Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
|
CCP Nozh
C C P
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 17:38:00 -
[1]
Quick update, I'm still taking a look at these stats. Unfortunately I won't have time to finish today. But, the current version, has the Estamel's version pushed up to -46 in line with the armor counterpart. Balance between the faction Shield Amplifiers will be more in-line with the Shield Boost Amplifiers / armor counterparts. Update after easter holidays or maybe during the weekend if I have time.
Ciao.
Nozh Game Designer CCP Games |
|
zacuis
Great Big Research
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 18:41:00 -
[2]
ok.....
what exactly is the armour counterpart of the sheild boost amp ??
|
Damned Force
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 19:01:00 -
[3]
good to know.... but by your balance dont forget that:
base armor resist is higher armor tank is much more worth in pvp because let your mids free(so equal armor tank strenght is more lucrative)
So u should by balance make a bit shields more usable for the pvp part of eve too. that would help to amarr too, evn without to nerf other ships
|
Castelo Branco
The Undertakers Brutally Clever Empire
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 19:03:00 -
[4]
Please, as I born caldari, only fly caldari ships, and I¦m very pround of it, I really ask you to do not nerf more stuff.. People spend lots and lots of isk in faction gears that are now nerfed to "ordinary" stuff. Preaty please, do not do this again..
|
Johnster
Mining Bytes Inc. Insurgency
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 19:12:00 -
[5]
Great to see this is being looked into again.
This is maybe not the place for this, but since your looking into module changes, would it be possible to look at fixing missiles so that they move faster (200% to 500% or so) for less time (equal to the speed increase), so that in PVP, we (a) actually hit something before the fleet blows it up and (b) can at least hit nano ships (even though damage will still be extremely low when you do). This is a huge issue since the speed rigs were introduced. Note that this would also reduce lag in fleet battles as the missiles will not be active for as long.
You and your alliance will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile.
|
Waxau
The Fated Odyssey.
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 19:23:00 -
[6]
Originally by: zacuis ok.....
what exactly is the armour counterpart of the sheild boost amp ??
Shield Amplifiers and Shield Boost Amplifiers are different.
|
Vrenth
White Shadow Imperium
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 19:27:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Waxau
Originally by: zacuis ok.....
what exactly is the armour counterpart of the sheild boost amp ??
Shield Amplifiers and Shield Boost Amplifiers are different.
Yes, and shield resistance amplifiers are different from shield amplifiers, dev should have clerified --------------------------------- Let's make CLONE VATS useful! |
Buyerr
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 19:55:00 -
[8]
YOU ROCK!!! just for posting :D :D
nice to see that devs are alife on the forum ^^
and ty for the info :D I declare war on stupidity |
Willow Whisp
Sadist Faction
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 20:05:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Vrenth
Originally by: Waxau
Originally by: zacuis ok.....
what exactly is the armour counterpart of the sheild boost amp ??
Shield Amplifiers and Shield Boost Amplifiers are different.
Yes, and shield resistance amplifiers are different from shield amplifiers, dev should have clerified
This thread is a continuation of the following thread on General Discussion: Linkage
As such, what we are looking at is shield resistance amplifiers. It's pretty clear.
There is no "Shield Amplifiers" - there is "Shield Resistance Amplifiers" and "Shield Boost Amplifiers" - the particular "Shield Amplifiers" the CCP Nozh is refering to is the resistance amplifiers.
Nozh, I can't thank you enough for taking a second look at these. Take your time with it. :)
-Willow. -- My Sig got pwnt by Cortes :( |
Kelby
The Dharma Initiative
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 20:18:00 -
[10]
Originally by: CCP Nozh Quick update, I'm still taking a look at these stats. Unfortunately I won't have time to finish today. But, the current version, has the Estamel's version pushed up to -46 in line with the armor counterpart. Balance between the faction Shield Amplifiers will be more in-line with the Shield Boost Amplifiers / armor counterparts. Update after easter holidays or maybe during the weekend if I have time.
Ciao.
Outstanding, thanks for looking into this.
|
|
Hectaire Glade
Forum Jockey
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 21:30:00 -
[11]
Very much agree, thanks for listening and taking a second look at this issue
|
Pilk
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 21:57:00 -
[12]
Here's an appropriate equivalence table. I'll use simple, whole numbers for CPU usage; they reflect relative CPU usage and are certainly NOT suggestions for actual CPU usage!
Domination/RF (1 CPU) = T2 (3 CPU) = 37.5% Gistum C-type (2 CPU) = Dread Guristas/CN (3 CPU) = 40% Gistum C-Type = 2 CPU, 40% Pithum C-Type (4 CPU) = Gistum B-type (3 CPU) = 41.5% Pithum B-Type (5 CPU) = Gistum A-type (4 CPU) = 43% Pithum A-Type (6 CPU) = Tobias (5 CPU) = 44.5% Estamel's (7 CPU) = 46%
Gistum C-type = Mizuro Gistum B-type = Hakim Gistum A-type = Gotan
Pithum C-type = Kaikka Pithum B-type = Thon Pithum A-type = Vepas
This is consistent with the pirate races' individual characteristics and resolves all current and former issues I have and had with the passive shield amps.
Originally by: zacuis ok.....
what exactly is the armour counterpart of the sheild boost amp ??
As the devs have said before, EANM. Of course, these days, armor tankers get both sides of the coin--an armor boost amp in the form of a rig, AND a passive universal hardener. Nice troll attempt.
--P Please visit your user settings to re-enable images. Kosh: The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote. Tyrrax's bet status: PAID! |
Dianeces
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 22:02:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Pilk Nice troll attempt.
--P
I think my irony-meter just exploded. Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
|
Back Again
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 22:16:00 -
[14]
Thank you CCP Nozh.
Willow already clarified about what this topic is, I would like to add some more information:
Shield Resistance Amplifiers versus Energized Plating
No signature here, only the bright light of a ship exploding right in front of me... Ohhh, wait, I'm in a pod!! It was my ship!!! |
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 22:28:00 -
[15]
ItĘs great to see you taking another look and glad to hear about the Estamel change. I just hope you make it a little harder to fit as well as the resistance boost. Passive shield tanking guide click here |
zacuis
Great Big Research
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 22:45:00 -
[16]
i wasnt trolling. the post was a little unclear is all.
i`d never troll a dev well unless he was wrong lol
|
Pilk
Dirty Deeds Corp. Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 22:56:00 -
[17]
Originally by: zacuis i wasnt trolling. the post was a little unclear is all.
i`d never troll a dev well unless he was wrong lol
Oh, I understand what you were trying to say now! Sorry! I've updated my response to you, above.
--P
Kosh: The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote. Tyrrax's bet status: PAID! |
Venkul Mul
Vikramaditya DO JAJA Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 23:07:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Johnster Great to see this is being looked into again.
This is maybe not the place for this, but since your looking into module changes, would it be possible to look at fixing missiles so that they move faster (200% to 500% or so) for less time (equal to the speed increase), so that in PVP, we (a) actually hit something before the fleet blows it up and (b) can at least hit nano ships (even though damage will still be extremely low when you do). This is a huge issue since the speed rigs were introduced. Note that this would also reduce lag in fleet battles as the missiles will not be active for as long.
Then Drones will get x5 speed to keep up with missile speed?
|
Johnster
Mining Bytes Inc. Insurgency
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 04:02:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Johnster on 20/03/2008 04:03:34
Originally by: Venkul Mul Then Drones will get x5 speed to keep up with missile speed?
I would not be against a drone speed upgrade so that the light drones can catch nano ships with good skills. As long as the tracking at that speed has an effect equal to other turrets/missiles. Nano ships should not be an iwin button.
You and your alliance will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile.
|
Jurgen Cartis
Interstellar Corporation of Exploration Nex Eternus
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 06:28:00 -
[20]
Thank you for taking another look at this. I look forward to seeing the revised numbers, and hope they fit better with the patterns I'm used to seeing in other faction gear. -------------------- ICE Blueprint Sales FIRST!! -Yipsilanti Pfft. Never such a thing as a "last chance". ;) -Rauth |
|
Dr Aryandi
Bloodstone Technologies
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 08:41:00 -
[21]
Thanks for looking again. This change doesn't effect me directly but it's nice to see a good response to player feedback :)
|
Durzel
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 15:19:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Durzel on 20/03/2008 15:20:21 Just FYI Nozh, while you're on the prowl for meta-level irregularities...
Gist X-Type Shield Boost Amplifier is meta level 14 and has the same boost percentage, CPU and everything else as Vepas' Modified Shield Boost Amplifier - which is listed as meta level 13.
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=726045
Presumably the Gist X needs to be more like 43.5% or thereabouts?
|
Willow Whisp
Sadist Faction
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 16:52:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Willow Whisp on 20/03/2008 16:56:00
Originally by: Durzel Edited by: Durzel on 20/03/2008 15:20:21 Just FYI Nozh, while you're on the prowl for meta-level irregularities...
Gist X-Type Shield Boost Amplifier is meta level 14 and has the same boost percentage, CPU and everything else as Vepas' Modified Shield Boost Amplifier - which is listed as meta level 13.
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=726045
Presumably the Gist X needs to be more like 43.5% or thereabouts?
It's not an irregularity. Gist X is the highest meta level of the Gist complex variants, while Vepa's items are one level lower in the officer food chain, and therefore meta 13. Also, this thread is not about shield boost amplifiers, it's about shield resistance amplifiers.
Furthermore, Gist X will never be as high % as Pith X modules, because it's not a characteristic of Gist to be higher boost percentage. That falls into the Pith domain. What you get with Gist X is lower fitting requirements.
Therefore the Meta 14 Gist X and Meta 14 Pith X modules will be different, much like they are now (and rightfully so), while the officer line of modules run on a different meta level progression, because of the introduction of the top named officers like Tobias and Estamel. -- My Sig got pwnt by Cortes :( |
Durzel
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 17:08:00 -
[24]
Thanks for the clarification - useful info!
|
Ulstan
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 19:13:00 -
[25]
Quote: Quick update, I'm still taking a look at these stats. Unfortunately I won't have time to finish today. But, the current version, has the Estamel's version pushed up to -46 in line with the armor counterpart. Balance between the faction Shield Amplifiers will be more in-line with the Shield Boost Amplifiers / armor counterparts. Update after easter holidays or maybe during the weekend if I have time.
Ciao.
Thanks for looking into this for us. I must say, I thought the values pre patch were more or less ok and didn't understand the rebalancing of just the shield resistance amplifiers in a vacuum, when no other faction stuff got changed.
I hope after your second round of changes faction resist amplifiers will be back to being good alternatives to armor tanking, and will more or less be back, on average, to their previous power instead of being made weaker overall.
|
Cordus
Advanced Combat Machines and Equipment Independent Faction
|
Posted - 2008.03.21 04:35:00 -
[26]
It's tough to own up to mistakes sometimes, so we all appreciate someone taking another shot at this.
Many good points were raised in the earlier thread, though some of those posts were unkind and hysterical (not in the funny way). Some of the best things repeated here most concern the "flavor" of each faction's gear, which I think is a good point. However, the thing which concerns me most is that the effort required to attain faction gear may no longer be worth it.
Some modules, like faction shield hardeners, were never worthwhile to acquire. Therefore those modules have always been useless wastes of space within the loyalty point shops. In fact there are many such useless faction modules in Eve. Unless their primary benefit exceeds that of their tech two counterpart, they're going to be ignored in favor of the far cheaper and more easily accessible tech two option. (The -primary- benefit is what needs to be superior. Easier fitting is not a worthwhile benefit for the kinds of inconvenience that we endure to score a faction module.)
I think it makes far better sense to have faction loot that is desirable and superior. If anything is going to be completely redone with faction loot, then I would suggest redoing all of the faction loot items to give them a bonus which makes them worth having. Find the faction armor and shield hardeners and other such useless things and give them a modest, superior bonus so that they can become a part of the game instead of sitting on the sideline.
There are some good players in this forum, and they would be willing to assist you in identifying them.
|
Back Again
|
Posted - 2008.03.21 17:32:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Cordus There are some good players in this forum, and they would be willing to assist you in identifying them.
Willow Whisp for Technical Council (CSM)! Serious, we need someone that know the game mechanics out there, and someone that have and know how to use based arguments.
No signature here, only the bright light of a ship exploding right in front of me... Ohhh, wait, I'm in a pod!! It was my ship!!! |
namelessclone01
blackbox ops
|
Posted - 2008.03.22 15:41:00 -
[28]
i wasn't particularly kind to CCP Nozh in that General Discussion thread, and i'd like to apologize for maybe some sharp words..
thanks for communicating with the players and for looking into the problem.
hopefully it will all end well and resist amps will be fixed the right way.
and then there is also hope that CN co-processors will be un-nerfed back to their previous bonus.. (or am i asking too much now?)
|
Willow Whisp
Sadist Faction
|
Posted - 2008.03.23 15:15:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Back Again
Willow Whisp for Technical Council (CSM)! Serious, we need someone that know the game mechanics out there, and someone that have and know how to use based arguments.
Off topic, but after seeing some of the current candidates, I may end up deciding to apply for the position. Still have to decide if it's really worthwhile doing though... -- My Sig got pwnt by Cortes :( |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.03.24 03:45:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Johnster Great to see this is being looked into again.
This is maybe not the place for this, but since your looking into module changes, would it be possible to look at fixing missiles so that they move faster (200% to 500% or so) for less time (equal to the speed increase), so that in PVP, we (a) actually hit something before the fleet blows it up and (b) can at least hit nano ships (even though damage will still be extremely low when you do). This is a huge issue since the speed rigs were introduced. Note that this would also reduce lag in fleet battles as the missiles will not be active for as long.
Go for secondary targets.
|
|
Willow Whisp
Sadist Faction
|
Posted - 2008.03.24 07:42:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Marlona Sky
Originally by: Johnster Great to see this is being looked into again.
This is maybe not the place for this, but since your looking into module changes, would it be possible to look at fixing missiles so that they move faster (200% to 500% or so) for less time (equal to the speed increase), so that in PVP, we (a) actually hit something before the fleet blows it up and (b) can at least hit nano ships (even though damage will still be extremely low when you do). This is a huge issue since the speed rigs were introduced. Note that this would also reduce lag in fleet battles as the missiles will not be active for as long.
Go for secondary targets.
They are missiles... you want to go after tertiary if you ever hope to get them there before primary AND secondary pop -- My Sig got pwnt by Cortes :( |
Willow Whisp
Sadist Faction
|
Posted - 2008.03.25 05:13:00 -
[32]
Back to the top. Hopefully, Nozh has had some time to think about the shield amps over the long weekend and has an interest solution ready :) -- My Sig got pwnt by Cortes :( |
|
CCP Nozh
C C P
|
Posted - 2008.03.25 20:20:00 -
[33]
Alright gang, check this spreadsheet out and see if I overlooked something.
The resistanceBonus values may seem a bit weird since I made them with my mad maths. But I wanted more values than the standard 1.5% increase produced to be able to deviate them a bit more (maybe I did the exact opposite by bringing the values too close together, I quite like them though).
I'll take a look at this thread in a few hours before I go to bed. Remember, I like constructive posts.
I just noticed the Gistum C-Type needs its cpu reduced to 25. Can't be bothered to create another screen shot, it's after working hours already.
Nozh Game Designer CCP Games |
|
Ephemeron
Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.03.25 20:34:00 -
[34]
Those mod stats look much better now. But why is Dread Guristas amp weaker by 0.6% than it used to be? It used to be 40%
People aren't gonna be happy about that. But everything else looks good
|
Hectaire Glade
Forum Jockey
|
Posted - 2008.03.25 20:43:00 -
[35]
Nozh, gets my vote, sits well with the officer/complex/faction alignment as discussed. Thanks for taking another look at this. These values sit better and closer to the spread in the energized plate armor alternatives.
|
Willow Whisp
Sadist Faction
|
Posted - 2008.03.25 21:33:00 -
[36]
Originally by: CCP Nozh
I just noticed the Gistum C-Type needs its cpu reduced to 25. Can't be bothered to create another screen shot, it's after working hours already.
Much much better now. Of concern is the current domination amps, which has the lowest CPU usage at 15. In the new chart, Gistum modules (which belong to the Angel / domination line) have had their CPU usage raised, along with their resistance bonuses (Gistum A went from 25tf/-34% to 29tf/-43.2%). Would it make sense, then, to raise the Domination base cpu usage from 15tf to the 17-19tf range, to keep it more consistent with the new values?
Also, I notice Tobias' keeps the same CPU as Gistum A, but has a higher resistance (-44.1 instead of 43.2) Is this consistent with the rest of the Gistum A / Tobias relationship? Or is Tobias more in line with Gistum X modules (which we don't have any of in the shield resistance amplifier chart).
Thanks again for taking a 2nd look at this whole line. Overall, the new values look much improved. -- My Sig got pwnt by Cortes :( |
|
CCP Nozh
C C P
|
Posted - 2008.03.26 01:16:00 -
[37]
Edited by: CCP Nozh on 26/03/2008 01:16:36
Originally by: Willow Whisp
Much much better now. Of concern is the current domination amps, which has the lowest CPU usage at 15. In the new chart, Gistum modules (which belong to the Angel / domination line) have had their CPU usage raised, along with their resistance bonuses (Gistum A went from 25tf/-34% to 29tf/-43.2%). Would it make sense, then, to raise the Domination base cpu usage from 15tf to the 17-19tf range, to keep it more consistent with the new values?
Yeah, I was thinking that, but since it's so much lower than the other shield amps and it's been at 15tf since they were released I feel bad nerfing them, some people might have spent money on acquiring them for the "perfect fit", but on the other hand since they sucked a lot before... raising their to 17-19tf might not be such a bad idea.
Originally by: Willow Whisp
Also, I notice Tobias' keeps the same CPU as Gistum A, but has a higher resistance (-44.1 instead of 43.2) Is this consistent with the rest of the Gistum A / Tobias relationship? Or is Tobias more in line with Gistum X modules (which we don't have any of in the shield resistance amplifier chart).
The Tobias shield booster is in line with the Gistum X-Type, thats what I based it of... other shield related Tobias modules seem to suck and need a look at..
Nozh Game Designer CCP Games |
|
Cordus
Advanced Combat Machines and Equipment Independent Faction
|
Posted - 2008.03.26 01:30:00 -
[38]
I'm a little disappointed that we no longer have the 40% resistance on the shield resistance amplifiers. (Really, would the other 0.4% have been that much of a reach around?) The way everything unfolded, it made it neat to maximize the related shield compensation skill to level 5 with that great mod -- accessible to everyone (sort of) despite the great expense -- to get an even 50% resistance. However, I do greatly appreciate the effort to unnerf them as much as has been done. |
Willow Whisp
Sadist Faction
|
Posted - 2008.03.26 01:55:00 -
[39]
Originally by: CCP Nozh
Yeah, I was thinking that, but since it's so much lower than the other shield amps and it's been at 15tf since they were released I feel bad nerfing them, some people might have spent money on acquiring them for the "perfect fit", but on the other hand since they sucked a lot before... raising their to 17-19tf might not be such a bad idea.
Their resist % has gone from -32.5 in the original chart, to 37.5 with your latest changes, so a slight increase in CPU to 17-19tf seems to be in line. Generally, CPU is something that passive tanks aren't really short on anyway, so it continues to be an overall boost regardless, while continuing to keep the faction flavor of lower fitting.
Originally by: CCP Nozh The Tobias shield booster is in line with the Gistum X-Type, thats what I based it of... other shield related Tobias modules seem to suck and need a look at..
Ok, this makes sense to me. I have noticed on some shield and propulsion modules, Tobias matches Gistum X, while in others they used to match Gistum A, so making Tobias consisten with Gistum X is a better overall change, and probably going over the Officers to double check consistency is not a bad idea overall.
Thanks for all your hard work on this,
-Willow -- My Sig got pwnt by Cortes :( |
Reatu Krentor
Void Spiders Fate Weavers
|
Posted - 2008.03.26 03:49:00 -
[40]
Originally by: CCP Nozh Alright gang, check this spreadsheet out and see if I overlooked something.
The resistanceBonus values may seem a bit weird since I made them with my mad maths. But I wanted more values than the standard 1.5% increase produced to be able to deviate them a bit more (maybe I did the exact opposite by bringing the values too close together, I quite like them though).
I'll take a look at this thread in a few hours before I go to bed. Remember, I like constructive posts.
I just noticed the Gistum C-Type needs its cpu reduced to 25. Can't be bothered to create another screen shot, it's after working hours already.
First, \/ my hero
Second, is it intentional that Republic Fleet is "worse" then Domination for shield amps? It seems inconsistent with other Republic Fleet items which have the same stats as their Domination equivalents.
As a final question, could you also take a look at the active hardeners(both armor and shield) for domination and republic fleet. Because right now they are the same as the named version of the hardener with a capacitor reduction. Which is nice but not nice enough to settle for a resist reduction. Perhaps a small increase to them could be nice(like bump it up to 52.5% for specific and 27.5% for invulnerability field)? -- stuff -- |
|
|
CCP Nozh
C C P
|
Posted - 2008.03.26 05:31:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Reatu Krentor
Originally by: CCP Nozh Alright gang, check this spreadsheet out and see if I overlooked something.
The resistanceBonus values may seem a bit weird since I made them with my mad maths. But I wanted more values than the standard 1.5% increase produced to be able to deviate them a bit more (maybe I did the exact opposite by bringing the values too close together, I quite like them though).
I'll take a look at this thread in a few hours before I go to bed. Remember, I like constructive posts.
I just noticed the Gistum C-Type needs its cpu reduced to 25. Can't be bothered to create another screen shot, it's after working hours already.
First, \/ my hero
Second, is it intentional that Republic Fleet is "worse" then Domination for shield amps? It seems inconsistent with other Republic Fleet items which have the same stats as their Domination equivalents.
As a final question, could you also take a look at the active hardeners(both armor and shield) for domination and republic fleet. Because right now they are the same as the named version of the hardener with a capacitor reduction. Which is nice but not nice enough to settle for a resist reduction. Perhaps a small increase to them could be nice(like bump it up to 52.5% for specific and 27.5% for invulnerability field)?
I'm not sure about the relationship between Republic Fleet and Domination shield mods, I'll take a look tomorrow.
Actually while looking into the Shield Amps closer I noticed a lot of underpowered modules and inconsistencies, so I guess I'm just going to have to take a look at all high meta stuff.
5:30, more work in 4 hours or so. 3 hour sleep here I come.
Nozh Game Designer CCP Games |
|
Willow Whisp
Sadist Faction
|
Posted - 2008.03.26 05:56:00 -
[42]
Originally by: CCP Nozh 5:30, more work in 4 hours or so. 3 hour sleep here I come.
Nozh, you're a beast! -- My Sig got pwnt by Cortes :( |
Zarch AlDain
Hematite Rose Bionic Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.03.26 10:20:00 -
[43]
Good work Nozh, it looks a lot better now. Can I just say it's really nice to see a developer interacting with players like this and taking feedback on board!
Zarch AlDain ---- My corp is recruiting. See the recruitment thread here.
|
Laila Eldgorn
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2008.03.26 16:00:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Laila Eldgorn on 26/03/2008 16:02:11 Please do not compare shield modules on armor counterparts, there isn't any. Shield tank works essentially in different way than armor tank and shield resists are already lower (that's why explosive resist nerf on shield wtf?). Instead of nerfing shield amps or faction hardeners maybe check stats so they're actually useful for shield tanking. I think everyone was happily fitting faction resist amps on their cruisers or smaller ships where they were useful, but you don't fit those on battleships which active tank etc.
I don't actually get this whole shield tank nerf at all, are minmatar overpowered? nerf minmatar. 75% em base resist on t2 woo-woo. Nanoers don't use shield buffer because shields are so good, but because nanos are so nom nom.
edit: also those new stats on tables look much more sensible now.
|
Mioelnir
KULT Production Atrum Tempestas Foedus
|
Posted - 2008.03.26 16:28:00 -
[45]
This. is. awesome.
|
Willow Whisp
Sadist Faction
|
Posted - 2008.03.26 16:33:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Laila Eldgorn edit: also those new stats on tables look much more sensible now.
Yes, that was the point in this whole discussion. How to bring passive resist modules to a point where they are actually useful, without being overpowered. The whole line is now better, with a few overpowered mods taken down a notch. Overall a much better balance and better lineup. Now most of the high meta shield amps are worth fitting. -- My Sig got pwnt by Cortes :( |
Hectaire Glade
Forum Jockey
|
Posted - 2008.03.26 16:47:00 -
[47]
Originally by: CCP Nozh
stuff
Would like to say Nozh, that having personally been a bit jacked off with the direction of Eve and CCP lately your responsiveness to the feedback given on this change has been a breath of fresh air and clear role model for how things can work, good stuff!
|
Back Again
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.03.26 17:21:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Hectaire Glade
Originally by: CCP Nozh
stuff
Would like to say Nozh, that having personally been a bit jacked off with the direction of Eve and CCP lately your responsiveness to the feedback given on this change has been a breath of fresh air and clear role model for how things can work, good stuff!
Same here.
Please, Nozh, keep this communication channel opened, you can count on several constructive posts full of arguments you can think about. And we can think about your arguments too as, you can see, agreement is not impossible, to the contrary.
Thanks again.
No signature here, only the bright light of a ship exploding right in front of me... Ohhh, wait, I'm in a pod!! It was my ship!!! |
Reecoh Soltar
Exotic Dancer Talent Agency United Corporations Against Macros
|
Posted - 2008.03.26 18:32:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Hectaire Glade Would like to say Nozh, that having personally been a bit jacked off with the direction of Eve and CCP lately your responsiveness to the feedback given on this change has been a breath of fresh air and clear role model for how things can work, good stuff!
I'll concur on this as well. While I have not contributed to this discussion, I've been following it (and learning a lot). Thanks Nozh!
As it sounds like you are reviewing a lot of the items, I'm wondering if you are also going to check the related COSMOS/Storyline modules?
|
Ulstan
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.03.26 18:32:00 -
[50]
Edited by: Ulstan on 26/03/2008 18:33:40
Quote: The resistanceBonus values may seem a bit weird since I made them with my mad maths. But I wanted more values than the standard 1.5% increase produced to be able to deviate them a bit more (maybe I did the exact opposite by bringing the values too close together, I quite like them though).
I'll take a look at this thread in a few hours before I go to bed. Remember, I like constructive posts.
I just noticed the Gistum C-Type needs its cpu reduced to 25. Can't be bothered to create another screen shot, it's after working hours already.
Superb changes. Looks a lot better now. And yeah, the relatively high CPU for the gist c type was the only thing that really jumped out at me.
these new values are so much better than the previous set - they maintain the same general power level as before (so people don't feel like their mods are getting hit with the nerf bat) while maintaining consistency inside a faction line and maintaining the flavor of each faction line (gist cheaper fitting, lower effects, pith high fitting, higher effects, etc)
Quote: Actually while looking into the Shield Amps closer I noticed a lot of underpowered modules and inconsistencies, so I guess I'm just going to have to take a look at all high meta stuff.
Yeah, there are a few. :) Overhauling the 'useless' faction mods scattered around would be a welcome, though rather involved, endeavor.
if you try to tackle it I am quite sure the forum goers here would be happy to provide feedback as you go :)
|
|
Johnster
Mining Bytes Inc. Insurgency
|
Posted - 2008.03.27 20:49:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Willow Whisp
Originally by: Marlona Sky
Originally by: Johnster Great to see this is being looked into again.
This is maybe not the place for this, but since your looking into module changes, would it be possible to look at fixing missiles so that they move faster (200% to 500% or so) for less time (equal to the speed increase), so that in PVP, we (a) actually hit something before the fleet blows it up and (b) can at least hit nano ships (even though damage will still be extremely low when you do). This is a huge issue since the speed rigs were introduced. Note that this would also reduce lag in fleet battles as the missiles will not be active for as long.
Go for secondary targets.
They are missiles... you want to go after tertiary if you ever hope to get them there before primary AND secondary pop
Exactly. Many alliances don't even let players use missile ships any more, they have just become useless since the nano craze, and in fleet battles the missiles dont have time to get to the target. I hope this can be looked into so that caldari finally become something other then an ECM race.
As stated earlier in the thread, drones have a similar issue. Maybe they could get a speed boost too?
You and your alliance will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile.
|
Ulstan
|
Posted - 2008.03.30 02:28:00 -
[52]
One set of faction modules that needs fixing are the shield transporters.
They have a worse energy/shield xfer ratio than base tech I modules and tech II beats the crap out of them :p Both pithi and gisti require far too much energy, and the gisti also boosts for too much.
The small pith shield transporters in particular, are something I don't see anyone fitting ever.
|
Wesley Baird
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.03.30 04:18:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Hectaire Glade
Originally by: CCP Nozh
stuff
Would like to say Nozh, that having personally been a bit jacked off with the direction of Eve and CCP lately your responsiveness to the feedback given on this change has been a breath of fresh air and clear role model for how things can work, good stuff!
Couldnt have said it better myself, thank you Nozh interaction like this really helps us keep the faith.
|
Agock Onie
|
Posted - 2008.03.31 20:05:00 -
[54]
Did we get a date when these changes are going into effect?
|
DogSlime
Wilde Cards
|
Posted - 2008.03.31 21:23:00 -
[55]
Just re-visited this thread.
Thanks to Nozh for the updates. It really is (almost) enough to restore faith in CCP's Dev team.
|
Back Again
|
Posted - 2008.04.04 00:06:00 -
[56]
Indeed, some ETA would be much appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
No signature here, only the bright light of a ship exploding right in front of me... Ohhh, wait, I'm in a pod!! It was my ship!!! |
Lynkon Lawg
Second Six Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.04.07 14:09:00 -
[57]
I know I, for one, am still breathlessly awaiting an ETA for the next change on this. Is it slated for the next patch?
|
Back Again
Caldari Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.04.10 23:35:00 -
[58]
Trinity 1.2 Patch coming in April 15 and no mention on this issue in the patch notes.
Lets not forget it again, please. |
Fastercart
Gallente Ihatalo Heavy Industries Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.04.11 16:10:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Back Again Trinity 1.2 Patch coming in April 15 and no mention on this issue in the patch notes.
Lets not forget it again, please.
Looks like they forgot...
Nozh's proposal: http://ccp.vo.llnwd.net/o2/forum/nozh/sa-new-new.gif
Current (53049) Sisi screenshot: http://img36.picoodle.com/img/img36/4/4/11/fastcart/f_sacurrentm_10e1e9e.png Which is the same as the current TQ values. __ Rorqual AKA Mega Maid
Oh, my God. It's Mega Maid. She's gone from suck to blow. |
Jurgen Cartis
Caldari Interstellar Corporation of Exploration Nex Eternus
|
Posted - 2008.04.11 20:33:00 -
[60]
So, when is all this coming to TQ? -------------------- ICE Blueprint Sales FIRST!! -Yipsilanti Pfft. Never such a thing as a "last chance". ;) -Rauth |
|
Agock Onie
|
Posted - 2008.04.14 05:06:00 -
[61]
Keep this on the radar folks.
It need to be resolved immediately |
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.04.14 05:42:00 -
[62]
Tomorrow I think, with the patch.
|
Willow Whisp
Sadist Faction
|
Posted - 2008.04.14 08:54:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Venkul Mul Tomorrow I think, with the patch.
Not in SiSi, not in the patch notes. If i'm reading into this thread correctly, then perhaps CCP Nozh will wait until ALL the faction items are rebalanced before re-introducing everything in one big swoop, which really isn't good, tbh. -- My Sig got pwnt by Cortes :( |
Daghandelaar
|
Posted - 2008.04.15 06:04:00 -
[64]
Maybe CCP Nozh will sneak it in on the patch like it was snuck in the first time around. So I will hold my comments until then. But I do hope that CCP Nozh will hold true to his word and fix this issue since we have waited some time for this paitently on CCP Nozh's word.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.04.15 09:45:00 -
[65]
It is possible he will be waiting for the Faction wars patch in (probably) June, to change all the modules at the same time.
|
Willow Whisp
Sadist Faction
|
Posted - 2008.04.16 00:06:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Daghandelaar Maybe CCP Nozh will sneak it in on the patch like it was snuck in the first time around. So I will hold my comments until then. But I do hope that CCP Nozh will hold true to his word and fix this issue since we have waited some time for this paitently on CCP Nozh's word.
I haven't had the chance to double check the settings after the patch. Are they still the same? -- My Sig got pwnt by Cortes :( |
NEBO61
Caldari GalTech Research Group
|
Posted - 2008.04.16 00:44:00 -
[67]
They are still same, i think he just don't care enough he did what he wanted.
"It is possible he will be waiting for the Faction wars patch in (probably) June, to change all the modules at the same time."
He didn't wait with changes to amplifiers for other modules why he should wait now.
|
Haakaa Palle
|
Posted - 2008.04.16 07:00:00 -
[68]
Hi Nozh,
can you please tell us when this change will be introduce please?
Thxs to take care of this issue
|
Lillith Vitae
|
Posted - 2008.04.16 23:09:00 -
[69]
It is sad to see that after all the work CCP Nozh went to fixing the stealth "NERF" that once again were given an empty promise.
|
Ulstan
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 18:40:00 -
[70]
I was really hoping the changes would have been implemented in this patch we just had! |
|
Agock Onie
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 13:36:00 -
[71]
Nozh,
Where is the fix?
Talk to us. You've done very well so far. Finish this please.
|
Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 14:08:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Damned Force good to know.... but by your balance dont forget that:
base armor resist is higher
Does armor regenerating itself? That's where you wrong. Multiply lower shiled resists by native shield regen and You'll get the right figure to compare against armor resists. -- Thanks CCP for cu |
Lars Erlkonig
Caldari Discrete Solutions Ltd.
|
Posted - 2008.04.19 07:28:00 -
[73]
Originally by: CCP Nozh
Yeah, I was thinking that, but since it's so much lower than the other shield amps and it's been at 15tf since they were released I feel bad nerfing them, some people might have spent money on acquiring them for the "perfect fit", but on the other hand since they sucked a lot before... raising their to 17-19tf might not be such a bad idea.
Please do not change the CPU fittings on the Domination Modules. Having bought one specifically to fit on a Hawk for CPU reasons, it would be a bit cruel to punish people that went with the lower resist faction modules specifically in order to conserve on CPU. when trying to build the best hawk I could afford, I needed to find both a faction Co-processor and as many domination modules as possible just to get 'the right fit.' As it currently stands my fitting has only 1.13 tf to spare. Domination Mods have always been nice and light on the CPU, but equallly light on the bonuses conveyed despite being a "faction" module. Many ship fittings rely on this, Domi Invuln fields on hulks for example.
Keeping the lower fittings and lowered bonuses is also in keeping with the ships that the factions fly. The gruistas fly caldari styled ships, normally ones with robust shield tanks and lots of CPU. The Angels on the other hand fly minmatar styled ships that require a large deal of versatility, and by having modules that are easier to fit, they add to the versatility of fittings. Please retain the fitting values.
Originally by: TWD We suck and Goonswarm are PvP gods.
|
Agock Onie
|
Posted - 2008.04.21 18:46:00 -
[74]
WE STILL NEED AN ANSWER ON THIS!
We are not going away until the fix that was promised is put into play.
Thank you |
Back Again
Caldari Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.04.22 00:46:00 -
[75]
Good luck with this problem guys. I'm not going to post here or in any other forum till these problems are addressed.
I started a thread here in the Game Development Forum when these problems with shield amplifiers were still only on Sisi, I filled a bug report on this issue that time too, I supported the thread in General Discussions and this one here. But now I'm tired and, as I said in the very 1st thread, more than 2 months ago, I'm going to have a break from EVE.
I will look this thread in the next days or weeks in the hopes of CCP Dev Team addressing the issues presented on it. Maybe, if I feel confident in the Devs responses, if any, I can come back again. Yeah, that is my name, Back Again.
Thank you CCP for this great game, I had a lot of fun playing it for more than 2 years and paid my subscription fees smiling, I will always remember EVE as the best MMO. Good luck and best regards.
My thanks to the EVE players too, OFC, cuz without this community EVE would not be what it is, IMHO, and I repeat, the best MMO all around. Cya and fly safe guys and galls.
No signature here, only the bright light of a ship exploding right in front of me... Ohhh, wait, I'm in a pod!! It was my ship!!! |
Damned Force
Minmatar Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.04.22 14:20:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Tonto Auri
Originally by: Damned Force good to know.... but by your balance dont forget that:
base armor resist is higher
Does armor regenerating itself? That's where you wrong. Multiply lower shiled resists by native shield regen and You'll get the right figure to compare against armor resists.
Made u any calculation how much the shield regen is on a non passive tanked ship.........its nothing worth..... |
Agock Onie
|
Posted - 2008.04.22 19:08:00 -
[77]
I, for one, am not going away until I get satisfaction.
Nozh, you flat out said you had the fix. NOW PUT IT INTO PLACE.
You broke it, now fix it!
|
J Valkor
Invicta.
|
Posted - 2008.04.23 19:08:00 -
[78]
Bumb for my A-Type.
|
Liio
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 19:09:00 -
[79]
Dear CCP Nozh, since you are looking at looking at the odd numbers in the lines and shield/armor counterparts, i wanted to present you another possible oversight.
While some of those modules didn't even drop, when only certain deadspace with their loottables were available, the numbers probably speak for themselves.
First to begin with armor repairers, they are all in line with the core-type-a having 30% increased repair-amount and the centus-type-a having 46,25% increased repair-amount at 12,5% increased cap usage, compared to their t2 counterpart. This is consistent from small to large.
Now to the shield boosters. There are quite some oddities here. First X-Large/Large have 20% reduced cycle time, while small/medium ones stay at the same cycle, whatever, not relevant, designed like that. Gist-type-A have through the line -35%,-36,6%,-38,75% and the x-large suddenly -51% cap usage compared to the t2. Here the X-Large seems to be a bit out of line. CPU / Grid is fairly in line for the Gist-type-A, while not as exact as for the armor counterparts. The amount repaired per cycle is increased on the x-large by 3,33% compared to t2, the large only 2,08% and medium and small suddenly a whopping 88,8% / 90%. One might think the large is a bit too low, but medium / small are just ridiculous, though nothing compared to the Pith-A.
Pith-type-A have throughout the line same cap per cyle, cpu & grid all in line. X-Large & Large both increase hp repaired by 30%. Medium and Small ( which afaik only drop since the complex overhaul ) suddenly have 153,33% increase in shield points repaired. Essentially bringing a pithum-a medium booster to the same hp/sec as a gist-a large booster...
As usually i guess this is explained by Core excelling in building inferior afterburners, while pithum/pithii and gistum/gistii build godlike mods that not everyone can have, and armor having the resistance boost anyways...
Not that i mind, switched to shield tanking anyways for npc'ing and never looked back... but its just ridiculous.
|
Agock Onie
|
Posted - 2008.04.28 15:05:00 -
[80]
We are STILL here and we STILL want an ETA.
Give us...INFORMATION! |
|
|
CCP Atropos
C C P
|
Posted - 2008.04.29 00:53:00 -
[81]
As far as I know, these changes are still slated to go ahead. I can't comment on a release date, but once they hit Sisi, you will all be able to try them out and give feedback upon them. Until then, there is nothing to be done apart from wait, I'm afraid.
|
|
Agock Onie
|
Posted - 2008.04.29 13:42:00 -
[82]
Thank you for the response.
Even without an ETA, it is MOST ENCOURAGING and MORALE BOOSTING that we know the devs are still there and still listening.
Thanks |
Agock Onie
|
Posted - 2008.05.06 15:58:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Agock Onie Thank you for the response.
Even without an ETA, it is MOST ENCOURAGING and MORALE BOOSTING that we know the devs are still there and still listening.
Thanks
However we still want INFORMATION :) |
Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
|
Posted - 2008.05.06 16:37:00 -
[84]
So... correct me if I wrong... this thread is all about removing armortank from EVE? |
Jurgen Cartis
Caldari Interstellar Corporation of Exploration Nex Eternus
|
Posted - 2008.05.06 19:00:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Tonto Auri So... correct me if I wrong... this thread is all about removing armortank from EVE?
Nice troll.
This thread is about unnerfing the faction passive shield hardeners to be on par with the passive armor hardeners. You know, the passive shield hardeners that no one uses in PvP (except to plug a single resist hole), because they're all using T2 Invulnerability Fields. Or (more likely) they're armor tanking because they need the midslots. |
Dallas23
|
Posted - 2008.05.11 14:38:00 -
[86]
So has there been anything on this still cause now I am hearing about possible increases to armor tanking ships for the new expansion? Or are shield tankers just going to continue to get nerfed?
|
Lynkon Lawg
Caldari Second Six Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 19:21:00 -
[87]
We have patiently waited for the promised restructure.
We have listed to the words that said we will be given solace in the passive hardeners.
NOW
WE WANT TO KNOW WHEN THIS IS GOING TO BE COMPLETED!!!
Give us the promised changes. Do it now. We have waited long enough, now we demand satisfaction!!!!! |
Efdi
Minmatar Brannigan's Law
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 23:37:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Lynkon Lawg We have patiently waited for the promised restructure.
We have listed to the words that said we will be given solace in the passive hardeners.
NOW
WE WANT TO KNOW WHEN THIS IS GOING TO BE COMPLETED!!!
Give us the promised changes. Do it now. We have waited long enough, now we demand satisfaction!!!!!
There's really absolutely no need to keep bumping this. _______________________________ Yes, I am an alt. No, I can't post with my main; he's forum banned. Yes, I will be happy to smack you with my main when I'm unbanned. |
|
CCP Nozh
|
Posted - 2008.05.20 20:24:00 -
[89]
Hey,
Sorry for not following up properly on the release of these changes, I thought this thread was done and buried.
They're scheduled to be out next patch, the Empyrean Age. If the changes aren't out on SISI already, they'll probably pop in soon.
Nozh Game Designer CCP Games |
|
Vibora BR
|
Posted - 2008.05.22 14:24:00 -
[90]
Would be really nice see the shield tanking worths the investment because right now the armor tanks rule in PVP.
|
|
Daan Sai
HAZCON Inc
|
Posted - 2008.06.06 09:18:00 -
[91]
Any update on these? Nothing in the patch notes for EA mentions the shield amps???
|
Majin82
g guild Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2008.06.07 00:56:00 -
[92]
Can we get a listing of the Boost Amps and there respected Properties.
All I know is I will Cry like a baby if you nerf my very exspensive Gixt X-Type Boost Amp. ------------------------------------- The difference between a Pirate and an Anti-Pirate is that an Anti-Pirate fights ships fitted with guns!
Passive Drake For The Win |
Dallas23
|
Posted - 2008.06.08 11:20:00 -
[93]
Than you Nozh.
I do have a question since you said you needed to revisit alot of modules is there any chance that we may get a list of any of the other ones that you will be changing since the correct to shield is not even being reported in the patch notes
|
Willow Whisp
Sadist Faction
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 00:00:00 -
[94]
Edited by: Willow Whisp on 10/06/2008 00:05:34
Originally by: Dallas23 Than you Nozh.
I do have a question since you said you needed to revisit alot of modules is there any chance that we may get a list of any of the other ones that you will be changing since the correct to shield is not even being reported in the patch notes
I was wondering about this myself. I'm in the middle of moving from Germany to Calif., so i haven't been able to log on to SiSi to check things out, but I noticed these changes didn't make it to the patch notes. Is this an unintentional omission, or are these changes slated for a later patch, or are they not making it in for FW at all?
edit; phear my l33t posting time of 00:00:00 -- this is my sig. |
Noisette Tata
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 20:05:00 -
[95]
I can comfirm that shiled amps have been boosted with this patch. \o/
Of course they forgot to put that in the patch notes AGAIN!! |
Willow Whisp
Sadist Faction
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 00:45:00 -
[96]
Originally by: Noisette Tata I can comfirm that shiled amps have been boosted with this patch. \o/
Of course they forgot to put that in the patch notes AGAIN!!
Oh, Happiness! -- this is my sig. |
Emerald Cortess
Konstrukteure der Zukunft
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 16:25:00 -
[97]
they boosted somethings and nerfed other. As always. (DG-Resistence-Shield-Amplifiers are needing now 10 more CPU. That sucks for me atm and makes them even worthless. They already did cost about 10mio. I think they'll go down now to 2mio ... )
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |