Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 11:15:00 -
[1]
I am here to talk about a greeat imbalance in game. The imbalance betwen the 7.5% repair/boost bonus agaisnt the 5% resist bonus.
First Even on an active setup with same modules the resistance bonus will field a better tank (due to the passive regeneration and hp buffer).
Example
Ferox LSB II 2 Invul II 1 SBA II= 352 dps tank Cyclone same setup = 344 dps tank
Also the most important the resistance ones are more evrsatile, youca nuse in active or apssive setups, buffer setups and your bonus helps when being remote repaired.
Sicne resistance bonus are so much more versatile and supeiro, and don't lock you in a single possible setup. I think that the active bonus one shoudl at VERY LEAST be superior on active tanking.
Therefore I request that CCP analyse the possibility of increasign the value of the active tank bonus (or scrap it and give resistance bonus to everyone). That is valid for both armor and shieds.
Its enough that the repair bonus do not helps with your hp buffer and neither helps when being remote repaired. But its also inferior even on active tank setup!
Please CCP solve that. Active tank bonuses should be adjusted to 10% per level.
------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Cpt Branko
Surge. Night's Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 11:42:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 20/02/2008 11:44:20 I hate the active bonus on the Cyclone, with five midslots (with six it'd be quite nice for active tanking really) and preety bad base cap, it's such a pain to active tank it (and I find it does quite decently well in a dual LSE II + invlun II setup as long as you stick out of webrange).
That said, rep amount bonuses, while inferior to resist bonuses, serve some ships quite well and making them tank better would make them awesomely good. Plus, making all the ships have resist bonuses reduces diversity, which is, in my view, a bad thing.
Resist bonuses are much more flexible though and allow for diverse fittings, and a lot of ships would effectively love having them instead of rep amount bonuses, but again, diversity.
I'm firmly against anything except resist bonuses on ships under BC size, though.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 12:00:00 -
[3]
Being useful or not for some ships is nto the issue. The issue is ALWAYS a 5% resist bonus is better.
Just check the cyclone example, usually better ignoring its own bonus and using a LSE...
This is so so way wrong that goes outside scale.
On My view the only options are 10% boost per level or 7.5% boost and CAP USAGE per level or exchange it to resist bonuses.
------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Cpt Branko
Surge. Night's Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 12:08:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 20/02/2008 12:08:43
Originally by: Kagura Nikon
On My view the only options are 10% boost per level
Would be preety awesome. Also, ships < BC size need resist bonuses and resist bonuses only, givne their inability to actually tank much.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Eaterof Children
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 12:49:00 -
[5]
You are right. The bonuses are not equal.
But whatever gave you the idea that they should be equal? *Of course* they're not. Tanky ships of tanky races get the good ones, tanky ships of ganky races get the worse ones.
No, they shouldn't be equal. After all why would they? If the ship balance can work without them, leave them.
Who cares?
And if that bothers you, maybe you should look harder to see a few much much better examples. -The new apocalypse will gain a 7.5% optimal/level while the rokh gains 10%, and as well it should, cause with 10%/level it would feed the rokh its own balls any day of the week (now the rokh will get a steak for sunday. It'll be fed its balls only six times a week). -A speed bonus is always better than a cloaked speed bonus (Stealth bombers vs. stabber et al.)
et.c.
Never was balanced, never needed to be, never will be, let it go.
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 12:57:00 -
[6]
I dont have a problem with them not being equal. Not at all.
resist ones are more versatile. OK accept that. But the boost one should be better at boosting!!!
For god sake Sleipnir pilots don't use shield boosters because a simple shield extender is better than using this bonus!!
The Apoc vs Rokh is a completely different issue. Because they affect completely different guns (Tachyons and rails), they need to be different to be balanced. The resist and boost ones affect the same modules!!
The fact is not a small inbalance. is that the repair bonused ships have a completely WORTHLESS bonus! The only usage you have for them is in very tight and specific setups that even so would be better with resist bonus.
On your logic Rails having less damage, less tracking a and less range and worse fitting than Arties would be ok. Everyone know that would not be OK!
------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Traeon
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 13:03:00 -
[7]
The boost/rep bonuses are superior for active tanking.
