EVE Search - Eve game balance team needs psicology classes

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Eve game balance team needs psicology classes

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.01.30 22:52:00 - [1] The 10% em reduction on armor tank is the WORSE possible "fix "to ammar issue. That was mafde without thinkign on the psicological effect it wil have on the players decidign its fittings. with 50% EM on armor. EVEryoen that was usign tripple hardeners will drop them in favor of 3 EANM II. Because 50% is too low resit to be left unboosted!! That on end will increase the average EM resist on the bigger ships (the ones that useually use tri hardeners). And will drop the average resist of other stuff a bit. So this is NERF to ammar! Please, try to use a bit your forward active thinking and see how players will respond to changes, not just see how that will change the balance on the current setups. CCP have already failed dozens of times exaclty because they change stuff without analysign how players will react. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
hammyhamm GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.01.30 23:07:00 - [2] Edited by: hammyhamm on 30/01/2008 23:07:34 OP needs to take spelling classes Its a plus to the fact that amarr will be doing 10% more damage on average.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.01.30 23:21:00 - [3] Originally by: hammyhamm Edited by: hammyhamm on 30/01/2008 23:07:34 OP needs to take spelling classes Its a plus to the fact that amarr will be doing 10% more damage on average. English is not my first language, its the 5th. Can you spell better than my english in 4 other languages? So please go back to your dark hollow cave... And I am not paid to speak english well. CCp game balance is paid to think before doing absurd stuff. Ammar wont be doign more damage. Will be doing less on several cases! All battleships that used tripple hadeners and no EM resist boost will change into 3x EANM II (same for capitals) and average EM resist wil be HIGHER! ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
ghosttr Amarr ARK-CORP RONA Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.30 23:21:00 - [4] Actually it means that people who omni-tank will have lower resists all around. And that you have to choose what you are tanking against, and anyone in thier right mind knows that there are far less amarr players tthan there are of any other race, so em would be the logical thing to leave untanked. A bigger eve Annndd..Player Factions
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.01.30 23:30:00 - [5] Originally by: ghosttr Actually it means that people who omni-tank will have lower resists all around. And that you have to choose what you are tanking against, and anyone in thier right mind knows that there are far less amarr players tthan there are of any other race, so em would be the logical thing to leave untanked. pleople tht omni tank wotn have Em as lowest resist so there is no reason why they would change their tanks! ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.01.30 23:50:00 - [6] Originally by: Kagura Nikon Previously on "Tanking in Eve" Actually previously they would have fit 3 eanm + DC or 2eanm + DC + plate and come ahead. Specific hardeners are for meta decisions regarding what ships you are fighting. [I.E. when you know what your opponent is flying]. Even if you already have plates on, an extra plate almost always comes out with nearly better or better EHP values than a tri-hardener+DC against ex/kin/therm, but you also get the huge increase in EM efficiency.
Komatose Caldari Libertas Contraho	Posted - 2008.01.31 00:32:00 - [7] Originally by: Kagura Nikon Originally by: hammyhamm Edited by: hammyhamm on 30/01/2008 23:07:34 OP needs to take spelling classes Its a plus to the fact that amarr will be doing 10% more damage on average. English is not my first language, its the 5th. Can you spell better than my english in 4 other languages? So please go back to your dark hollow cave... And I am not paid to speak english well. CCp game balance is paid to think before doing absurd stuff. Ammar wont be doign more damage. Will be doing less on several cases! All battleships that used tripple hadeners and no EM resist boost will change into 3x EANM II (same for capitals) and average EM resist wil be HIGHER! Can I just ask why you spell amarr 2 diffrent ways in the same post?
El Mauru Amarr Nexus Analytics Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.01.31 00:41:00 - [8] Have to disagree with OP (sorry m8). This em-damage stuff/explosive stuff) thing is totally awesome. it fixes sooooooo many issues: Nanos got more killable (use of shield extenders as tanks with usually no resists mods=less tank) EM/drones ammo finally has a use again. "mid-range" becomes a more viable option in combat (em-ammo)= new tactics? That`s 3 powerful points FOR the change. All ships suffer the 10%explo resist to shields so at least on BC/BS resists where shield actually is a factor in combat on armor tankers should keep the impact on caldari lower than expected. Caldari are certainly getting a hitch here, but their EXPLO resist were rather high so every pilot knowing his thing was using non-explo ammo against them anyway). Minmatar won`t be uber- since most of their speed-tanked ships were using shields (vaga, stabber, etc.) so this is actually a (slightly needed) nerf to all their uber-prefered ships while their standard ones (all the arti ships really) got a slight boost (which was needed) to their damage. <3 this patch -
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.01.31 02:02:00 - [9] Originally by: Komatose Originally by: Kagura Nikon Originally by: hammyhamm Edited by: hammyhamm on 30/01/2008 23:07:34 OP needs to take spelling classes Its a plus to the fact that amarr will be doing 10% more damage on average. English is not my first language, its the 5th. Can you spell better than my english in 4 other languages? So please go back to your dark hollow cave... And I am not paid to speak english well. CCp game balance is paid to think before doing absurd stuff. Ammar wont be doign more damage. Will be doing less on several cases! All battleships that used tripple hadeners and no EM resist boost will change into 3x EANM II (same for capitals) and average EM resist wil be HIGHER! Can I just ask why you spell amarr 2 diffrent ways in the same post? Maybe because Amarr is a made up word that measures in nothign anyoen capability of spellign correclty in any language? At least is far better than people typing Vegabond or Gallante or Capitol ships. You know, since those are words in some languages. Back to subject. I disagree with gou on this. If you were fitting eanm and DCs when you had 4 slots to use on resist you were beign dumb (since most of damage in PVP is Explosive and Thermal). Also the extra plate is not always a good option since after a certain limit that could cost you the very seconds of warping off that could save your skin. The active hardeners until today would give you a more balanced resist. Now there will simple be no option of well averaged resists and all the armor tanks wil have EM as far highest resist. CCP changes should not be geared into making only a single setup a possibility. Cutting out viable options will never do good, and always result in more extremist and ultra focused setups. When you are facing a typhoon with 3 EANM II and DC II don 't ever come complain of the uber EM resist. Will be all fault of this change. CCP coudl have simply increased lasers damage 5% and em drones 5%. Pretty simple and with less side effects. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Xaroth Brook Minmatar BIG Ka-Tet	Posted - 2008.01.31 02:14:00 - [10] Edited by: Xaroth Brook on 31/01/2008 02:16:13 Amarr aren't underpowered to begin with, I managed to prove this by taking a 9-month old amarr alt I have and kicking ass with it, winning more 1v1 duels and even managing to beat a lot of people on the 'scores' (how inaccurate those might be to begin with).. it all came down to having your balls at the right place when you needed them most. and to the OP, your point fails, seriously... reducing a resistance will obviously cause people to tank it, but the change of tank will cost them at other grounds (note how amarr don't ONLY do em damage)... same would go for the explosive 'nerf' ... people will tank them more, leaving bigger holes for kin and thermal damage.. now guess what the other damage type of the amarr is? I do, however, that this base 'nerf' isn't just aimed to amarr but more to minmatar, but as you said, people will adapt by tanking differently, which means it's basically a nerf for the minmatar. so therefore.. Boost minmatar!(subtle pun there) It was like a baby, it landed on my lap and was helpless and totally defenseless. Then I shot it and bragged about it on a killboard.
Arana Tellen Gallente The Blackguard Wolves	Posted - 2008.01.31 02:47:00 - [11] 3 EANM, you never fit that lol. --------------------------------- Oh noes!
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.01.31 10:32:00 - [12] Originally by: Arana Tellen 3 EANM, you never fit that lol. Now you wil!! Whenyou have 4 slots to use into resists the 3 EANM + DC will be the best option by far. The 3rd EANM is stil very effective . 15% resistis still a LOT. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Siigari Kitawa Gallente The Aduro Protocol	Posted - 2008.01.31 11:33:00 - [13] Why the hell would you fit 3 EANM? 2 EANM II, DC II, Exp hard II gives a good tank unless you're running an active tank of 2x AR, Armor Exp/Kin/Therm II and DC II. Get real. _________________ Burn.
Eleana Tomelac Gallente Through the Looking Glass	Posted - 2008.01.31 13:02:00 - [14] So, all non-minmatar armors will take 25% more EM damage than before (that's the difference in remaining damage from 60% to 50%, it's taking 50% instead of 40% -- 40*1.25=50 -- just saying that before people start saying I'm a fool). Minmatar armors will take 33% more EM (from 70% to 60%, so from 30% to 40% damage taken) damage. So, what armor tanks got in counterpart to this? Will the EANM CPU be back to the original values? will we get a 10% more in another damage type that will only be around 15-20% effective damage reduced? So, if it's just taking away the EM resistance and giving nothing, yes, they greatly need psychology classes! Because it's just another nerf with nothing given... Boosting the amarr thermal damage would have changed this... tweaking the crystals, tweaking the damage multipliers of amarr weaponry and the fitting costs... So, it's again the wrong way done : 'there is something wrong in one item, let's nerf everything else!'. -- Pocket drone carriers (tm) enthousiast ! Assault Frigates MK II

CCP Gangleri	Posted - 2008.01.31 19:37:00 - [15] You say: Originally by: Kagura Nikon Now with the nerf It wil go to a tiny bit more than 60 on EM. The player wil use his brain and decide its btter to use 3 EANM and a DC. to achieve 73 72 68 66 (the now best way to keep resistances even). But this result in a boost to gallente and minmater. Not to amarr. And then contradict yourself: Originally by: Kagura Nikon If you were fitting eanm and DCs when you had 4 slots to use on resist you were beign dumb (since most of damage in PVP is Explosive and Thermal). So by your logic people were fitting against Thermal and Explosive (unless they were stupid) before and will suddenly start tanking against EM instead after this change? The fact is that there will be more holes in tanks after this change, where they are is something we can not really affect unless you know of any good way to gauge what people will do when we change things. Too bad we don't have a test server and a forum to gather feedback, that would really solve things wouldn't it? Your input is however not based on any solid data, you are seemingly worried that due to some strange psychological effect people will start to fear EM more than they do now. Even though as you yourself state, it is not a very common damage type to see in PvP.

Kirov VIII	Posted - 2008.01.31 20:23:00 - [16] It's very good if you respect your devblog ... It's the third in ~2 years for boost amarr at each time not a lot of improvement finally ... I want to test and give you a feedback ;) One thing PLEASE don't forget the PVE ! PvP is good but a lot of NPC's have a very high resist in EM/Thermal please don't forget to check that. Thx CCP to take the time for balance Amarr.
Aidelon Caldari AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2008.02.01 01:08:00 - [17] Edited by: Aidelon on 01/02/2008 01:15:42 While I generally applaud CCP for their changes and improvements, I have to state here that this change doesn't seem to be in the best interest of balance. The one flaw with the arguement that the problem with EM is armor tank usage, and CCP's theories on how to fix it, is that players using explosive ammo don't have problems bringing down shield tankers. So this change doesn't make ANY sense to me, and makes weaker shield tanking even worse off with not being as good against explosive, a popular dmg type. Too many variables in this change, and like you stated, you cannot accurately predict how players will compensate. It will be boom or bust, but I think this change is too wide-sweeping. The object is to fix amarr, not nerf tanking. A new solution is needed. Focus on amarr-centered fixes first and then move to changes that affect non-amarr - if needed. Make amarr better at cap usage to start out with and go from there. Give dmg bonuses on ships. Add crystals with different damage types. Do something other than a sweeping nerf to tanking to fix a problem with a single dmg type.
Agif Templar Republic R0ADKILL	Posted - 2008.02.01 02:12:00 - [18] after something that has been fine for many years were going to change it because ermmm were on the balance team and havent produced anything so weve pulled this out of our arses . Is the impression im getting ^^ TBH and here comes the classic forum whine but i will transfer legally all my characters to ppl in my alliance as i ain't going to give away 8 dread pilots to joe blogs and royally shove this game in my trash bin as it seems all the new employees of ccp are just University rejects half ass guessing nerfs and annoying the crp out of the evo-c. Rant over O/ --------------- EvEmissions - Level 5 Missions - Updated 22/01/08
Koti Resci Knighthawk Light Industries	Posted - 2008.02.01 04:56:00 - [19] By all means, please reduce the resists of the damage type in question for Amarr, in this case EM. My Caldari characters will still primarily focus on doing Kinetic damage because their ships get bonuses to that. My Gallente alts will still mostly focus on Thermal damage because that's the main damage type of rails, as well as the damage type which they get bonuses to for their missiles. My Minmatar corpmates will still mostly focus on Explosive damage because that's the main damage type of projectiles. It's a great way to boost Amarr, really. I understand that you can't quite take away what's not there (in the case of most ships' EM resists for shields). But have you also considered the fact that most shield tanks have a lower base thermal resist than armor tankers? Both of this means that Amarr are already very effective against, for example, Caldari ships. Reducing explosive resists there is simply a stealth Minmatar boost. What I don't understand is why you're boosting Minmatar too. They're already really powerful. As someone already mentioned in this thread, they have no problem ripping through shield tanks. And their speed tank is better than an omni tank -- you don't have to worry about what type of damage you're tanking if that damage never hits you in the first place.
Xar Corleoni	Posted - 2008.02.01 08:51:00 - [20] Okay got half way thru this thread and had this thought amarr - stop whining. every race has its own weakness/specialities - you get the best resists to local pirates imho, ships were not set up with pvp in mind, dont like it crosstrain t2 ship resists - they are higher because they are "elite" frigates not your run of the nill junkets (someone whining elsewhere about a 90% em resis t2 frig) em damage - get real ffs. em isnt an armour breaker and NEVER should be Explosive is not a shield breaker and never should be get the drift? CCP - stop pandering to the lowest common denominator, unless you want all the races to be clones of each other
Maeltstome Minmatar D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.02.01 08:57:00 - [21] I'll just quote myself from one of the other threads with a similar subject matter to this one. Originally by: Maeltstome I'd also like to point out that the standard dual repping tank on armor with 3x active hards and a damage control leaves EM being the second weakest resistance. This leaves 0.4% res to the lowest which is explosive - so no, explosive damage wont help amarr. The only ships this isnt the case with are minmatar, and even then EM res is still not the top res. T2 armor tanking Minmatar ships are the biggest problem, but how many of them exist versus the number of armor tanking amarr ships that minmatar ammo just can't breach (against a tanked t2 amarr sip that is). Don't look at those resistance bonus you have on armor as a small improvement, it's massive. ------- [12:07] w33Daz: a trained 1 skill fur 24 mins n it took 2 days aff drones lvl 5 [12:07] w33Daz: A WIS LIKE WTF
Maeltstome Minmatar D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.02.01 09:00:00 - [22] And tbh, a nerf to EM res on armor is a boost to Minmatar, along with teh shield res reductoin of explsive. I'll cackle as my tempest shreds Megathrons with republic fleet EMP now. By all means, drop my em res from 70 to 60. The stacking penalty when you get that high makes little real difference to my tank once i've stuck on a DC + EANM anyway. ------- [12:07] w33Daz: a trained 1 skill fur 24 mins n it took 2 days aff drones lvl 5 [12:07] w33Daz: A WIS LIKE WTF
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.02.01 09:29:00 - [23] Originally by: CCP Gangleri You say: Originally by: Kagura Nikon Now with the nerf It wil go to a tiny bit more than 60 on EM. The player wil use his brain and decide its btter to use 3 EANM and a DC. to achieve 73 72 68 66 (the now best way to keep resistances even). But this result in a boost to gallente and minmater. Not to amarr. And then contradict yourself: Originally by: Kagura Nikon If you were fitting eanm and DCs when you had 4 slots to use on resist you were beign dumb (since most of damage in PVP is Explosive and Thermal). So by your logic people were fitting against Thermal and Explosive (unless they were stupid) before and will suddenly start tanking against EM instead after this change? The fact is that there will be more holes in tanks after this change, where they are is something we can not really affect unless you know of any good way to gauge what people will do when we change things. Too bad we don't have a test server and a forum to gather feedback, that would really solve things wouldn't it? Your input is however not based on any solid data, you are seemingly worried that due to some strange psychological effect people will start to fear EM more than they do now. Even though as you yourself state, it is not a very common damage type to see in PvP. I am not contradictign myself, maybe you guys need english lessons too, more than me. It was dumb as of on trinity, but after the new resists on SISI will be the only smart thing to do! Readign comprehension FTW! I have some extremely usefull tool called ASKING to people. Somethign you seems to have failed! And don 't ven think I don 't have logged my Amarr alt on sisi. And the result support everything I said. No one wil use tri hardened tanks anymore!! Because altough EM is not a prevalent damage, no one will risk going into battle and risk face an Amarr BS, because you will be recieving rougly 30% more damage of what was already your lowest resist, and from a Ship that has huge base damage! Its not a STRANGE psicology effect, its called FEAR! The most primitive and influential of ALL psycological effects in human mind. People will fear too much that they will be simply be TOO exposed to amarr ships. On trinity a tri hardened ship with a DC has pretty much EM as one of the lowest resists but close enough to the other resists. So no reason to have any special fear of Em damage. On sisi you will have 25% to 35% (depend on race and if you use DC) less resistance. Going out with a 50% EM resist is MUCH MUCH more dangerous than with a 50% explosive resist on armor. Why? because amarr ships do WAY WAY more base dps than minmatar . And explosive is at least buffered by the shields. Even with Thermal and Explosive being more common. Why because they are Not more common enough to overcome the HUGE difference that her eI illustrate. What youd prefer? With both EM and Explosive resists on 50% on armor 10k Shields 10k armor (just roundign numbers to make easier) Face a ship that deals 1000 EM dps or a ship that deals 800 explosive DPS? (remember altough more common, minmatar ships have lower dps than amarr) Just run the numbers: you have effectively 25K HP against EM -> 25 seconds. And at same time you have 30k Effective dps against Explosive-> 37 seconds! 67% DIFFERENCE!! No one in their right mind will fly with such a huge hole in EM while it has no extra buffers on shields agaisnt it and on base numbers amarr ship giving huge dps. As things are on trinity , EM being a not very used damage type, Triple hardeners are a good idea. As is on sisi, evennot being used a lot, amarr battleships woudl *****any tri hardener ships so badly that no one will risk! ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
The Djego Minmatar FORTES FORTUNA ADIUVAT CORP. The Dawn of Darkness	Posted - 2008.02.01 11:20:00 - [24] Edited by: The Djego on 01/02/2008 11:24:51 Ok first Amarr don¦t do 100% EM, there are no EM Drones and EM Missles are also not that common(only used in a Mix with Explo on Minmatar/Caldari Ships to kill Shilds quicker). 25% of the Gedons Firepower comes form Drones(please don¦t say that they use EM Drones). We are at 750-800 DPS now, Confalgtion/AN Multis also have 30-45% Thermal Damage incudet. Now you looking at 400-500 EM DPS that do 25% more Damage... On a Abaddon it is nearly the same, even on a Harbinger a big amount of the Damage commes still from the 50m¦ Dronebay. Making EM a usefull Damagetyp against Armor in PVP is a good thing. I don¦t get all the whine. Also Setups won¦t change and the only Situation where a Hardnertank is better that a EANM tank is when you stick in a extra EANM + DC II and some Rep Rigs to create mean Activetanks. Also only BS got that mutch Lows(you actualy need 7 Lows yust for Tanking to get a real advantage now). This Fitting is called pure Tank and not so common in PVP. ENAM + DC II are still better especialy with some Plates and Trimark Pumps by using a Buffer Tank. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Jonny JoJo 425 II In PVE? Surely hybrid users use Blaster in PvE.
Sonya Rayner Unicorn Enterprise Blind Octopus	Posted - 2008.02.01 11:28:00 - [25] This post has much more sense in it. Although being amarr i see forward for the 'amarr boost' but for god's sake why such a drastic way? Why always boosting one thing means nerfing everything else? I believe there might be found much more intelligent ways to boost amarr. Like the energy weapon cap usage reduction and/or crystal damage type rebalancing? Or powergrid usage reduction for beams? Or at least 55% instead of 50% for em resistance on armor? p.s. in ALL of my setups, EM is already the WORST resistance, so why bother nerfing it further down? and yes, it's not being resisted by shiels. Besides, there's much more important problems to solve instead of tinkering with base resistances. Like Amarr recons for instance? ____________________ couldn't resist... sorry...
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.02.01 14:03:00 - [26] Originally by: The Djego Edited by: The Djego on 01/02/2008 11:31:07 Edited by: The Djego on 01/02/2008 11:28:33 Ok first Amarr don¦t do 100% EM, there are no EM Drones and EM Missles are also not that common(only used in a Mix with Explo on Minmatar/Caldari Ships to kill Shields quicker or on Amarr T2 Missleships). 25-30% of the Gedons Firepower comes form Drones(please don¦t say that they use EM Drones). We are at 750-800 DPS now, Confalgtion/AN Multis also have 45% Thermal Damage incudet. Now you looking at 400-500 EM DPS that do 25% more Damage... On a Abaddon it is nearly the same, even on a Harbinger a big amount of the Damage commes still from the 50m¦ Dronebay. Making EM a usefull Damagetyp against Armor in PVP is a good thing. I don¦t get all the whine. Also Setups won¦t change and the only Situation where a Hardnertank is better that a EANM tank is when you stick in a extra EANM + DC II and some Rep Rigs to create mean Activetanks. Also only BS got that mutch Lows(you actualy need 7 Lows yust for Tanking to get a real advantage now). This Fitting is called pure Tank and not so common in PVP. ENAM + DC II are still better especialy with some Plates and Trimark Pumps by using a Buffer Tank. You can say the same about the drones on minmatar ships. The ratio of damage remains the same. An Abaddon with scorch does 90% of its damage from EM. People seems to fail to grasp this is not a 10% boost to damage. Its a 25%/33% bosot to damage. Resultign that you would need to be completely stupid to leave your EM resist unagummented. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
The Djego Minmatar FORTES FORTUNA ADIUVAT CORP. The Dawn of Darkness	Posted - 2008.02.01 15:43:00 - [27] Edited by: The Djego on 01/02/2008 15:44:27 Originally by: Kagura Nikon Originally by: The Djego Edited by: The Djego on 01/02/2008 11:31:07 Edited by: The Djego on 01/02/2008 11:28:33 Ok first Amarr don¦t do 100% EM, there are no EM Drones and EM Missles are also not that common(only used in a Mix with Explo on Minmatar/Caldari Ships to kill Shields quicker or on Amarr T2 Missleships). 25-30% of the Gedons Firepower comes form Drones(please don¦t say that they use EM Drones). We are at 750-800 DPS now, Confalgtion/AN Multis also have 45% Thermal Damage incudet. Now you looking at 400-500 EM DPS that do 25% more Damage... On a Abaddon it is nearly the same, even on a Harbinger a big amount of the Damage commes still from the 50m¦ Dronebay. Making EM a usefull Damagetyp against Armor in PVP is a good thing. I don¦t get all the whine. Also Setups won¦t change and the only Situation where a Hardnertank is better that a EANM tank is when you stick in a extra EANM + DC II and some Rep Rigs to create mean Activetanks. Also only BS got that mutch Lows(you actualy need 7 Lows yust for Tanking to get a real advantage now). This Fitting is called pure Tank and not so common in PVP. ENAM + DC II are still better especialy with some Plates and Trimark Pumps by using a Buffer Tank. You can say the same about the drones on minmatar ships. The ratio of damage remains the same. An Abaddon with scorch does 90% of its damage from EM. People seems to fail to grasp this is not a 10% boost to damage. Its a 25%/33% bosot to damage. Resultign that you would need to be completely stupid to leave your EM resist unagummented. It is more like 80%... Damn I even started EFT for this. A Abaddon will do only about 550 EM Damage even with Scorch(and yes it is with 2 Heat Sinks and Max Skills). With Conflagration it is about 430 DPS pure EM. (pure EM DPS against 60%/50% EM Resistance) Abaddon Conflag: 215 EM Damage / 258 EM Damage = 43 DPS Abaddon Scorch: 275 EM Damage / 330 EM Damage = 55 DPS Omg Amarr will own them all!!! Btw this is the worst case, the BS with the Most Turret DPS and 2 Heat Sinks are close to gank on a Abaddon... ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Jonny JoJo 425 II In PVE? Surely hybrid users use Blaster in PvE.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.02.01 16:18:00 - [28] Originally by: The Djego Edited by: The Djego on 01/02/2008 16:13:21 Edited by: The Djego on 01/02/2008 16:01:21 Originally by: Kagura Nikon Originally by: The Djego Edited by: The Djego on 01/02/2008 11:31:07 Edited by: The Djego on 01/02/2008 11:28:33 Ok first Amarr don¦t do 100% EM, there are no EM Drones and EM Missles are also not that common(only used in a Mix with Explo on Minmatar/Caldari Ships to kill Shields quicker or on Amarr T2 Missleships). 25-30% of the Gedons Firepower comes form Drones(please don¦t say that they use EM Drones). We are at 750-800 DPS now, Confalgtion/AN Multis also have 45% Thermal Damage incudet. Now you looking at 400-500 EM DPS that do 25% more Damage... On a Abaddon it is nearly the same, even on a Harbinger a big amount of the Damage commes still from the 50m¦ Dronebay. Making EM a usefull Damagetyp against Armor in PVP is a good thing. I don¦t get all the whine. Also Setups won¦t change and the only Situation where a Hardnertank is better that a EANM tank is when you stick in a extra EANM + DC II and some Rep Rigs to create mean Activetanks. Also only BS got that mutch Lows(you actualy need 7 Lows yust for Tanking to get a real advantage now). This Fitting is called pure Tank and not so common in PVP. ENAM + DC II are still better especialy with some Plates and Trimark Pumps by using a Buffer Tank. You can say the same about the drones on minmatar ships. The ratio of damage remains the same. An Abaddon with scorch does 90% of its damage from EM. People seems to fail to grasp this is not a 10% boost to damage. Its a 25%/33% bosot to damage. Resultign that you would need to be completely stupid to leave your EM resist unagummented. It is more like 80%... Damn I even started EFT for this. A Abaddon will do only about 550 EM Damage even with Scorch(and yes it is with 2 Heat Sinks and Max Skills). With Conflagration it is about 430 DPS pure EM. (pure EM DPS against 60%/50% EM Resistance) Abaddon Conflag: 178 EM Damage / 215 EM Damage = 37 DPS Abaddon Scorch: 220 EM Damage / 275 EM Damage = 55 DPS Acording to the Fully fitted DPS including Drones and Thermal we got: Abaddon Conflag: 1026 DPS -> 37 more DPS at the Target Abaddon Scorch: 840 DPS -> 55 more DPS at the Target Please feel free to search for the 25% Damage Boost ... Btw this is the worst case, the BS with the most Turret DPS, maxed out SKills and 2 Heat Sinks are close to gank on a Abaddon... The effect remais! The ration on explosive damage to barrage is same as Em on Scorch. The absolute values change but relative continue. Its simply too dangerous to fly a Battleship or Capital ship without boosting EM resist (oter than the DC that will be in all setups) after these changes. Check most capital ships killmails around. you will notice how amarr ships usually are in the top, why because on big ships EM is already the lowest resist (because those ships don use Omni tank). Now even those will use Omni tanks! ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
The Djego Minmatar FORTES FORTUNA ADIUVAT CORP. The Dawn of Darkness	Posted - 2008.02.01 16:45:00 - [29] Edited by: The Djego on 01/02/2008 16:47:07 Originally by: Kagura Nikon The effect remais! The ration on explosive damage to barrage is same as Em on Scorch. The absolute values change but relative continue. Its simply too dangerous to fly a Battleship or Capital ship without boosting EM resist (oter than the DC that will be in all setups) after these changes. Check most capital ships killmails around. you will notice how amarr ships usually are in the top, why because on big ships EM is already the lowest resist (because those ships don use Omni tank). Now even those will use Omni tanks! Any Minmatar will use another Amno that Barrage against a Shieldtank if it is possible(option to tank at a closer Range/other Amno in the Cargohold). On a Battleship well, even if you facing Amarr the EM Damage is only a limited part of the DPS and tanking more on the other Damage Types via the Hardner Tank will still negate a bit of the bigger Damage you recive. Also in Gangs you got about 10-20% Amarr Ships and you won¦t face mutch EM Damage from other Ships... Last time I checked you needed more than one Ship to destroy a Capital that leads to a mix of Damage Types because of the diffrent Ships. Also I am preaty shure EM is preaty mutch the lowest part of this Damagemix, simply because there are only 10-20% Amarr Ships involved in general and even they don¦t deal 100% of her DPS in EM. So having 5% more Thermal and Kinetic Resistence would be better her than 10-15% more EM because it is the smallest part of the Damage in total. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Jonny JoJo 425 II In PVE? Surely hybrid users use Blaster in PvE.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.02.01 22:15:00 - [30] Originally by: The Djego Edited by: The Djego on 01/02/2008 16:47:07 Originally by: Kagura Nikon The effect remais! The ration on explosive damage to barrage is same as Em on Scorch. The absolute values change but relative continue. Its simply too dangerous to fly a Battleship or Capital ship without boosting EM resist (oter than the DC that will be in all setups) after these changes. Check most capital ships killmails around. you will notice how amarr ships usually are in the top, why because on big ships EM is already the lowest resist (because those ships don use Omni tank). Now even those will use Omni tanks! Any Minmatar will use another Amno that Barrage against a Shieldtank if it is possible(option to tank at a closer Range/other Amno in the Cargohold). On a Battleship well, even if you facing Amarr the EM Damage is only a limited part of the DPS and tanking more on the other Damage Types via the Hardner Tank will still negate a bit of the bigger Damage you recive. Also in Gangs you got about 10-20% Amarr Ships and you won¦t face mutch EM Damage from other Ships... Last time I checked you needed more than one Ship to destroy a Capital that leads to a mix of Damage Types because of the diffrent Ships. Also I am preaty shure EM is preaty mutch the lowest part of this Damagemix, simply because there are only 10-20% Amarr Ships involved in general and even they don¦t deal 100% of her DPS in EM. So having 5% more Thermal and Kinetic Resistence would be better her than 10-15% more EM because it is the smallest part of the Damage in total. You underestiamte Amarr firepower in fleet battles. Specially the big laggy ones. Where all ships loose tons of DPS because they need to relaod and than lag makes it restartign to fire a 30 seconds job. On most big fights the effectrive damage durign whole fight for amarr ships is whole oder higher than other ships (specially arties with small clips). Also On Long range guns category the Lasers have the highest DPS too. Final fact is, my post is ecalty about that type of thinkign you doing. You cannto balance only thinking on the ratio of ships that people use now! You need to think on how this will affect game after the patch. More peopel usign amarr, in fact with new APOC bonus, I woudl bet will be the most used sniper. Then no one will be able to simply ignore a 50% em hole. If you want to do it.. .go ahead.. you will pay for it. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough

Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.