this current... change can ever hope to be tbh.
Captain Dralisz	Posted - 2008.01.31 13:09:00 - [76] I start calculating in excel the resistances and damage taken. so the jaguar and the zealot: if the damage is 100 on armor: matar take 7,5 (before 92,5%) 10 after(after 90%) its 125% of growing if the damage is 100 on shield: matar take 40 (before 60%) 50 (after 50%) its 133% of growing if the damage is 100 on armor: amarr take 40 (before 60%) 50 (after 50%) its same as the matar shield 133% if the damage is 100 on shield: amarr take 10 (before 90%) 20 (after 80%) its 200% of growing WTF?! omg 200% it mean the avarga stats: matar vurable against exp and em with: 129,1666667% and amarr is 162,5%? amarr boost? or matar? :D so i know its more complex but you can see something is very wrong.
Cpt Branko The Bloody Red	Posted - 2008.01.31 13:18:00 - [77] Originally by: Kykio Not realy ,because matar ships have the smallest signature radiuses. So if you count that they are harder to hit by guns and take less damage from missiles, their resist even higher than the other 3 races ships. I would give matar much less resist. When fighting Minmatar short-range frigs/cruisers/BCs/BS/capital ships, tracking is only a issue if you are a total noob, and in case you didn't know, sig size differences are only applied (mutliplied) into tracking. Missile explosion radius is only a issue if you are firing T1 heavies on a frig or T1 cruises/torps on a cruiser really. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Mrski Okupator Amarr The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.01.31 13:44:00 - [78] Originally by: Kagura Nikon /cut 1 eanm2 on 50% em base gives 62.5% rezist. About the same as hardened exp. 2 eanm2s equal 70%. High enough? Add a third and a DC? Of course, minnie ships will now have 60% base em rezists. No, I don't think this will have an impact on most setups. My BS will still be dual hardened at best (exp+kin), sacri will have an eanm+plate, cruiser are still crap and rest arent really tanked anyway. Besides; according to statistics, only 16% ships in eve are Amarr. ___
Kykio Caldari Megadodo Publications The Sphere Confederation	Posted - 2008.01.31 13:54:00 - [79] Edited by: Kykio on 31/01/2008 13:55:31 Edited by: Kykio on 31/01/2008 13:55:14 Originally by: Cpt Branko When fighting Minmatar short-range frigs/cruisers/BCs/BS/capital ships, tracking is only a issue if you are a total noob, and in case you didn't know, sig size differences are only applied (mutliplied) into tracking. Missile explosion radius is only a issue if you are firing T1 heavies on a frig or T1 cruises/torps on a cruiser really. It is the matar player, who should uses his ship to avoid damage. Thats why it has high speed to choose fight distance. And still matar ships take less dmg than others. It is a resist.
Captain Dralisz	Posted - 2008.01.31 14:00:00 - [80] Edited by: Captain Dralisz on 31/01/2008 14:04:29 total points -armor%- shield% astarte392,49 -46,875-51,2475 slepinir 395,6 -53,125-45,775 absolution 385,62 -41,875-54,53 caldari394,99 -48,125-50,6225 matar have the most resistances

Atius Tirawa Minmatar Wreckless Abandon	Posted - 2008.01.31 16:26:00 - [81] Just when I thought things were looking too good to be true for Minmatar - the buffed us. . .this is a huge boost to EMP ammo. In all honesty, I think this is a bad idea not because of the changes in general but because the changes are meant to boost Amarr - and in that regard - they end up boosting Minmatar more then they do Amarr. -----------
KD.Fluffy The Avalon Foundation	Posted - 2008.01.31 18:43:00 - [82] CCP bad idea! Ever since I started playing this game, the ships I train have received nerf after nerf Rolling Eyes This game is supposed to be about diversity, and with changes like this, your moving the game towards homogeneity. Sure CERTAIN amarr ships need a buff, but is it really necessary to nerf, all other races? I suggest you look at the fitting requirements for tachyons in certain cases, and buff a select few ships that are in actual need of a buff.
xxxak	Posted - 2008.01.31 19:09:00 - [83] This is actually a big Caldari nerf! Our strong explosive resists on shield is one of the few things Caldari have going for them. You need to change Caldari shield resists so that Caldari explosive resist is higher than the armor tanking races.
Seeing EyeDog	Posted - 2008.01.31 19:49:00 - [84] Originally by: Madla Mafia If that change gets implemented on Tranq, I can finally remove my signature. orrrr u can change it to... Minmatar - OMGWTFBBQing your ships since 2008 _____________________ Originally by: Locus Bey Intelligence isn't a prequisite for being a Goon, in fact its a deficit.
The Djego Minmatar FORTES FORTUNA ADIUVAT CORP. The Dawn of Darkness	Posted - 2008.01.31 20:07:00 - [85] Edited by: The Djego on 31/01/2008 20:13:00 It is quite funny how many People scream "Omg they nerfed my Tank." I still bett all my ISK to never see a Explosive Hardner on a Shild Tank or a EM Hardner on a Armor Tank in PVP. Nobody that got a other Choice would use Explosive against Shilds or EM against Armor. Setups won¦t change after this, like they don¦t realy changed after the EANM Nerf. Will it increase EANM Omni Tanking, mayby but this is allready the Nr 1 Armortanking Form of Eve. Hardnertanks get a bigger EM Hole right, but if you fit Hardner you don¦t fear EM in PVP anyway(it is by far the Damagetype that you will face at least if you don¦t face a Amarr). To all the People that complaint EMP Anmo will be overpowert, a little Hint, Phased Plasma is in 90% of all real PVP Situations better against both Schild and Armor atm, because of the Damage Spread between Explosive and EM... Also if CCP realy put her hands on the Thermal/EM Ratio of Crystalls(what i realy would support in a smaller extend) this Change will be mostly something nobody talks about in 6 Month. Like People don¦t complain about the EANM CPU nerf now... ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Jonny JoJo 425 II In PVE? Surely hybrid users use Blaster in PvE.
Kruel Beyond Divinity Inc	Posted - 2008.01.31 20:07:00 - [86] Nerfing explosive resists on shield tanks is a "consistency nerf"... kind of like how tracking disruptors got nerfed recently when they were near useless to begin with. From a consistency standpoint it makes sense. Which means something else needs to be done to make shield tanking ships in pvp more desirable. Making the shield boost amp a lowslot instead of midslot mod might help.
Xequecal	Posted - 2008.01.31 20:13:00 - [87] The problem with shield tanking ships is the crappy 5/6 slot configuration, which restricts them to a 3-slot tank. Guess what? The Tempest with a 6/5 slot config has a crappy armor tank too. To fix shield tanks, the Raven and Maelstrom should get a 4/7 slot config.
Skeiron Wretched Industries New Eden Research	Posted - 2008.01.31 20:58:00 - [88] Minmatar didn't get "a huge boost to EM ammo", increase in dps is like 5-7% tops while Amarr get a 11-13% boost. Also, Minmatar only gets a boost to EMP ammo (while everyone with a brain would use T2 ammo in most cases anyways), whereas all layz0rs are boosted for Amarr. ------------------------- No more alt-posts!!! Originally by: Derek Sigres Minmatar ships look like someone built a racecar with parts out of a junkyard.
Katarlia Simov Minmatar Cowboys From Hell	Posted - 2008.01.31 21:29:00 - [89] Just in case people avoided reading the rest of the dev blog. It was stated that this is just a test to see how things go. Also, it was stated that they are aware of the other issues. This is not the only change being planned. But then again you'd lack something to whine about if you actually read what was being said. I mean you moan for months and months about getting your lasers fixed. And now CCP have the time to sort it out, you scream 'OMG ITS MADE THINGS WORSE' before the changes are live or even have been in testing for more than a day. Personally, I cheer the changes. Now a standard omnitank takes 25% more damage to lasers. Well that seems pretty good to me. In response to the people saying that they should just have boosted laser damage, I would imagine its down to CCP not wanting lasers to be even nastier against shields than they are at the moment.
Bronson Hughes Knights of the Wild	Posted - 2008.01.31 22:06:00 - [90] If this change goes live, the ships it will impact the least are the ones with ship bonuses to shield or armor resists. Which, oddly enough, translates to a boost (in the form of a reduced nerf) for Amarr and Caldari. Now, how long until we get a 'ZOMG Nerf the Maller, it can sitll omni-tank without a huge EM hole!!!!11!!!one!!1one!!eleventyone!' thread.... Welcome to EvE. -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne



Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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