The Cyclone has a a bad slot layout, not bad bonuses.
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 13:29:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Traeon The boost/rep bonuses are superior for active tanking.
The Cyclone has a a bad slot layout, not bad bonuses.
Check the data in OP.
They are NOT! because the booster bonuses only affect your booster. The resistance bonus affect your booster and your apssive regeneration and your already pre-existant HP form full shields or armor.
Ferox have same slot layout. Check my first post. Ferox tanks better with Shield Booster.
------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Eleana Tomelac
Gallente Through the Looking Glass
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 14:31:00 -
[9]
I think there is too much difference between the two ships to compare tanked DPS effectively. Just because ships setups can be discussed forever. And there's exactly the same with gallente ships having a repair bonus vs amarr with a resistance bonus.
The issue may be better understood just for the versatility part.
If I make a passive tank (or plated tank for armors), a resistance bonus is useful, not repair bonus. If I make an active tank, a resistance bonus is as good as the boost bonus. If I have no more cap, the resistance bonus makes my ship last longer. If I'm under very heavy fire, the resistance bonus makes me live longer, the repair bonus gives close to nothing.
So, seen this way, a resistance bonus is 4 times more versatile (and there may be others like the 4) than a repair bonus.
There is not a single case where the repair bonus is better, and a resistance bonus has more uses.
Also, considering active tanking, there is no drawback on cap use for any of those setups (not like turret ROF which usesmore cap for amarr).
So, This active tanking bonus needs something. -- Pocket drone carriers (tm) enthousiast !
Assault Frigates MK II |
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 15:10:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Eleana Tomelac I think there is too much difference between the two ships to compare tanked DPS effectively. Just because ships setups can be discussed forever. And there's exactly the same with gallente ships having a repair bonus vs amarr with a resistance bonus.
The issue may be better understood just for the versatility part.
If I make a passive tank (or plated tank for armors), a resistance bonus is useful, not repair bonus. If I make an active tank, a resistance bonus is as good as the boost bonus. If I have no more cap, the resistance bonus makes my ship last longer. If I'm under very heavy fire, the resistance bonus makes me live longer, the repair bonus gives close to nothing.
So, seen this way, a resistance bonus is 4 times more versatile (and there may be others like the 4) than a repair bonus.
There is not a single case where the repair bonus is better, and a resistance bonus has more uses.
Also, considering active tanking, there is no drawback on cap use for any of those setups (not like turret ROF which usesmore cap for amarr).
So, This active tanking bonus needs something.
I used cyclone and Ferox because they have similar fitting and have same slow layout, but I had already said in the first post that this extends to armor repair bonus.
As of now is like if race a had guns that do 300 dps have tracking 1 and range 1 and are being considered equivalent to another race with guns doing 300 dps but with twice tracking and range without any disadvantage.
------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
|
Eleana Tomelac
Gallente Through the Looking Glass
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 16:04:00 -
[11]
CCP must have at some point balanced the ships including all the slots and all the weaponry type... Which is why comparing ferox and cyclone sounds not right to me. One uses rails and launchers, the other one artys and launchers... Are rails and arties the same when it comes to the balancing team?
Just as the rokh had a 10% range per level because it benefits only to railguns and not to blasters because of the ridiculous optimal range.
While with lasers, pulse have still a good optimal and giving 10% would have made it good in too many situations.
So, comparing just the tank on ships can't work, and this bonus changed would mean that those ships are to be balance checked : -hyperion -cyclone -brutix -myrmidon -astarte -eos -sleipnir -claymore
And currently, several are considered to be properly balanced.
I may forget some? -- Pocket drone carriers (tm) enthousiast !
Assault Frigates MK II |
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 17:49:00 -
[12]
It does not matter! I am not comparing ships, I am just comparing the bonuses. And how they are unfair when compared. You could add those bonus to any other ship in game, which one would you prefer? Always will be resistance. That is the wrong thing!
Cap boost bonus is related to a module, not to a specific ship. It shoudl be good with that module, but it is not.
Simple fact that the 7.5% shield boost is useles in 90% of the time, except if you making a slow boat Maelstrom AC. While the resistance one gives SAME tank when using same slots on active tank
If you get any other ship except Ferox and cyclone will be even worse. Compare abaddon and Hyperion tank etc...
That became specially serious after revelations with the HP boost that made resistances even better.
------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Eaterof Children
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 14:19:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Kagura Nikon I dont have a problem with them not being equal. Not at all.
resist ones are more versatile. OK accept that. But the boost one should be better at boosting!!! For god sake Sleipnir pilots don't use shield boosters because a simple shield extender is better than using this bonus!!
The Apoc vs Rokh is a completely different issue. Because they affect completely different guns (Tachyons and rails), they need to be different to be balanced. The resist and boost ones affect the same modules!!
The fact is not a small inbalance. is that the repair bonused ships have a completely WORTHLESS bonus! The only usage you have for them is in very tight and specific setups that even so would be better with resist bonus.
All right, but that's not what you said at first. I meant that a comparison between the bonuses themselves is worthless.
But then another matter comes up - Strangely enough, the ships are balanced WITH the "worthless" bonus. What would happen to that balance if all of the sudden you gave them a bonus that was more useful? It's dangerous, *if* all the ships were the same and some have a worthless bonus, if all of a sudden you give them a useful one, quite probably they'll end up better than the rest. That's why I said that we don't have to pick on the bonuses like that.
Quote: On your logic Rails having less damage, less tracking a and less range and worse fitting than Arties would be ok. Everyone know that would not be OK!
I said nothing of the sort. Quite the contrary. What I said, basically, is that *since* arties and rails are balanced, if you changed arties to use cap because "it is unfair not to use cap" they would be unbalanced. On the other hand, if for some reason rails ended up being leader of the pack *even if* they had worse fitting, tracking, range and damage, they would need to be nerfed even more for the sake of balance between the actual ships.
|
Eleana Tomelac
Gallente Through the Looking Glass
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 14:35:00 -
[14]
I'll take a simple example.
I have a brutix, its tank is crap, its damage is great.
Now, you give it a useful bonus, its damage is great, its tank gets to 'normal'.
Then the ship has just been boosted.
I can't say it another way than its tanking bonus is useless, but it's a 7 turret BC with a 5% damage bonus so it is doing more damage on rail than the 5 (or new 6) turret ferox that has a better tank because a better bonus.
This is exactly the kind of difference between ships that show they were designed and balanced for their own bad bonus.
Let's say they change the bonus to 10%. Then the brutix tanks more, it may become overpowered (I guess not much because 5 lows...), and then they will have to review its stats. So, in the balancing logic, if it tanks more, it should do less damage. Then, the brutix looses its difference and becomes like the others. -- Pocket drone carriers (tm) enthousiast !
Assault Frigates MK II |
Traeon
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 15:08:00 -
[15]
Compare a Cyclone fitted with guns and everything to a Ferox with guns.
I did this and had to fit a cap booster of course. The cyclone came out on top as far as tanking goes.
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 15:26:00 -
[16]
Its does not! If you fit same modules it won't. Simple, nothing can change that.
From the very basic tank you can expect LSB + Invul II up to LSB + 2 Invull II + SBA + DC.. always same result. Ferox tanks more.
This is not about cyclone vs ferox is about 2 types of bonuses, that exist in severl other ships and how they are imbalanced. Or you really think ANYONE would not prefer 5% resit per level on his Hyperion instead of repair bonus?
------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Ellaine TashMurkon
CBC Interstellar The Unseen Company
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 15:50:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Kagura Nikon Or you really think ANYONE would not prefer 5% resit per level on his Hyperion instead of repair bonus?
Does EVERYONE fly only Abaddons and Rokhs? Or maymbe NO ONE ever flies a Hyperion?
Yes, resist bonus is better. If a ship would be overpowered with resistance bonus and its other abilities, it gets boost bonus :) And - some races are ment to be good tankers and some have to work on it, at least on some ships.
Amarr and OMG we have so superior armor, Caldari and OMG we have so superior shield. Does caldari have "OMG we have superior armor" in their background? Yet, a domi is easier to tank then a Geddon (that shoots). Fair?
