Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Temitten
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 13:19:00 -
[91]
Originally by: Amalthea Green
ok .. can you tell me the new auguror stats? i know the old one, but not how has need nerfed.
Take at look at the first post in this thread:
Augoror Navy Issue: We removed a high-slot, reduced the cpu and powergrid a bit. But overall we preserved its old role, itÆs basically a damage sponge. A lot of hit points, slower than the rest of the tier 1 ships but if it gets its claws on you itÆs only a matter of time.
Special ability: 10% bonus to Medium Energy Turret Capacitor Usage and 10% bonus to Armor Hitpoints per level.
|
Ambien Torca
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 13:22:00 -
[92]
Faction cruisers have been way too expensive since HAC/Recon lines were introduced. How about you finally cut prices down to 1/4th and level playing field with vets and newer players a bit? 240k LP for a cruiser is a complete waste, and so is 90k. 20-30k and maybe they¦d see some use.
|
Vibora BR
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 16:06:00 -
[93]
So now we already have two nice reasons to don't join FW.
Lack of reward. Extremely high prices for faction stuff.
Please, where is the third?
|
Mahn AlNouhm
The Bastards
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 16:24:00 -
[94]
Edited by: Mahn AlNouhm on 26/05/2008 16:24:05 The Navy Caracal is the second ship in recent memory where CCP added a hard point, but taken away grid to fit anything on it. Last one was the Raptor, and we all know what a smash hit that change has been. Can anyone come up with a plausible explanation as to why this is? . . .
|
Ishina Fel
Synergy. Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 16:47:00 -
[95]
Meh... guess I won't get a Navy Omen after all. Ship's still nice, but I can get two fleet fitted, rigged battleships for the price that's gonna be asked for a unfitted tech1 cruiser. Nope, sorry. Will go watch em in the next alliance tourney instead. And fly a Zealot for less than a third of the money.
|
Ezekiel Sulastin
Central Research Nexus
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 17:24:00 -
[96]
So first you make the new cruisers epic crap, then make them cost nearly as much LP as the Tier 2 ones?!
Good going CCP, here's hoping whomever is running the faction cruiser introduction isn't in charge of balancing everything else. ---- WTB Armor Nerf Hardener II, 10^100 isk OBO |
Azuse
The Brotherhood Of The Blade Pure.
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 18:08:00 -
[97]
Well if you listen to the last dev blog you'll hear that rewards are something they're still watching an examining. I've also seen comments on wanting to make them more common in pvp (only a good thing for everyone) so it's really a case of deciding how common and then either tweaking after watching sis for couple weeks or waiting and watching tranquillity then sorting it in a later patch.
In either case guessing from our point is view is ultimately futile. Still they're out of the reach of the players that faction warfare is largely aimed and and that's the real shame atm. -------------------------
|
Noisette Tata
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 18:44:00 -
[98]
Edited by: Noisette Tata on 26/05/2008 18:46:49 Edited by: Noisette Tata on 26/05/2008 18:46:13 CCP Nozh, does anyone review the changes you make to this game. You already F***ed up shield amps and now this. BTW, when are you going to fix shield amps like you promised? Logistics ships with combat bonuses WTF. Adding a low slot to the Fleet Stabber for armor tanking. Do you even play this game?? That change will only make fleet stabbers even faster and more tracking. They will be faster then vagabonds now and will likely hit more often. Adding a launcher to the Navy caracal but removing power grid at the same time. The navy caracal was the only caldari ship that could fit HAMs reasonably (the cerb sure in hell cant). Now you expect us to be able to fit an extra launcher with less powergrid. I really wish CCP had designers who actually played the game and understood how the game mechanics work.
P.S. Fix shield amps already!!!!
|
Ral Ulgur
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 19:52:00 -
[99]
I'm expecting something close to the following balance:
Tier 2 faction cruisers perform about as well as a tech 2 cruiser, but will cost a bit more. They have the advantage that they will be able to enter complexes that tech 2 cruisers are not allowed in.
The tier 1 faction cruisers I expect to to perform in between high end tech one cruiser and tech 2 cruiser and end up having a market value of 20m to 30m. No more.
I hope it will be implemented as such. Maybe CCP can also take the opportunity to fix the LP stores and balance some offers.
|
Ezekiel Sulastin
Central Research Nexus
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 20:48:00 -
[100]
Originally by: Ral Ulgur The tier 1 faction cruisers I expect to to perform in between high end tech one cruiser and tech 2 cruiser and end up having a market value of 20m to 30m. No more.
At the 90k LP Fendahl put forth last page, they will be a LOT more than 20m isk. At this point, they are broken. ---- WTB Armor Nerf Hardener II, 10^100 isk OBO |
|
Ashina Sito
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 21:13:00 -
[101]
To be fair.
IF the FW missions pay in LP you should be gaining it faster then doing normal missions. So the cost would be less. Although you would not be gaining ISK doing those missions (tags instead of bountys, no ISK payout). So if they increased the LP x4 then the cost of the navy ships is x4 less... as long as your not using tags which is were your ISK would come from.
It does look like the only people that could afford to use the Navy ships in PvP would be older players who could afford, and have the skills to fly, HACs. HACs are better. cost less and easier to obtain. So why fly Navy ships?
Younger players that would fly the navy ships becuase they don't have the skills to fly a HAC won't fly the navy ships ether. They will be to costly and the newer player couldn't afford them.
Who will use these things?
|
Ral Ulgur
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 21:17:00 -
[102]
Originally by: Ezekiel Sulastin
Originally by: Ral Ulgur The tier 1 faction cruisers I expect to to perform in between high end tech one cruiser and tech 2 cruiser and end up having a market value of 20m to 30m. No more.
At the 90k LP Fendahl put forth last page, they will be a LOT more than 20m isk. At this point, they are broken.
Sorry, that's was meant to be my point. I agree however, that I was not very clear.
PS: Sorry, I misclicked and reported your post :( I hope some forum mod will have a good laugh at me at least...
|
Sphynx Stormlord
Snuff inc
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 21:57:00 -
[103]
Edited by: Sphynx Stormlord on 26/05/2008 22:04:34 Edited by: Sphynx Stormlord on 26/05/2008 21:57:53
Originally by: CCP Fendahl The ships will be initially only be available as direct ship exchange offers requiring: a cruiser nexus chip + the T1 ship it's based on + 90K LP. The equivalent offer for the high-end faction cruisers require a slightly more expensive T1 ship and 240K LP.
The problem with doing this is that no one in their right mind will have been accepting the current faction cruiser offers at 240k lp's. Instead, they will have been accepting the offer for the bpc, at 100k lp and 20 mil. Build costs for a cruiser are not that high.
I guess you might even be able to check the stats on which lp offers are being accepted, and which are not. Might be worth checking, before making balance decisions based on something that possibly might as well not exist.
I could be wrong, though, eve players might be even less smart than I think.
People are currently offering vexor navy issues at 89 mil. If they paid 100k lp + 20 mil + 5 mil build costs for them, that would imply that they are getting 64 mil for their 100k lp's. A similar isk/lp ratio on 90k lp + 2k lp (for the nexus chip) would lead to around 61 mil ask price for the tier 1 faction cruisers.
|
OneSock
Crown Industries
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 09:28:00 -
[104]
I wouldn't accept less the 1000 isk per LP, so the price is too high for my liking.
Still doesn't feel right that the Navy Aug. gets +1 high and *+2* low slots over the Navy Exeq. You even lose a bonus (RoF) to provide the high slot. Makes no sense.
You know what fit will be used for that 7 low Aug. Yep. Nano. :/ groan.
|
Forge Lag
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 11:15:00 -
[105]
The other navy ships besides Augoror have build in nano and overdrive, without the stacking penalty. That is two slots right there. They are virtually forced to go nano. That does not work for blasterboats, sure, but they have bonus base stats that easily cover the missing slots.
I still wonder who found it interesting experiment to break the design paradigm on Caldari ships and introduce pre-nanoed AND range-bonused missile boat, aka ship that can go fast without losing dps and most of all ship that can at the same time outrange the opponent and control range. If that gets through I start to support minnie whines about artillery as all the artificial limitations on that weapon system stop making sense.
|
Minsuki
Metafarmers
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 18:45:00 -
[106]
My initial reaction to the new cruisers was, "lol mining bonuses and navy?" Then it went to "Oh my god, these are awesome!" Now it's "Great, even more trophy ships. Like we didn't already have enough of those " Moreover, looks like the navy exeq doesn't do anything. You can't 1600 plate it(Not enough grid), you can't nano it(lousy range on blasters, lousy tracking on rails), and you can't kill nanos in it. (With your lows filled with speed and damage mods, maybe a DC II, and your mids taken, you can catch nanos, but can't kill them before they get you, while if you tank it would won't catch them) Meanwhile, navy caracal gets a launcher, then gets its PG nerfed. So, is this the same genius that gave us the "boost" for the raptor? (Which, by the by, is bottoming out near mineral prices and still not selling, last I checked)
tl;dr **** costs too much, navy exeq sucks, and caracal change makes no sense.
|
Ulstan
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 20:56:00 -
[107]
Originally by: CCP Fendahl
Originally by: Cortana AI
Originally by: CCP Nozh We wanted to release a full line of cheaper more affordable faction cruisers,[/i]
Ok so I'm just curious when you say cheaper and more affordable how much are we talking about? I'm not asking for a set market price just a guestimate of how they will compare to the 80+mil faction cruisers now?
The ships will be initially only be available as direct ship exchange offers requiring: a cruiser nexus chip + the T1 ship it's based on + 90K LP. The equivalent offer for the high-end faction cruisers require a slightly more expensive T1 ship and 240K LP.
Erm, many thanks for giving us a heads up on the cost, but that is much much too expensive
240k LP is half the cost of a faction BATTLESHIP. These are cruisers, for crying out loud. The faction costs should be about 4-5x what the T1 hull costs, same ratio as we have for faction battleships.
Paying essentially 200m for a CRUISER is just a little.. erm...
|
Havok Pierce
D00M.
|
Posted - 2008.05.29 00:04:00 -
[108]
Originally by: CCP Nozh ...Although weÆre not big fans of split weapon system...
Could you do something about the horrible split bonuses on Roden boats sometime then?
Originally by: CCP Wrangler There's a Community petition category??
|
Tsu'ko
Valley Forge Wrath.
|
Posted - 2008.05.29 10:07:00 -
[109]
Originally by: Eleana Tomelac Navy vexor needs some real dronebay.
While 100Mbit/s is already cool firepower, having only 100m3 of dronebay totally gimps it.
Flying 4 heavies is cool firepower just as the bonuses of the other navy ships are. But having no spares is death and means no versatility.
It really needs a dronebay upgrade, even +25m3 would be a huge improvement for allowing 5 light drones and 4 heavies to be carried. A very good dronebay would be around 200m3, and it doens't feel so high when we have the arbitrator with already 150m3.
oh yeah let's do that, gallente best at drone DPS AND Bandwidth.. they already said amarr would be king at bandwidth, and gallente at drone DPS.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
The Amarr are the tanking and ganking floating rods of gold. Amarr simply sit there and charge their lasers, secure in their knowledge that God is on their side.
|
JS LiamElms
Quantum Industries RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.05.29 10:26:00 -
[110]
ok.. i not following this too much.... but, on most mods that are faction based, they are pretty much similar but with variant on which has better attributes than T2. and a lot more iskies. So why are we trying to get a faction crusier inbetween T2 and T1? and to be cheaper than t2?
if it would follow suit with other faction items, it should be similar and or better in some of the attributes than t2?
random example, would be Neutron Blaster Cannons
T2 / Faction
Activation = 18.2/14.56 Power = 2363/2250 Optimal = 7200/6300 Damage mod = 4.2/4.375
note// the rest of the parameters are the same.
anyway, sorry if i derailed this thread.... just got me thinking to why so many people are going on about costs. Lets face it, when your doing a crusier only plex/mission or whatever.... your faction BS is not going to be able to go in! so in real terms, the cost to have the BEST ship to access the plex.
Anyway, to me... a faction crusier, should be better in most ways than T2. I mean, don't these scientist use the T2 variant to develop their research? or do they happen to forget they are developing a substandard ship while all the commercial entities are developing t2 versions? |
|
Mikal Drey
ORIGIN SYSTEMS Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.05.29 11:22:00 -
[111]
hey hey
are they ONLY going to be available through the LP system or will they ALSO be available as "free" from the COSMOS agents that gave and are still giving out the last set ?
Many Thanks
|
Roemy Schneider
BINFORD
|
Posted - 2008.05.29 15:51:00 -
[112]
humm... i'm afraid, these gaps between the "tiers" of faction cruisers doesn't lead to versatility; so the scythe is kinda half a stabber in every way, but also (roughly) half the price.
i'll only pick the scythe because i've been flying an aggressive scimitar (yes... i know...) non-stop for about a year now.
but in terms of "only tech 1 ships may enter" - if one is supposed to spend >100mil on any ship, one tends to go full monty just to be on the safe side/get the best out of it. the scythe doesn't excel at anything, not even the praised speed: the stabber has considerably less mass and the low slots to back that up.
plzplz, the scythe needs some tiny edge to stick out. something like 75m¦/50Mbps drones to underline the phoon's heritage or significantly less signature to justify a passive shield tank vs amarr and their evil pulse lasers (add a med slot while you're at it, if that's really the way of tanking you had in mind). or less mass than the stabber at least to counter the effects of a plate if that kind of tanking was supposed to be preferred, while remaining slightly agile. - putting the gist back into logistics |
Terianna Eri
Scrutari
|
Posted - 2008.06.01 03:15:00 -
[113]
Sorry for the necro but two issues:
1) I would give a kidney if these were priced such that they could be had for 20-30 million apiece
2) Can it be confirmed that all existing Augoror Navy Issue ships will be transformed into Omen Navy Issue ships when FW hits TQ? __________________________________
|
Aravel Thon
|
Posted - 2008.06.01 04:07:00 -
[114]
Originally by: Terianna Eri
2) Can it be confirmed that all existing Augoror Navy Issue ships will be transformed into Omen Navy Issue ships when FW hits TQ?
Why the **** would they do that? the Omen navy issue and augoror navy issue are two distinctly unique ships. They are not phasing out the current faction cruisers in game. They are simplying adding 4 new ones
|
Terianna Eri
Scrutari
|
Posted - 2008.06.01 04:10:00 -
[115]
Originally by: Aravel Thon
Originally by: Terianna Eri
2) Can it be confirmed that all existing Augoror Navy Issue ships will be transformed into Omen Navy Issue ships when FW hits TQ?
Why the **** would they do that? the Omen navy issue and augoror navy issue are two distinctly unique ships. They are not phasing out the current faction cruisers in game. They are simplying adding 4 new ones
Originally by: CCP Nozh If we had simply downgraded the Augoror to match the tier 1 faction cruisers in strength, weÆd have devalued the ship as it exists on Tranquility. To tackle this problem, the existing Augoror Navy Issue is being replaced by a new Omen Navy issue and the Augoror Navy Issue is being created as a new type. If people are unhappy with the new Omen Navy Issue and would rather want the Augoror Navy Issue, they should be able to sell the Omen and easily afford an Augoror Navy Issue, once the prices settle.
Basically I want to make sure that I'm reading CCP Nozh's post correctly. __________________________________
|
Viktor Fyretracker
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.06.01 06:02:00 -
[116]
Originally by: Wadaya
Originally by: CCP Nozh
Osprey Navy Issue: Fast, missile spamming, not bound to the kinetic missile damage. It out damages the caracal with every damage type except for kinetic. It doesnÆt have very good defenses and goes slightly slower than the Exequror Navy Issue.
Special Ability: 5% bonus to Assault, Heavy Assault and Heavy Missile Launcher rate of fire and 10% bonus to Heavy Assault and Heavy Missile velocity per level."
Let me see if I understand this correctly. The Navy version of a mining and logistic support ship (shield transporting) has been changed into Mini Caracal? I guess the real boost is, Mini Caracal with a bigger drone bay? Crazy.
Wad
WW2 style Q-Ship almost. looks like an Osprey but it bites back!
|
Venkul Mul
|
Posted - 2008.06.01 11:04:00 -
[117]
Originally by: Ashina Sito To be fair.
IF the FW missions pay in LP you should be gaining it faster then doing normal missions. So the cost would be less. Although you would not be gaining ISK doing those missions (tags instead of bountys, no ISK payout). So if they increased the LP x4 then the cost of the navy ships is x4 less... as long as your not using tags which is were your ISK would come from.
It does look like the only people that could afford to use the Navy ships in PvP would be older players who could afford, and have the skills to fly, HACs. HACs are better. cost less and easier to obtain. So why fly Navy ships?
Younger players that would fly the navy ships becuase they don't have the skills to fly a HAC won't fly the navy ships ether. They will be to costly and the newer player couldn't afford them.
Who will use these things?
Almost certainly LP gain ratio in the militia will be lower, not higher.
First, they are new missions so they start from the lowest point;
Second, the success ration will be way lower that in normal missions as the timer is way shorter and beside the NPC opposition you will have PC opposition.
|
Siona Windweaver
|
Posted - 2008.06.01 18:22:00 -
[118]
Edited by: Siona Windweaver on 01/06/2008 18:29:10 Edited by: Siona Windweaver on 01/06/2008 18:28:08 Edited by: Siona Windweaver on 01/06/2008 18:26:11 About Faction Cruiser prices, from todays (still ongoing) live chat with devs;
Quote:
<MMORPGBot> zamav asks, "Do you plan to adjust faction cruiser prices to make them more accessable?"
Greyscale> With regard to faction ship prices, when we implemented the LP Store last winter we made a conscious decision to leave the ship offers exactly as they were, because they were considered a "staple crop" if you will and we didn't want to mess around with them at the same time as adding a new system
Greyscale> Now things have settled down, revisiting those offers is something we are considering, as they haven't been changed in some time. The current round of new ships are essentially using the old model still, but as above there are plans afoot to come up with a new pricing model here
I hope this doesnt mean we will have to bear with current prices for the next to expensions before any changes
About LP or general rewards;
Quote: <MMORPGBot> wells asks, "What rewards are we to expect from Factional Warfare, And what benefits are there to rising in ranks?"
<Greyscale> The biggest bonus from the ranks is that every time you rank up you gain a fairly substantial chunk of Faction standing. This is the main way to achieve Faction standing in the FW mechanics, so it's fairly important :)
<Greyscale> On the subject of rewards in general, the current target for the initial release is to have a reasonable but not huge reward mechanism in place. The biggest bonus is probably going to be the amount of NPC dogtags you can pick up, which are needed for a lot of LP Store exchanges and are in pretty short supply for a lot of people right now
<Greyscale> On top of that, you'll get any payouts from missions, and of course the loot of those you kill!
<Greyscale> The rewards area though is something we're definitely keeping a very close eye on, and it's likely that we'll ramp them up further as time goes on. We're anticipating that a lot of older and more experienced players are going to want to have a play after the initial release, and we don't want to be giving rich experienced PvPers lots of free cash! Once the system settles down and we figure out exactly where the balances lie we may well tweak things
<Greyscale> But initially at least, the biggest payoff should be the fact that the PvP is fun. If you're having fun with the game then that should be its own reward!
It seems to me, we'll see pretty poor rewards, and when hype goes down, CCP will probably forget it or say "there are more important things to do first" when asked about rewards.
PVP itself shouldn't be a reward, It should be a tool for having fun and making progress in game.
If you see PVP action as a reward, than there is something definitely wrong with you
|
PR0D AK71V
Mad Hamster Infestation
|
Posted - 2008.06.02 00:44:00 -
[119]
ccp should give a discount in LP stores for fw participants based on corp/char rank as a reward. In the end of the day, we're gonna be fighting for those factions, aren't we ?
|
Ruth Menewai
|
Posted - 2008.06.02 02:17:00 -
[120]
Originally by: CCP Nozh
Stabber Fleet Issue:
Special Ability:10% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret tracking speed per level.
wtf? That's what I bought my Cynabal for. Now this gets 10% per level over the 7.5% the Cynabal gets?
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |