EVE Search - "Nerf-Free"... have they changed plans for the patch?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

"Nerf-Free"... have they changed plans for the patch?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
DogSlime	Posted - 2008.03.05 19:34:00 - [1] From the Eve front page... Quote: Trinity 1.1: The Boost Patch is preparing to fire down the pipe and, if all goes according to plan, youÆll be enjoying this ônerfö freepatch and all its astounding content next Tuesday, 11 March Maybe CCP have a different definition of "nerf", but last I heard, they were reducing armour EM resistance by 10% and shield Exp resistance by 10%... Has this been changed? If not, then isn't the "nerf free" claim just... well, a lie, basically? or will they argue that it's not a nerf, but is in fact a "balancing"?
mothermoon2	Posted - 2008.03.05 19:37:00 - [2] Originally by: DogSlime From the Eve front page... Quote: Trinity 1.1: The Boost Patch is preparing to fire down the pipe and, if all goes according to plan, youÆll be enjoying this ônerfö freepatch and all its astounding content next Tuesday, 11 March Maybe CCP have a different definition of "nerf", but last I heard, they were reducing armour EM resistance by 10% and shield Exp resistance by 10%... Has this been changed? If not, then isn't the "nerf free" claim just... well, a lie, basically? or will they argue that it's not a nerf, but is in fact a "balancing"? every boost in a nerf, no matter what. they are making ships deal more damage to each other. thus booster damage. thus nerfing tank. like the increase inturrets on the ships. this is actully a nerf to ships not getting in becuase they will have less time in combat while fighting that ship. and thus the forums whine cycle will never end.
Stephannus Calimben mUfFiN fAcToRy Sex Panthers	Posted - 2008.03.05 19:38:00 - [3] Originally by: DogSlime From the Eve front page... Quote: Trinity 1.1: The Boost Patch is preparing to fire down the pipe and, if all goes according to plan, youÆll be enjoying this ônerfö freepatch and all its astounding content next Tuesday, 11 March Maybe CCP have a different definition of "nerf", but last I heard, they were reducing armour EM resistance by 10% and shield Exp resistance by 10%... Has this been changed? If not, then isn't the "nerf free" claim just... well, a lie, basically? or will they argue that it's not a nerf, but is in fact a "balancing"? its an across the board "nerf," so its not really a nerf, since it affects everyone equally. It ends up being a boost for amarr, who do the most EM damage. i think thats why its not considered a nerf?
mothermoon2	Posted - 2008.03.05 19:39:00 - [4] Originally by: Stephannus Calimben Originally by: DogSlime From the Eve front page... Quote: Trinity 1.1: The Boost Patch is preparing to fire down the pipe and, if all goes according to plan, youÆll be enjoying this ônerfö freepatch and all its astounding content next Tuesday, 11 March Maybe CCP have a different definition of "nerf", but last I heard, they were reducing armour EM resistance by 10% and shield Exp resistance by 10%... Has this been changed? If not, then isn't the "nerf free" claim just... well, a lie, basically? or will they argue that it's not a nerf, but is in fact a "balancing"? its an across the board "nerf," so its not really a nerf, since it affects everyone equally. It ends up being a boost for amarr, who do the most EM damage. i think thats why its not considered a nerf? well no they didn't say nerf free they said "nerf free"
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2008.03.05 19:40:00 - [5] Hrm, does it count as a nerf if they're nerfing every ship? It's all totally relative, man. passes drugs ---------------- Tarminic - 33 Million SP in Forum Warfare Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.79
mothermoon2	Posted - 2008.03.05 19:40:00 - [6] Originally by: Tarminic Hrm, does it count as a nerf if they're nerfing every ship? It's all totally relative, man. passes drugs groovy man.
DogSlime	Posted - 2008.03.05 19:44:00 - [7] If they want to nerf shields and armour, then fair enough. Such things happen. My issue is where they nerf something, and then claim that their patch is "nerf free". That's garbage, and it's a bit insulting. It's almost as if they're saying "ha! we can put any **e we want up there, and they'll swallow it" ...maybe I'm doing them an injustice there, but screw it - I pay my subscription, and they bull** on their front page, so I take issue with it :)
mothermoon2	Posted - 2008.03.05 19:51:00 - [8] right it's "nerf free" not nerf free
Yakoff	Posted - 2008.03.05 19:57:00 - [9] Originally by: mothermoon2 right it's "nerf free" not nerf free Two of these things are just like the other.... Two of these things are not quite the same. Great, now I got that song in my head.
Haradgrim Tyrell Corp INTERDICTION	Posted - 2008.03.05 20:05:00 - [10] Originally by: Yakoff Originally by: mothermoon2 right it's "nerf free" not nerf free Two of these things are just like the other.... Two of these things are not quite the same. Great, now I got that song in my head. You....Bastard /resumes humming that damn song Originally by: CCP Oveur ...every forum whine feels like a baby pony is getting killed
Alz Shado Ever Flow	Posted - 2008.03.05 20:29:00 - [11] AFAIK, all the patches so far have been free. Why should this nerf patch be any different? ------------------- "Kill a man one is a murderer; kill a million, a conqueror; kill them all, a God." -- Jean Rostand
DogSlime	Posted - 2008.03.05 20:51:00 - [12] Originally by: Alz Shado AFAIK, all the patches so far have been free. Why should this nerf patch be any different? Aha! Now it makes sense.
Shadow Joy	Posted - 2008.03.05 21:05:00 - [13] They probably just transposed "nerf" and "free".

CCP Chronotis	Posted - 2008.03.05 21:17:00 - [14] Any balancing change is both a boost and a nerf. It is just a matter of how the change affects you which determines what you call it. Hopefully there are enough of you here who try to understand the reasoning and big picture behind each change even if it affects you personally negatively.

Shadow Joy	Posted - 2008.03.05 21:22:00 - [15] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Any balancing change is both a boost and a nerf. It is just a matter of how the change affects you which determines what you call it. Hopefully there are enough of you here who try to understand the reasoning and big picture behind each change even if it affects you personally negatively. Reasoning? Big picture? Here? Are you reading the same forums I am?
HenkieBoy Enrave	Posted - 2008.03.05 21:23:00 - [16] Its more of a Nerf then a boost. NPC stuff (ships, drones, sentries, etc) will do more damage on the players...
Roy Batty68 Caldari Immortal Dead	Posted - 2008.03.05 23:21:00 - [17] Originally by: Dev Blog 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. It made me chuckle when I first read it. Sig removed, inappropriate content. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2008.03.05 23:22:00 - [18] Originally by: HenkieBoy Its more of a Nerf then a boost. NPC stuff (ships, drones, sentries, etc) will do more damage on the players... So it's a boost to NPCs! ---------------- Tarminic - 33 Million SP in Forum Warfare Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.79
Atomos Darksun Infortunatus Eventus	Posted - 2008.03.05 23:31:00 - [19] are they also going through with the deimos nerf? an armor rep bonus on a HAC? LOL! give me back my mwd bonus pls...thx Originally by: Atomos Darksun What's the difference between an alt poster and a leech? One is a blood sucking parasite, the other is a leech.
Ishina Fel Caldari Synergy. Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2008.03.05 23:35:00 - [20] Edited by: Ishina Fel on 05/03/2008 23:35:49 Last I checked, the Raptor is getting nerfed hard. It gets its powergrid reduced so that people don't fit 150mm rails... fully ignoring the fact that even without the grid nerf and perfect skills, you couldn't even fit 3x 125mm's without sacrificing a lowslot for a MAPC. And the Raptor is already one of the slowest, if not the slowest interceptor in the game. It needs every low for speed. Honestly, this patch will turn a ship that nobody /wants/ to fly into a ship that nobody /can/ fly properly. If that's not a nerf, then I don't know what is. Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!
Karyuudo Tydraad Caldari Whiskey Pete's Drycleaning Services	Posted - 2008.03.05 23:37:00 - [21] Edited by: Karyuudo Tydraad on 05/03/2008 23:37:28 Originally by: Atomos Darksun are they also going through with the deimos nerf? an armor rep bonus on a HAC? LOL! give me back my mwd bonus pls...thx Nope. They revoked it when it became clear most of us weren't happy with it. Also, what the hell is with people arguing semantics? Just roll with the ******* changes. It's not like 10% less EM resist will radically shift the basics of PVP as we know it.
Cailais Amarr VITOC Hedonistic Imperative	Posted - 2008.03.05 23:45:00 - [22] Originally by: Tarminic Hrm, does it count as a nerf if they're nerfing every ship? It's all totally relative, man. passes drugs You mean it's a con. If everyones effectively weaker its "situation no change". 'Oh, but look the amarr do more damage!' - erm, no, because if youre blown up faster because your resists are weaker you never get to apply that damage 'boost' anyway. C. Improved Low Sec Idea!!
Missy X	Posted - 2008.03.05 23:46:00 - [23] Quote: Any balancing change is both a boost and a nerf. It is just a matter of how the change affects you which determines what you call it. Hopefully there are enough of you here who try to understand the reasoning and big picture behind each change even if it affects you personally negatively. Dev speaks the truth. It's literally impossible to adjust play balance without both nerfing something and boosting something. People who whine about "omg they're nerfing x" need to just grow up and deal with it. Play balancing is essential in an MMORPG and you should be grateful and thankful for the constant care and attention that Devs give to stuff like this. If you don't like nerfs then best to give up EVE and play a game that isn't updated with new patches frequently. Maybe play the first Doom, I've heard a rumour that id software have stopped patching it recently.
Nadarius Chrome Celestial Horizon Corp.	Posted - 2008.03.05 23:47:00 - [24] I was hoping a "nerf-free patch" meant they were actually concentrating on fixing stuff.
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Phalanx Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.05 23:58:00 - [25] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Any balancing change is both a boost and a nerf. It is just a matter of how the change affects you which determines what you call it. Hopefully there are enough of you here who try to understand the reasoning and big picture behind each change even if it affects you personally negatively. How can something that nerfs all ships accross the board and therefor undoes the hps boost and therefor hits ships that didnt get hps love harder be considered a boost in any sense. It's the biggest nerf to hit the game since well ever. It isnt tought out either. It makes OMNI tanks the only viable resist tank. It never took NPCing into account (which will hurt lowskilled players most but also has great effect on the possibility to run high end plexes). It doesnt effect everybody equally (hits gallente most, then amarr, then caladari and then minimatar). The reasoning behind the change can be achieved in other ways (through giving love) then by what is done (assuming the reasoning is correct). But most importantly it doesn't achieve what it is intended to achieve without lots of unwanted side effects, it rips into the core of the game, the very essence of what the game is build on, what the modules are designed around, how ships are desigend, how racial balance is designed, goes against the philosophy of making fights last longer, etc. No matter the amount of boosts; Trinity 1.1 is the biggest nerf patch ever, due to this and only this change on itself. Testing proofs it, yet CCP has made their mind up and refuses to refute the proofs laid upon them. It's about ego, ego of the guy or team that came up with this idea. Ego and designers is something that has proven to be a disaster historicly. When everybody drinks alcohol and alcohol is proven to be an drug, then alcohol is still a drug even if you lower the alcohol percentage in all beers by 10%.
Karyuudo Tydraad Caldari Whiskey Pete's Drycleaning Services	Posted - 2008.03.06 00:08:00 - [26] Originally by: DrAtomic No matter the amount of boosts; Trinity 1.1 is the biggest nerf patch ever, due to this and only this change on itself. Testing proofs it, yet CCP has made their mind up and refuses to refute the proofs laid upon them. It's about ego, ego of the guy or team that came up with this idea. Ego and designers is something that has proven to be a disaster historicly. No, you just have no idea what you're talking about and love to feel indignant. Sit down, get a drink, relax, read your post over again, and ponder where you went horribly, horribly wrong with your reasoning.
Lord Rue Gallente GenX Societies Inc. Final Retribution Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.06 00:44:00 - [27] Ishina, I just wanted to let you know that that rotating Black Adder sig is full of the win. :) Devil bunnies! I snort the nose! Lucifer! Banana!
Last Wolf Templars of Space	Posted - 2008.03.06 01:25:00 - [28] Edited by: Last Wolf on 06/03/2008 01:28:04 Edited by: Last Wolf on 06/03/2008 01:25:13 Originally by: DrAtomic Originally by: CCP Chronotis Any balancing change is both a boost and a nerf. It is just a matter of how the change affects you which determines what you call it. Hopefully there are enough of you here who try to understand the reasoning and big picture behind each change even if it affects you personally negatively. How can something that nerfs all ships accross the board and therefor undoes the hps boost and therefor hits ships that didnt get hps love harder be considered a boost in any sense. It's the biggest nerf to hit the game since well ever. It isnt tought out either. It makes OMNI tanks the only viable resist tank. It never took NPCing into account (which will hurt lowskilled players most but also has great effect on the possibility to run high end plexes). It doesnt effect everybody equally (hits gallente most, then amarr, then caladari and then minimatar). The reasoning behind the change can be achieved in other ways (through giving love) then by what is done (assuming the reasoning is correct). But most importantly it doesn't achieve what it is intended to achieve without lots of unwanted side effects, it rips into the core of the game, the very essence of what the game is build on, what the modules are designed around, how ships are desigend, how racial balance is designed, goes against the philosophy of making fights last longer, etc. No matter the amount of boosts; Trinity 1.1 is the biggest nerf patch ever, due to this and only this change on itself. Testing proofs it, yet CCP has made their mind up and refuses to refute the proofs laid upon them. It's about ego, ego of the guy or team that came up with this idea. Ego and designers is something that has proven to be a disaster historicly. When everybody drinks alcohol and alcohol is proven to be an drug, then alcohol is still a drug even if you lower the alcohol percentage in all beers by 10%. TBH I see this mostly as a buff, 'speacally for minmatar. <3 EMP ammo. Also, In my opinion, the stacking nerf to damage mods was the biggest nerf ever. That or Kessies/caracals not being able to fit cruise/torps any more :P Also, minmatar take the most damage from this change, going from 70% - >60% resists hurts a lot more than 60% --> 50%. Last point, Is there anyone who DOESN'T OMNI tank in PvP anyways? Seriously, Show me the guy who only fits kin/therm hardeners because he plans on only fighting gallente ships for the day. This helps solve the stupidly high EM resist on OMNI armor tanks, if no one fit 2-3xEANM + DC there wouldn't be much need for this change in the first place. Originally by: Liang Nuren wrong forum isroy i am vjery drunm
Sky Marshal Aeden Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2008.03.06 01:43:00 - [29] Edited by: Sky Marshal on 06/03/2008 01:44:45 Quote: you should be grateful and thankful for the constant care and attention that Devs give to stuff like this I would be more thankful if they did nothing instead of nerf everyone to "boost" something, or at least, find a better way to "balance" the game. To boost Minmatarr, they will nerf the Explosive Shield Resistance. Oh wait, I mean ½ To boost Amarr, they nerf EM Armor +... No, Mimmatar, I was right. It would be acceptable if it would be 5% less for shield instead of 10%, as it is difficult to use it in a PVP situation (as Zulupark said, Armor is more used than Shield, it is not for nothing). CCP always stated that it is more easy to nerf one thing than boost the same of all other races. Ok, but here, it is justly the invert statement. This remember me the Mineral Compression problem. Make modules more big hurts all players more hardly than reduce the maximum reprocess percentage. If you can't loot all T1, less profit by reprocess, and named modules are not all saleable at a good price but give 50%/75% less raw ore than T1. The wallet still cries by this double kick, and CCP correct a problem by a more complicated solution and generate another one... EVE is a futurist universe, and I doubt that all Corporations who create all our ships would reduce something to keep a balancing between all Empires. No, they would create better shields, better weapons, better energy generators. There is certainly a way to balance the game with this logic, same if it is less easier than a nerf. The only thing that I find good in the last 4 months was... The Torpedo modification. Yes, they did more modifications than one but... _______ 16/20 Dragon : ½ Great Game + 14/20 Revelations : ½ Desyncs... + 11/20 Trinity : ½ BBSOD, Bugs, Desyncs, F*** Nerfs + 10/20 v1.1 : ½ [...] + EXP shield nerf + CCP, you are tiring.
Spleef Malevolent Intervention	Posted - 2008.03.06 01:43:00 - [30] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Any balancing change is both a boost and a nerf. It is just a matter of how the change affects you which determines what you call it. Hopefully there are enough of you here who try to understand the reasoning and big picture behind each change even if it affects you personally negatively. I try hard to understand the reasoning behind yet another gallente nerf, but completely fail to see it. Perhaps you can help us chronotis. Why did the other 3 races have the effectiveness of their weapons improved by varying degrees, while hybrids got left out of the picture. Or the same thing put more simply, why did railguns and blasters need a nerf? If we could only see the reasoning you speak of, it would be much easier to accept, perhaps even embrace, these changes. I really pray the answer does not include the balancing team not being aware that hybrid guns can only deal kinetic and thermal damage, the two types that were left unchanged. That would be as absurd as modifying a racial ecm without being aware of ships existing with bonuses to them. Surely that sort of thing couldn't happen :)

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: 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.