And in fact, boost bonus is sligtly better then resist bonus for damage tanked per second on hypothetical identical ships. At skill lvl 5 its 37.5% bonus for boost and 33% bonus for resist. At skill lvl 4 its 30% bonus for boost and 25% bonus for resist.
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 17:51:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Ellaine TashMurkon
Originally by: Kagura Nikon Or you really think ANYONE would not prefer 5% resit per level on his Hyperion instead of repair bonus?
Does EVERYONE fly only Abaddons and Rokhs? Or maymbe NO ONE ever flies a Hyperion?
Yes, resist bonus is better. If a ship would be overpowered with resistance bonus and its other abilities, it gets boost bonus :) And - some races are ment to be good tankers and some have to work on it, at least on some ships.
Amarr and OMG we have so superior armor, Caldari and OMG we have so superior shield. Does caldari have "OMG we have superior armor" in their background? Yet, a domi is easier to tank then a Geddon (that shoots). Fair?
And in fact, boost bonus is sligtly better then resist bonus for damage tanked per second on hypothetical identical ships. At skill lvl 5 its 37.5% bonus for boost and 33% bonus for resist. At skill lvl 4 its 30% bonus for boost and 25% bonus for resist.
For god sake, get some reading comprehension classes!!
If you could change your hyperion bonus to resist would not you? I am not comparing 2 ships! I am comparing 2 bonuses that were supposed to be equivalent but are IMENSELY, HUGELY NEAR INFINITELY different level of quality.
I proved already in first post that boost is NOT better!!! Because the resist also affects the passive regeneration on shields!! READ before posting!!! Run the numbers!!! Test in game!
This is an unfair difference and MUST be solved. This is an issue that makes one bonus be among the best in game and the other an almost useless bonus.
Otherwise I want a 15% rof per level for all projectile bonuses, since by your opinion unbalanced bonuses are not an issue.
------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente Cadien Cybernetics
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 18:11:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Kagura Nikon I am comparing 2 bonuses that were supposed to be equivalent
Says who? Please point me to the dev comment.
Yes, there are better bonuses, or let's say more popular ones, and there are less popular, or maybe worse, bonuses. That's normal. And it shouldn't be a problem, as long as you take the weighted attribute approach when designing stuff. A ship is always a complete package. That means the end result is important. It doesn't consist of just one bonus, you know?
So if you disregard that fact and start comparing single attributes, you're making the same mistake as many WoW "my class can't beat that other class" whiners. The result would be even more imbalances and even more making everything the same. It happens when you start changing original concepts.
Originally by: Kagura Nikon (..) but are IMENSELY, HUGELY NEAR INFINITELY different level of quality.
Exaggerating much?
Balancing has to be done on a much more complex scale than comparing single bonuses. Try it.
___________________________________ - 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 |
Eaterof Children
|
Posted - 2008.02.23 04:31:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Eaterof Children on 23/02/2008 04:31:53
Originally by: Kagura Nikon This is an unfair difference...
No it is not, as has been explained Originally by: Kagura Nikon ...and MUST be solved.
No it does not, as has been explained. Originally by: Kagura Nikon This is an issue that makes one bonus be among the best in game and the other an almost useless bonus.
It does not matter. What's this obsession with the bonuses themselves anyway? Have you been flying bonuses instead of ships lately?
Originally by: Kagura Nikon Otherwise I want a 15% rof per level for all projectile bonuses, since by your opinion unbalanced bonuses are not an issue.
I am missing something here. This has actually happened in many forms and fashions. Once upon a time something of the sort happened to lasers (damage was incorporated to the module, cap use got increased and cap reduction was added to ships as a bonus), then to ECM (strength halved, bonus doubled) et.c.
You could very nicely have a 15% rof reduction per level on all projectile fitting ships if projectile rof was quadrupled to begin with, then you can have it all you want cause the ships would ultimately stay the same. See? Only the ships matter ultimately.
|
|
Nova Fox
|
Posted - 2008.02.23 07:39:00 -
[21]
I state one thing only
Active reprair bonuses get better with a better module
The higher resists bonus get worse with better modules (in essence its still an overall good effect but not its full effectiveness)
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |