| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kira Novia
   |
Posted - 2008.07.29 17:03:00 -
[1]
I would like some information from CCP directly related to the Gallente blaster-boats, specifically the Deimos & Astarte.
With the MWD nerf and WEB nerf, what exactly are you looking at to keep the blaster-boats in line like they currently are?
And as far as the Deimos, with the MWD changes, are you possibly looking at giving the Deimos a different bonus to the MWD?
With the web changes, how exactly are blaster boats supposed to keep the enemy within range (given blasters have such a short range to begin with)?
Im logging back into SiSi to evaluate this further. I am just curious to know what the Dev's position is regarding specifically, the blaster-boats?
|
Asume Nosami
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 19:54:00 -
[2]
Good question regarding the Deimos...
|
Draahk Chimera
Caldari
Interstellar eXodus
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 20:09:00 -
[3]
Linkage
|
Kira Novia
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 20:40:00 -
[4]
Alright that answers my question in regards to the Deimos...
But I would still appreciate a Dev's viewpoint on the MWD+Web modifications and how those are going to effect blaster boats (Deimos, Astarte, Brutix, Hyperion) and whatnot. Because as it stands right now, we need the MWD's to close the distance (sometimes they're a good ways away) and the web to hold them in place because our guns have such a short range.
How do the Devs plan to fix this?
|
Trent Nichols
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 20:41:00 -
[5]
After playing around on Singularity a while, I'm a bit concerned about blasters myself and I don't think that other thread had enough answers.
Having a complete tacking in the new warp scram is great if you manage to drop out of warp right on top of your target otherwise you have to MWD within range and that's where the troubles begin.
My blaster Megathron/Hyperion now takes far longer to reach its, now lower, full speed. By the time I get within range (if I'm not dead or my prey hasn't warped off) I am having to spend cap boosters to avoid going dry.
The Deimos fares even worse. Out of four tries, I was only to do any significant damage to another ship once and that was because no one was firing on me. Twice I didn't get within firing range.
The Deimos takes too long to close the gap and is too easy to hit while doing so.
Possible solutions:
Increase one or all three for blasters: range, tracking, damage. Make the, now much greater, risk blaster boats take while trying to get into range worth it.
Reduce or eliminate the signature radius increase. A charging blaster boat is easy enough to lock and hit as is.
Implement an agility nerf for MWDs instead of a speed nerf. I saw this elsewhere on the forums. It would make MWDs as good as always for closing a gap or running but they would no longer be useful while orbiting a target.
Logistics deployables mean less grind and more pewpew! |
Kira Novia
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 20:45:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Kira Novia on 29/07/2008 20:46:42
Yes.
You're right when you say no Dev has addressed this issue specially in a reply.
CCP, would you please provide a detailed description of how you feel this patch will effect blaster boats and how you plan to address said issues which will be caused by this patch?
Details, please. Only after we know what YOU are thinking can we offer suggestions and test these boats out specifically.
Please.
As it stands right now, fromthe tests I've run on SiSi thus far, this patch will seriously gimp, for lack of a better term, the Gallente blaster platform.
|
Solomon XI
Caldari
Black Scorpion Navy
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 22:31:00 -
[7]
So... Cmon CCP... Kira is asking a fair question. Let's have it. 
|
Kira Novia
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 14:22:00 -
[8]
Still hoping for an official reply from CCP.
|
Larkara
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 15:14:00 -
[9]
My take on this is "Interpretive tactics" the bonus on the Deimos are intended to keep the ship MWD friendly, as fitting one has some rather notable drawbacks, and Hybrid weapon capable.
we CHOSE to put blaster on it, but in truth if you look at just about every HAC bonus in the game, its a range buff. My interpretation of this is that they want you to fit longer range weapons and operate these platforms as if they where more like battle ships. OR! (before you make your foolish reactions) Its intended to make it blaster friendly without requiring significant fittings to overcome the short comings (pun intended) of blaster weaponry.
In short, I say this, we fit what we fit onto ships because we choice to, not because the developers tell us to. Tactics change when conditions change, and right now conditions are changing.
Not to offend, but I think the legit question you have here is this - Since MWD's drawbacks are becoming more and more apparent how dose CCP plan to address this in relation to all the Thorax platform ships (any any other ships with MWD bonus).
I will agree that its slightly unfair that other ships in there class's have NON MWD bonus that will not get addressed as a result. however the MWD is the root of all evil according to what CCP is up to so who knows, thus the question.
|
Petrak O'Karr
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 15:47:00 -
[10]
hahaha bitter tears right back at you all... now that you realise that all the "whines" were not nano whines but serious concern that the changes are too far reaching.
suggest you all start training missles.
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 16:07:00 -
[11]
Blasters really do need something.... Maybe an optimal range incease of a good deal and then remove falloff range from them completely?
which is crazy I know but then blasters could fight in longer ranges just be easier to get away from or something...
but something needs to be done..
another crazy idea! Blasters could have a slowing effect?
 Originally by: Dapanman1
Terrible idea, you're an idiot
|
Galliana Foresta
Gallente
Fleeting Moments of Insanity
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 17:44:00 -
[12]
Bump.
Changes are fail.
Glad I crosstrained Amarr tbh.
HIRING|KB|PRESS
|
FlameGlow
Caldari
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 17:52:00 -
[13]
Originally by: MotherMoon
Blasters really do need something.... Maybe an optimal range incease of a good deal and then remove falloff range from them completely?
which is crazy I know but then blasters could fight in longer ranges just be easier to get away from or something...
but something needs to be done..
another crazy idea! Blasters could have a slowing effect?
That's good ideas for boosting Caldari hybrid boats ;)
_____________
I don't care what is nerfed, as long as it's not my "undock" button. |
Kira Novia
|
Posted - 2008.08.01 21:06:00 -
[14]
Bumping my own topic.
Come on, CCP. As a paying customer, I want answers.
|
Kira Novia
|
Posted - 2008.08.03 02:25:00 -
[15]
Still waiting...
|
Zantei
|
Posted - 2008.08.03 10:57:00 -
[16]
Yup, same with small frigates. The fact that webbing doesn't help much any more makes void s ammo useless.
That's a serious drop in max damage for small tech II blasters.
------------------------------------------
|
Andreya
Direct Intent
|
Posted - 2008.08.03 11:06:00 -
[17]
why does everyone seem to forget the hyenas MWD as well? whats their solution to that one
not to mention the 3% sig rad reduction is a joke, (should be built into the base stats) and .... woo hoo,,,, target painting. why dont you guys do a check on tranq to see how many hyenas actually have a painter fitted
_________________________________________________________
Only once you've lost everything, are you free to do anything.
Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes -Navigator ([email protected]) |
Draahk Chimera
Caldari
Interstellar eXodus
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2008.08.03 11:11:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Andreya
why does everyone seem to forget the hyenas MWD as well? whats their solution to that one
not to mention the 3% sig rad reduction is a joke, (should be built into the base stats) and .... woo hoo,,,, target painting. why dont you guys do a check on tranq to see how many hyenas actually have a painter fitted
[irony] Maybe people will fit painters II now when misiles will insta-wtf-omg-bbq everything. 1 torp = 1 dead ceptor days are back. Yayyy. [/irony]
|
leich
Amarr
Fritter Transport Co.
|
Posted - 2008.08.03 11:20:00 -
[19]
I though the idea of the spead patch was to try and make more people use AB i dont know the ships you are using but couldnt you just fit a AB instead of MWD ?
If not just ignore this post.
|
Trent Nichols
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.08.03 16:21:00 -
[20]
On sing, an afterburner actually works quite well if you manage to drop out of warp within 10km of your target. Otherwise (typically) you are cooked.
I'm still waiting on a dev response to this issue. I read through threads early on until I got tired of reading. Has anyone spotted a Dev comment out there?
Logistics deployables mean less grind and more pewpew! |
Esmenet
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.08.03 17:42:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Trent Nichols
I'm still waiting on a dev response to this issue. I read through threads early on until I got tired of reading. Has anyone spotted a Dev comment out there?
There seems to be a complete lack of response from anyone from CCP about this speed change despite tons of feedback. Hopefully that means they realise they made a huge blunder and are desperately trying to find some way to save this mess.
Vote against the nano nerf! |
Kira Novia
|
Posted - 2008.08.04 03:27:00 -
[22]
I need this thread back on track please.
CCP, please answer my question from the first post.
I will NOT allow this topic to die until I have my answers.
|
Nyphur
Pillowsoft
|
Posted - 2008.08.04 03:32:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Nyphur on 04/08/2008 03:33:40
Originally by: Esmenet
Originally by: Trent Nichols
I'm still waiting on a dev response to this issue. I read through threads early on until I got tired of reading. Has anyone spotted a Dev comment out there?
There seems to be a complete lack of response from anyone from CCP about this speed change despite tons of feedback. Hopefully that means they realise they made a huge blunder and are desperately trying to find some way to save this mess.
When CCP don't give a conclusive response to an issue like this, it's usually because they don't want their response to colour the discussion. People take what devs say extremely seriously and the only way to get a decent focussed discussion about the issue is to do exactly what Nozh did - post in the blaster thread saying that he's reading and wants more discussion. Not giving any more hints as to what direction development is going in is intentional, a way to avoid limiting discussion.
Everyone wants a conclusive response but to ask for it now is premature. The debate is still ongoing and I highly doubt CCP have had enough time to adequately analyse the thread and discuss it internally, much less draw conclusions and test alternatives. In short, they haven't announced anything because they haven't decided anything yet. There's nothing to announce and when there is, they'll probably post another blog.
Pillowsoft - Join the Pillowsoft Gallente Militia, get free ships and support. |
Kira Novia
|
Posted - 2008.08.04 03:50:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Nyphur
Edited by: Nyphur on 04/08/2008 03:33:40
Originally by: Esmenet
Originally by: Trent Nichols
I'm still waiting on a dev response to this issue. I read through threads early on until I got tired of reading. Has anyone spotted a Dev comment out there?
There seems to be a complete lack of response from anyone from CCP about this speed change despite tons of feedback. Hopefully that means they realise they made a huge blunder and are desperately trying to find some way to save this mess.
When CCP don't give a conclusive response to an issue like this, it's usually because they don't want their response to colour the discussion. People take what devs say extremely seriously and the only way to get a decent focussed discussion about the issue is to do exactly what Nozh did - post in the blaster thread saying that he's reading and wants more discussion. Not giving any more hints as to what direction development is going in is intentional, a way to avoid limiting discussion.
Everyone wants a conclusive response but to ask for it now is premature. The debate is still ongoing and I highly doubt CCP have had enough time to adequately analyse the thread and discuss it internally, much less draw conclusions and test alternatives. In short, they haven't announced anything because they haven't decided anything yet. There's nothing to announce and when there is, they'll probably post another blog.
Or perhaps they've already decided and are going to screw us like they usually do...
But you make a valid point. A very logical one, too.
I'll let this thread die ... for now.
|
rValdez5987
Amarr
Warped Mining
|
Posted - 2008.08.04 03:55:00 -
[25]
I killed a pilgrim in my myrmidon the other day. The fight left me at 4% structure, and was thoroughly enjoyable. If this is a preview of things to come on TQ, then I will enjoy this.
Note: My myridon was full t2 fit, with 3 aux nano rigs for tank. Pilgrim took 22k dmg before it went down, it had an armor tank fit. He ran outta cap about 10 seconds before I did :)
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |