| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Big Al
Stoat's Ultimate Carebear Adventure
   |
Posted - 2008.07.30 14:57:00 -
[31]
Would love to see this.
|
Bad Borris
20th Legion
Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 14:58:00 -
[32]
ppl need an armageddon month to assess the changes tbh. 
|
Dark Flare
Caldari
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 16:38:00 -
[33]
 Originally by: Bad Borris
ppl need an armageddon month to assess the changes tbh.
QFT. |
Xofii
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 18:26:00 -
[34]
This is being tested in small scale at sisi atm, need moar ppl though. First try, hac gang won. Second run with the groups reversed will soon commense.
|
Trent Nichols
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 18:33:00 -
[35]
This is an excellent idea and Im glad to see a dev expressing interest in it. The only thing that dissapoints me is that dev test runs of this kind should have been made standard practice long ago.
Id like to see the devs set up and run several test scenarios with players for every major change they make.
I can fly quite a few of the ships impacted by this nerf so I will definitely be there if able.
Logistics deployables mean less grind and more pewpew! |
Trojanman190
D00M.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 18:50:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Xofii
This is being tested in small scale at sisi atm, need moar ppl though. First try, hac gang won. Second run with the groups reversed will soon commense.
Status + who was who?
|
Malachon Draco
eXceed Inc.
eXceed.
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 18:57:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Xofii
This is being tested in small scale at sisi atm, need moar ppl though. First try, hac gang won. Second run with the groups reversed will soon commense.
I was in both tests. First fight ended with HACs holding the field. Few remarks though, in the first minute about 5 HACs got killed while trying to get out of the bubble, and the HAC gang was significantly outgunning the defence gang. Once the HACs got out of the bubble they could take on the defence gang which was pretty light on firepower.
Second test, HACs jumped into a sniper BS gang. HACs were sniper fitted. HACs made it through the bubbles reasonably well because there was only 1 huginn (who was primary) and little else for support. HACs then engaged at 80km and basically got slaughtered by the snipers. Also a few extra remarks on that: HAC gang had only 1 scimitar which made repairing difficult and the sniper BS gang was heavy on Amarr, which have better tracking on average already. Sniper BS gang also seriously outgunned HAC gang.
Overall I would still say that the nerf has been too much. If HACs get 1, maybe 1.5kms more topspeed and better acceleration they will be able to maneuver better, but I think without making them as invulnerable to heavy guns as they are now. Currently I'd estimate that HACs are 2 to 2.5kms slower than on TQ, if you halve that for the normal HACs (so the HACs that go 4 to 5kms on TQ go 3-4kms after the patch, the situation is salveagable for nanofleets, but they will certainly take more losses in any case unless the enemy are totally unprepared.
|
Toman Jerich
Ars ex Discordia
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 19:17:00 -
[38]
So when you say "HACs won", do you mean in terms of ISK lost?
If the defenders lose a couple of insured BS and BC, that costs a lot less than losing several HACs.
Can you provide some more details about the tests, like how many were on each side, what ships they were in, and what got blown up on each side?
|
Malachon Draco
eXceed Inc.
eXceed.
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 19:38:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Toman Jerich
So when you say "HACs won", do you mean in terms of ISK lost?
If the defenders lose a couple of insured BS and BC, that costs a lot less than losing several HACs.
Can you provide some more details about the tests, like how many were on each side, what ships they were in, and what got blown up on each side?
I dont have exact fleet make-ups.
But the first fight was about 12 defenders vs 12-14 HAC. Defenders had 2 rapiers, 1 or 2 BS, think 2 BCs, 1 or 2 CBCs, maybe a ceptor or two. Something like that. HAC gang was heavy. At least 3 muninns, some zealots, ishtars, 2* cerberus. On jumpin, the cerberuses died fast after getting tackled (there was a big bubble on the gate and the rapiers got some of the nanoships). In terms of shiplosses, the HACs won and practically wiped out the defensive gang. If you had to do it by isk, it was probably closer to a draw, if you estimate that 5 nano-HACs cost 200m each. On the other hand the CBCs and rapiers were not cheap either.
Second fight there was about 15 in the HAC gang and same in the sniper gang. HAC gang had a claymore, a ceptor a scimitar and mostly snipery HACs. Defensive gang was about 15 as well, with a Huginn, Lachesis and the rest I think BS, I'd estimate about 7-9 Amarr BS and 1 or 2 of each other race. That fight started with the HACs jumping in and MWD aligning to the sun out to 80-100km and primarying the huginn and then the lachesis. Huginn died fast, not sure if the HAC gang took many losses at the start, didn't seem that way. Once the snipers got to focusfiring, the HAC gang was dead meat. Too little repping and heavy sniper DPS. Speedtanking didn't work and the HACs got slaughtered.
|
Toman Jerich
Ars ex Discordia
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 20:16:00 -
[40]
Thanks for the information. Seems like an interesting set of tests.
|
Xofii
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 21:05:00 -
[41]
In the three first tests the gang that won all fights were the same gang.
First gang, all range fitted hacs 100km engagement area, enough got out of range from defenders and hacs won. Equal numbers
2nd gang: Defenders had 4-5 locus apocs and some bs + support and 5 bubbles, a proper tq anti nano gang. Nanos were slaughtered. Eual numbers.
3d gang: nano vs nano. Not equal numbers and unfair advantage for engagement, pretty much tq like. Team 1 slaughtered basically. Was never a fair fight, noteworthy was that range was more advantageous and also that hac vs hac gangs are still fun to fight.
4th test: Hacs vs bc camp. Hacs are close range nanos, bc's with dual logistics and recon support. Hacs were mauled. Team 1 lost.
5th test: Team 1 decides to hotdrop defenders, caps are jumped right on top of pervious bc gang, forgone conclusion and not really relevant for speed testing, allbeight fun.
|
Zarthanon
Gallente
TEAMSTERS
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 03:11:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Dark Flare
Originally by: Keitaro Baka
I'd be happy to either proof fast ships can still work or nano ships no longer work (red, blue, i'm colour impaired anyways, drop me in any team) if this will be done.
As for the other side of this, this is obviously made to show nano ships are now broken beyond use, sadly the nano***s (and use the term to indicate the group that actually are nano***s, not just anyone going fast) don't see the damage they do. So while you might be able to show the devs what you want them to see, you will never see what the rest of us have seen.
Vagabonds doing 8km/s on a basic cheap set up is not balanced, they can now do 5km/s, deal with it.
WTS: Clue.
A cheap Vagabond does not do 8km/s. Polys, T2 MWD, T2 Overdrives will do 5.xkm/s.
All of EVE does not have snakes.
I have snakes. But they still don't make much of a difference because I probably won't be able to have my +5% to speed and Shaqil's speed enhancer and my damn Snake Omega in at the same time.
I like pie. |
leg it
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 09:26:00 -
[43]
Any more tests planned for today?
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |