Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ruato
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 13:02:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Ruato on 20/03/2008 13:03:07 Well, amarr got buffed. Nothing wrong with it, but i was wondering if changes were good when we think about caldari ships (read: shield tanked ships).
Lets take raven for example:
In amarr buff, raven lost 10% armor em and 10% shield explosive resist, and gained nothing in return.
Always been crappy against amarr ships (crap resist against em and thermal damage), now its even worse.
So, big question is, should shield tanking ships get some shield EM resist in compensation of losing resists in Amarr love patch? (ie: would it 'break' the game if shield tanking ships would get 20% em shield resist for example).
EDIT: yeah, yeah, im talking mainly about caldari boats in that post, but i mean all ships that are shield tanked (so, minnies dont flame me :p) ---
Get rid of those *bleep*ing secure containers. *bleep*! |
Chinese Chick
Apogee Group
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 13:20:00 -
[2]
No.
|
Ruato
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 13:22:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Chinese Chick No.
No what?
Shield tanked ships shouldnt get more em resist. or Adding EM resist wouldnt break the game.
Reading the post ftw ;) ---
Get rid of those *bleep*ing secure containers. *bleep*! |
Ruah Piskonit
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 13:31:00 -
[4]
Shields have regeneration. . .thats the logic behind the difference. Live with it.
or train Gallente/Amarr and be done with it. The fact that so many people continue to use the Drake/Raven in missions means you are just whining. Stop fying them, and maby there will be a need to change it. ----
|
Ruato
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 14:02:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Ruato on 20/03/2008 14:05:04
Originally by: Ruah Piskonit Shields have regeneration. . .thats the logic behind the difference. Live with it.
or train Gallente/Amarr and be done with it. The fact that so many people continue to use the Drake/Raven in missions means you are just whining. Stop fying them, and maby there will be a need to change it.
Well, that was a load of garbage with nothing to do with original post. Congrats.
Shields always had regeneration, whats it gotta do with amarr patch making shield tanks worse? FYI: Shield regeneration has pretty much zero effect in active shield tanks.
What missions have to do with EM/therm weak shield tanks getting even worse?
Yeah, train other race, thats a brilliant solution to every problem in eve.
EDIT: and i've already trained other race (this toon is gallente/caldari hybrid). So atleast i have a bit of knowledge what im actually talking about :p ---
Get rid of those *bleep*ing secure containers. *bleep*! |
Eleana Tomelac
Through the Looking Glass
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 14:06:00 -
[6]
Your shield EM and thermal resistances didn't change, so the situation between your raven and an amarr ship shooting it is exactly the same as before.
So, you would be crap because you lost 10% in EM armor on a raven? Are you armor tanking your raven? I guess no.
If it's about amarr ships doing 10% more damage on your armor (20% res lost in EM, but it's half EM half thermal when someone is shooting with multifreq or conflagration), I don't see the big change for a raven. When your shield tank is dead, you are dead.
So, your point about having EM compensation for lost Explosive resistance is moot... It would be a nerf to Amarr... -- Pocket drone carriers (tm) enthousiast !
Assault Frigates MK II |
Ruato
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 14:26:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Eleana Tomelac Your shield EM and thermal resistances didn't change, so the situation between your raven and an amarr ship shooting it is exactly the same as before.
Not quite. Weak EM and thermal shield resist so amarr ships can chew through shields quite fast and now we have less armor resist so hp buffer is smaller. Thats what i mean when i say shield tanks got worse.
Quote: So, you would be crap because you lost 10% in EM armor on a raven? Are you armor tanking your raven? I guess no.
Nope, was talking about shield tanks.
Quote: If it's about amarr ships doing 10% more damage on your armor (20% res lost in EM, but it's half EM half thermal when someone is shooting with multifreq or conflagration), I don't see the big change for a raven. When your shield tank is dead, you are dead.
Thats generally how it goes. But hp buffer got smaller against certain damage types, meaning short caldari lifespan in PvP got a bit shorter :)
Poor shield resists and untanked armor is not a good thing.
Quote: So, your point about having EM compensation for lost Explosive resistance is moot... It would be a nerf to Amarr...
It would affect amarr a bit yes, but would the change be a 'nerf'. Shield tanks always been crap against lasers, so overall this change would propably be a good one.
With some base em resist, shields would last bit longer, but it wouldnt make shield tanks overpowered against lasers (resist would still be quite poor because shields also have quite poor base thermal resist).
And there is not that many caldari ships pvp'ing these days, so dunno if we could call this an amarr nerf. ---
Get rid of those *bleep*ing secure containers. *bleep*! |
Damned Force
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 14:29:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Damned Force on 20/03/2008 14:33:14 Yes raven(shieldtankers) lost not big issue against amarr with the -10% em armor and -10% exp shield, but they lost a big against minmatar for example.....
The problem is devs made a wrong change, because they tried to fix a problem and not resolve the reason of the problem....
The reason of the problem is that in pvp the ratio between armor and shield tanked ships is extreme big......
To answer of this devs took away 10% EM on armor to make amarr do more damage, and took away 10% exp because fairness
This caused that minmatar do a lot more damage against shield tankers and amarr do slight more damage on armor tanker.....
What would this change make is, that players would use even slight less shield tanked ships in pvp and so the reason of the problem is not resolved, but increased....
The change would be need here is to make somehow the shield tanked ships be lucrative in pvp......
PS: the shield recharge on a non passive tanked ship is so small, that this is almost(and maybe not almost) not noticeable in pvp, even by high resistance, so if devs think that this can be a reason to have less shield res, than they should begin to play this game
|
Lalita Prestoc
Maelstrom Crew
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 14:32:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Lalita Prestoc on 20/03/2008 14:33:24 Shield tank got worse because your armour lost EM resistance? Sorry but 60% res becomming 50% will cost you maybe one second of life on a shield tanker.
If anything it will help you since even more people will use EANM armour tanks like most Amarr do anyway so you can use exp missiles. Typically exp is lower on armour than EM+therm is on shields.
If anything the -10% exp on shields will hurt you more than -10% em on armour.
|
sdthujfg
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 14:45:00 -
[10]
Haha caldari boost??? Hahaha, yeah right. They are gonna boost one of the most used ships and race over the top? I think not. Good comedy reading though. There is a reason why half the players are flying caldari and its not because they suck.
|
|
Eleana Tomelac
Through the Looking Glass
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 14:45:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Damned Force Yes raven(shieldtankers) lost not big issue against amarr with the -10% em armor and -10% exp shield, but they lost a big against minmatar for example.....
...
The explosive shield resistance reduction affects close to only minmatar and people using explosive drones.
This improved a big time the efficiency of minmatar T2 ammo that is much explosive damage (makes approx 10% improve in barrage, 15% to hail, 13% to quake, 13% to tremor).
It also improved to a lesser extent the EMP ammo damage which does close to half EM and half explosive (remaining is kin), by 10%.
For explosive drones, it's straight 20%, they do only explosive.
PS : my % increase in damage are very approximative for ammo, I didn't take a calculator and didn't make real calculation, only estimated it sstraight) -- Pocket drone carriers (tm) enthousiast !
Assault Frigates MK II |
Damned Force
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 14:52:00 -
[12]
Originally by: sdthujfg Haha caldari boost??? Hahaha, yeah right. They are gonna boost one of the most used ships and race over the top? I think not. Good comedy reading though. There is a reason why half the players are flying caldari and its not because they suck.
U speak about a different thing.... The problem is not pve... 90% caldari ships used in eve are in pve
I donno if u make pvp too, i made pvp in all possible places: 0.0, lowsec, empire wars, empire ganking...
The caldari ships used in pvp are extreme low.... u can see almost just by alliances where carebears need to grab a ship to defend space
|
sdthujfg
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 15:07:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Damned Force
U speak about a different thing.... The problem is not pve... 90% caldari ships used in eve are in pve
I donno if u make pvp too, i made pvp in all possible places: 0.0, lowsec, empire wars, empire ganking...
The caldari ships used in pvp are extreme low.... u can see almost just by alliances where carebears need to grab a ship to defend space
I see plenty drakes, ravens, cerbs, falcons, rooks, rokhs, scorps, caracals and crows in pvp. Wich server are you playing on?
|
Aleranie
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 15:48:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Aleranie on 20/03/2008 15:48:10
Quote: ...is exactly the same as before.
He hit the nail on the head here.
I think it is fairly evident that shield tankers were effected the LEAST in regards to the reductions in relation to Amarr.
Every armor tanking race saw a direct increase in the amount of damage that they take from lasers to their primary hp buffer. Caldari saw a difference only to their secondary hp buffer.
So every other race would have better reason to ask for a boost now, except that the increase for amarr was the point in the first place...
|
Ruato
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 15:48:00 -
[15]
Originally by: sdthujfg I see plenty drakes, ravens, cerbs, falcons, rooks, rokhs, scorps, caracals and crows in pvp. Wich server are you playing on?
I see plenty of useless trolling. Might aswell stop it. ---
Get rid of those *bleep*ing secure containers. *bleep*! |
sdthujfg
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 16:06:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Ruato
Originally by: sdthujfg I see plenty drakes, ravens, cerbs, falcons, rooks, rokhs, scorps, caracals and crows in pvp. Wich server are you playing on?
I see plenty of useless trolling. Might aswell stop it.
Maybe you should state something that is true instead of trolling yourself.
|
Damned Force
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 16:13:00 -
[17]
Originally by: sdthujfg
Originally by: Damned Force
U speak about a different thing.... The problem is not pve... 90% caldari ships used in eve are in pve
I donno if u make pvp too, i made pvp in all possible places: 0.0, lowsec, empire wars, empire ganking...
The caldari ships used in pvp are extreme low.... u can see almost just by alliances where carebears need to grab a ship to defend space
I see plenty drakes, ravens, cerbs, falcons, rooks, rokhs, scorps, caracals and crows in pvp. Wich server are you playing on?
and have u counted how many gallente or minmatar ships are for everi of this caldari ships?
|
sdthujfg
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 16:19:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Damned Force
and have u counted how many gallente or minmatar ships are for everi of this caldari ships?
amount of caldari in pvp > amount of amarr in pvp
If youre claiming that caldari needs boosts because of numbers of ships then amarr will still need both pvp and pve boosts. By huge amounts i might add.
|
Damned Force
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 16:26:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Damned Force on 20/03/2008 16:26:58
Originally by: sdthujfg
Originally by: Damned Force
and have u counted how many gallente or minmatar ships are for everi of this caldari ships?
amount of caldari in pvp > amount of amarr in pvp
If youre claiming that caldari needs boosts because of numbers of ships then amarr will still need both pvp and pve boosts. By huge amounts i might add.
hmm i can use all 4 races ships and in very few situation i use caldari....just ecm ships and crow
i use a lot: omen, sacrilige, curse, abaddon(after change in fleets the apoc), arbitrator.....
but i agree amarr need other boost.... what devs made is not good and faar not enough
|
Ulstan
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 20:07:00 -
[20]
With the buff to the terrible line of Caldari railgun hulls, I think most Caldari ships are ok.
Where we have a problem is with shield tanking compared to armor tanking in PvP. This is a big problem but not a caldari specific one and any fixes should not be caldari centric.
|
|
Ruato
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 20:38:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Ruato on 20/03/2008 20:38:53
Originally by: Ulstan Where we have a problem is with shield tanking compared to armor tanking in PvP. This is a big problem but not a caldari specific one and any fixes should not be caldari centric.
I said in my original post that even if im mainly speaking about caldari and using raven as an example, i mean all shield tanking ships.
Minnies are bit better off though because their T2 ships have quite balanced resists (62.5%, 50%, 40%, 50% sleipnir resists for example), caldari boats have flat 0% EM resist across the board. ---
Get rid of those *bleep*ing secure containers. *bleep*! |
GrandNagus
Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 21:34:00 -
[22]
Lets take your raven as example. With torps it does as much damage as the abaddon with mps and can do 100% explosive damage. The base resistance against exp on amarr ships is 20%. The laser user can have at most about 55/45 therm/em ratio if hes going for closerange damage and thus there wouldn't really be any advantage anymore for the laser user.
Other caldari boats may lose their damage bonus if switching to exp ammunition but still. You can put it as you want but this would be an amarr nerf which doesn't really make much sense given they've just been buffed and all.
Now caldari not used *that* much in pvp (i think you exaggerate a bit here i see lots of caldari ships in pvp) and not having place for pvp mods (though they can fit for full gank + tank as exchange) and other issues raised in this thread may be true. But why should amarr suffer for that instead of solving the actual problems where they are - in the caldari ships?
|
Damned Force
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.03.21 06:51:00 -
[23]
I dont said that amarr dont should get a boost. they should get more boost, because the one they got now was very very few....
I just said that the main problem of amarr issue was not resolved, and even devs dont tried to resolve the main problem... And till this is so, amarr cant get enough boost....
|
Chinese Chick
|
Posted - 2008.03.21 07:31:00 -
[24]
No as in Caldari don't need a buff... they have very good tanking capabilities and are in line with other races.
Caldari can select their dmg type, Amarr can't. Amarr excell in PvP, Caldari suck (in general). Shieldboost has relatively short cycles, armor relatively long cycles... 10% more or less won't break the game, but also won't add a damn thing.
If they do, the next thread will be "Amarr needs some lovin' (blah blah blah)"
PS: I do read the post... just think it's a rather useless idea.
CC
|
Jaketh Ivanes
|
Posted - 2008.03.21 15:43:00 -
[25]
No, Caldari should not get any compensation for loss of EM/Exp. Because all ships have lost equal amounts of shield and armor resist, it would not make sense to only give Caldari a "compensation". Gallente have lost just as much af Caldari, as have Minmatar and Amarr. Caldari can switch their damage to EM or Explosive to take advantage of the recent nerf/boost, where Gallente can't.
As I see it, Gallente are the only ones who are entitled to a "compensation", as they cannot take advantage of the recent nerf/boost, but since they already do good damage and have loads of drones, there really aren't any reason to give them any "compensation".
|
Eleana Tomelac
|
Posted - 2008.03.21 15:52:00 -
[26]
When will we see EM missile spamming ships everywhere?
May it be EM or explosive, missile ships can take advantage of it or continue hitting in kinetic which is the most common damage because of gallente, caldari and minmatar (most projectile ammo does kin damage) having either ammo types or bonuses on kin.
By the way, the devs stated that they reduced the resists because if they only boosted lasers, EM drones and missiles would still not be used at all.
So, a raven could run on half EM half explosive missiles in a hope to hit hard any kind of tanks hard and gains 20% damage on the bad half of the missiles against the current tank attacked. -- Pocket drone carriers (tm) enthousiast ! Please visit your user settings to re-enable images. Assault Frigates MK II |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |