EVE Search - Things that will ALSO need balancing following the speed nerf:

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Things that will ALSO need balancing following the speed nerf:

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Merin Ryskin Peregrine Industries	Posted - 2008.07.30 01:54:00 - [1] Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 30/07/2008 02:00:29 CCP, there is much better way to do this. You're making way too many changes at once, instead of starting with the obvious solutions (nerf snakes, nerf polycarbons, boost precision heavy missiles), and it's going to cause major balance issues to areas of the game that have nothing to do with speed tanking. PLEASE don't use this as another place to argue about whether speed needs to be nerfed or not. Please keep the discussion on the subject of side effects of CCP's "nerf everything, all at once" strategy compared to a more gradual approach. Let's get a nice long list of them so CCP realizes just how much they're changing. 1) Blaster ships. As discussed in the other thread, they will have major issues getting into range and tracking their targets if the web and 7.5km scram changes are made. 2) Missiles. They're probably going to be too good against smaller targets, and people are going to demand a nerf. 3) Lasers. Just like missiles, they're going to hit extremely well now that speeds are slower, and probably going to make blasters and projectiles obsolete. 4) Tracking in general. Speeds on non-nano setups are also going to be massively changed, which means every turret in the game is going to need to be looked at to make sure it's doing the right damage. 5) ECM and long-range setups in general. Now range is even more of a defense, since it's much harder to get into range of a target with your slower speed. Expect tons of complaints about long-range ECM ships and sniper battleships. 6) Tracking disruptors. With webs nerfed, these are going to hurt close-range ships even more than they used to. 7) Interceptors and interdictors. These are going to be suicide to fly, since 90% of all PvP ships with a drone bay are carrying Warrior IIs. 8) Interdictor/anchored/HIC bubbles. It now takes even longer to burn out of one, meaning a significant boost to bubbles. Do we really want this? 9) Arazu/Lachesis. Say hi to the new nano-Rapier. Damps are supposed to have a weakness against ships that can get in close, now there's no way to ever get within lock range of an Arazu/Lachesis with your MWD shut down at 30km. Please add more as you think of them.
P'uck	Posted - 2008.07.30 04:45:00 - [2] drones.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2008.07.30 04:49:00 - [3] Originally by: P'uck tracking fixed it for you but yeah :P drones but mostly the way they track, thus tracking. Originally by: Dapanman1 Terrible idea, you're an idiot
Lilith Velkor Minmatar Oyster Colors	Posted - 2008.07.30 04:55:00 - [4] If the mwd reactivation delay makes it to TQ (I seriously hope not!), all ships that used to pulse the mwd in order to maintain their engagement range will need rethinking. My main concerns are stabber and vagabond here, these two really rely on being able to pulse the mwd, its way too easy now to completely nullify their speed advantage if you wait for them to shut mwd off.
Lilith Velkor Minmatar Oyster Colors	Posted - 2008.07.30 04:57:00 - [5] Originally by: MotherMoon fixed it for you but yeah :P drones but mostly the way they track, thus tracking. Even drone speeds may need to be looked at.
d3vo The Space BorderLine United For 0rder	Posted - 2008.07.30 05:04:00 - [6] CCP is like Big Brother. They know about everything that goes on. Their only problem is fixing stuff. #2 is already in effect... #3 is umm...wrong? Lasers have the worse tracking amongst the three types #4 what? #7 I believe defenders and smartbombs are the solution. __________ \(^.^)/
Lilith Velkor Minmatar Oyster Colors	Posted - 2008.07.30 05:09:00 - [7] Originally by: d3vo #3 is umm...wrong? Lasers have the worse tracking amongst the three types Base tracking vs. typical (desired) engagement range Originally by: d3vo #4 what? Not so sure about this one either, but not that unlikely on the other hand. Originally by: d3vo #7 I believe defenders and smartbombs are the solution. Smartbombing interceptors? Defenders... seriously defenders? Like, the defender missiles aka single most broken thing in Eve?
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2008.07.30 05:12:00 - [8] Originally by: Lilith Velkor Originally by: d3vo #3 is umm...wrong? Lasers have the worse tracking amongst the three types Base tracking vs. typical (desired) engagement range Originally by: d3vo #4 what? Not so sure about this one either, but not that unlikely on the other hand. Originally by: d3vo #7 I believe defenders and smartbombs are the solution. Smartbombing interceptors? Defenders... seriously defenders? Like, the defender missiles aka single most broken thing in Eve? that's what he means they need to be looked at so every interceptor is running a rack of them while tackling. Originally by: Dapanman1 Terrible idea, you're an idiot
VicturusTeSaluto Metafarmers	Posted - 2008.07.30 05:14:00 - [9] Originally by: d3vo #3 is umm...wrong? Lasers have the worse tracking amongst the three types Try actually flying combat sometime. Lasers have excellent tracking/range. An amarr BS doesn't have a lot of trouble hitting nanoships the way it currently stands.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2008.07.30 05:16:00 - [10] Originally by: VicturusTeSaluto Originally by: d3vo #3 is umm...wrong? Lasers have the worse tracking amongst the three types Try actually flying combat sometime. Lasers have excellent tracking/range. An amarr BS doesn't have a lot of trouble hitting nanoships the way it currently stands. sure ignoring when they go back to full speed and run away at 8000m/s are out of range before your next shot and such. sure one could say if they run you win but... that's no fun :P Originally by: Dapanman1 Terrible idea, you're an idiot
Matalino Gallente Ki Tech Industries	Posted - 2008.07.30 05:19:00 - [11] 10) Blockade Runners and other agility fitted Industrials - without mass modification modules/rigs, there is only one stacking nerf'ed attribute that can be fitted for. This will result in 30%-40% (possibly more) increase in time to warp.
P'uck	Posted - 2008.07.30 05:59:00 - [12] Edited by: P''uck on 30/07/2008 06:00:51 Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: P'uck tracking fixed it for you but yeah :P drones but mostly the way they track, thus tracking. You ain't fixin nothing. Just for shits and giggles I slapped 3 navcomps on my phoon (unrealistic, but imagineable on a domi in a gang) and launched a buncha t1 valks, which went around 4.6k Fully skilled t2 push over 5k I bet...
Fearless Kill Garoun Investment Bank	Posted - 2008.07.30 06:43:00 - [13] warriors IIs will catch EVERYTHING now. muahhahaha in other news.... according to this thread... ccp after nerfing nano's... you need to nerf everything else to put nanos back into the untouchable stage
TZeer BURN EDEN	Posted - 2008.07.30 07:40:00 - [14] Originally by: Merin Ryskin Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 30/07/2008 02:00:29 CCP, there is much better way to do this. You're making way too many changes at once, instead of starting with the obvious solutions (nerf snakes, nerf polycarbons, boost precision heavy missiles), and it's going to cause major balance issues to areas of the game that have nothing to do with speed tanking. PLEASE don't use this as another place to argue about whether speed needs to be nerfed or not. Please keep the discussion on the subject of side effects of CCP's "nerf everything, all at once" strategy compared to a more gradual approach. Let's get a nice long list of them so CCP realizes just how much they're changing. 1) Blaster ships. As discussed in the other thread, they will have major issues getting into range and tracking their targets if the web and 7.5km scram changes are made. 2) Missiles. They're probably going to be too good against smaller targets, and people are going to demand a nerf. 3) Lasers. Just like missiles, they're going to hit extremely well now that speeds are slower, and probably going to make blasters and projectiles obsolete. 4) Tracking in general. Speeds on non-nano setups are also going to be massively changed, which means every turret in the game is going to need to be looked at to make sure it's doing the right damage. 5) ECM and long-range setups in general. Now range is even more of a defense, since it's much harder to get into range of a target with your slower speed. Expect tons of complaints about long-range ECM ships and sniper battleships. 6) Tracking disruptors. With webs nerfed, these are going to hurt close-range ships even more than they used to. 7) Interceptors and interdictors. These are going to be suicide to fly, since 90% of all PvP ships with a drone bay are carrying Warrior IIs. 8) Interdictor/anchored/HIC bubbles. It now takes even longer to burn out of one, meaning a significant boost to bubbles. Do we really want this? 9) Arazu/Lachesis. Say hi to the new nano-Rapier. Damps are supposed to have a weakness against ships that can get in close, now there's no way to ever get within lock range of an Arazu/Lachesis with your MWD shut down at 30km. Please add more as you think of them. Quote: More Missile tests After requests I tested Cruise damage against T1 frig, Inty and dictor... ( Used minmatar since that is what my alt can fly ) The frigs and dictor got no gangbonuses and no implants. Ship firing is using T2 cruise with max skills and +3% implants. Ammo used is EM, 10% resists on the T2 ships, 0% in T1 And the results: Dictor (Sabre) Orbit 19km @ 2750m/s-----T1 Missile 79,2 HP-----T2 Precission 205 HP Orbit 9km @ 2200m/s-----T1 Missile 180 HP-----T2 Precission 323 HP Approach @ 3314m/s-----T1 Missile 26,5 HP-----T2 Precission 99,3HP As you can see, best use is doing drivebys dropping bubbles, trying to go close and the ship is not agile enough or fast enough to keep the target there for long. Was surprised it took that much damage while orbiting @ 19km. Might need to look into the stats on the dictors. T1 Frig (Vigil) Orbit 19km @ 4370m/s-----T1 Missile 1,6 HP-----T2 Precission 12,6 HP Orbit 9km @ 3575m/s-----T1 Missile 15,3 HP-----T2 Precission 69,2 HP Approach @ 5187m/s-----T1 Missile 0,1 HP-----T2 Precission 1,3 HP Cant say this are bad, not at all.... T2 Inty (Claw) Orbit 19km @ 4527m/s-----T1 Missile 0,5 HP-----T2 Precission 7,0 HP Orbit 9km @ 3709m/s-----T1 Missile 6,2 HP-----T2 Precission 46,7 HP Approach @ 5428m/s-----T1 Missile 0,0 HP-----T2 Precission 0,5 HP Sooo, only real damage it takes are in 9km range doing 3,7km/sec. Add some bonuses and the ship will easily be pushed aboue 4km I think. Damage is fine, except maybe on the dictor.
Jim Raynor Caldari Shinra	Posted - 2008.07.30 07:46:00 - [15] Originally by: Fearless Kill warriors IIs will catch EVERYTHING now. muahhahaha in other news.... according to this thread... ccp after nerfing nano's... you need to nerf everything else to put nanos back into the untouchable stage heh.. kinda have to agree. I must say after testing on sisi my Torp Raven with webifier drones and javelins does a pretty good job at wiping the floor with Ishtars. But alas, if I dare say a Caldari ship can kill anything 1,000 people will scream to nerf it until it's as fearsome as a gerbil. That being said I hope they manage to balance it out to where everything is fair but to nerf everything so that speed is king again would rather be defeating the entire purpose of the nerf in the first place. ------ I'll make a sig later.
Euriti Gallente SniggWaffe	Posted - 2008.07.30 07:59:00 - [16] Edited by: Euriti on 30/07/2008 07:59:21 Originally by: TZeer Originally by: Merin Ryskin Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 30/07/2008 02:00:29 CCP, there is much better way to do this. You're making way too many changes at once, instead of starting with the obvious solutions (nerf snakes, nerf polycarbons, boost precision heavy missiles), and it's going to cause major balance issues to areas of the game that have nothing to do with speed tanking. PLEASE don't use this as another place to argue about whether speed needs to be nerfed or not. Please keep the discussion on the subject of side effects of CCP's "nerf everything, all at once" strategy compared to a more gradual approach. Let's get a nice long list of them so CCP realizes just how much they're changing. 1) Blaster ships. As discussed in the other thread, they will have major issues getting into range and tracking their targets if the web and 7.5km scram changes are made. 2) Missiles. They're probably going to be too good against smaller targets, and people are going to demand a nerf. 3) Lasers. Just like missiles, they're going to hit extremely well now that speeds are slower, and probably going to make blasters and projectiles obsolete. 4) Tracking in general. Speeds on non-nano setups are also going to be massively changed, which means every turret in the game is going to need to be looked at to make sure it's doing the right damage. 5) ECM and long-range setups in general. Now range is even more of a defense, since it's much harder to get into range of a target with your slower speed. Expect tons of complaints about long-range ECM ships and sniper battleships. 6) Tracking disruptors. With webs nerfed, these are going to hurt close-range ships even more than they used to. 7) Interceptors and interdictors. These are going to be suicide to fly, since 90% of all PvP ships with a drone bay are carrying Warrior IIs. 8) Interdictor/anchored/HIC bubbles. It now takes even longer to burn out of one, meaning a significant boost to bubbles. Do we really want this? 9) Arazu/Lachesis. Say hi to the new nano-Rapier. Damps are supposed to have a weakness against ships that can get in close, now there's no way to ever get within lock range of an Arazu/Lachesis with your MWD shut down at 30km. Please add more as you think of them. Quote: More Missile tests After requests I tested Cruise damage against T1 frig, Inty and dictor... ( Used minmatar since that is what my alt can fly ) The frigs and dictor got no gangbonuses and no implants. Ship firing is using T2 cruise with max skills and +3% implants. Ammo used is EM, 10% resists on the T2 ships, 0% in T1 And the results: Dictor (Sabre) Orbit 19km @ 2750m/s-----T1 Missile 79,2 HP-----T2 Precission 205 HP Orbit 9km @ 2200m/s-----T1 Missile 180 HP-----T2 Precission 323 HP Approach @ 3314m/s-----T1 Missile 26,5 HP-----T2 Precission 99,3HP As you can see, best use is doing drivebys dropping bubbles, trying to go close and the ship is not agile enough or fast enough to keep the target there for long. Was surprised it took that much damage while orbiting @ 19km. Might need to look into the stats on the dictors. T1 Frig (Vigil) Orbit 19km @ 4370m/s-----T1 Missile 1,6 HP-----T2 Precission 12,6 HP Orbit 9km @ 3575m/s-----T1 Missile 15,3 HP-----T2 Precission 69,2 HP Approach @ 5187m/s-----T1 Missile 0,1 HP-----T2 Precission 1,3 HP Cant say this are bad, not at all.... T2 Inty (Claw) Orbit 19km @ 4527m/s-----T1 Missile 0,5 HP-----T2 Precission 7,0 HP Orbit 9km @ 3709m/s-----T1 Missile 6,2 HP-----T2 Precission 46,7 HP Approach @ 5428m/s-----T1 Missile 0,0 HP-----T2 Precission 0,5 HP Sooo, only real damage it takes are in 9km range doing 3,7km/sec. Add some bonuses and the ship will easily be pushed aboue 4km I think. Damage is fine, except maybe on the dictor. That is after resists + you are using CRUISE MISSILES. Try fitting AMLs. It's like me trying to want to hit interceptors with 200mm railguns.
Archimedes XVII	Posted - 2008.07.30 09:42:00 - [17] BLOCKADERUNNERS Merely months after being un-nerfed to once again give them a chance to survive bubble camps and heavy interdictors through speed and agility... they're being re-nerfed in exactly the same way!!!! We'll all be better-off flying the disposable t1 versions again, sigh.
Deva Blackfire D00M.	Posted - 2008.07.30 09:49:00 - [18] Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 30/07/2008 09:54:12 Adding to what been said: 1. Fighters (too fast) 2. Cap ships speeds: new webs dont stop em from moving back into pos shield. Other than that might think about pos shield hugging mechanics / station hugging mechanics (longer aggro timers and stuff) 3. missile defences (defenders DO NOT work, id like to reduce missile ships effectiveness same way i can TD turrets) 4. precission light missile cerbs = they create sphere of invulnerability from ceptors that has 90km radius
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises	Posted - 2008.07.30 11:19:00 - [19] Why in hell peopel keep sayign that lasers track wel and blasters track poorlyl? Compare the tracking of a MEga PUlse against a NEutron blaster for god sake. Its HUGE advantage for blasters. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Darth Felin	Posted - 2008.07.30 11:27:00 - [20] Originally by: Kagura Nikon Why in hell peopel keep sayign that lasers track wel and blasters track poorlyl? Compare the tracking of a MEga PUlse against a NEutron blaster for god sake. Its HUGE advantage for blasters. You are forgeting a HUGE advantage for pulse lasers in range. There is no disscussion about point blank fighting but about taklers at high orbit and other "short to mid range" fighting. You can not compare them to blasters at this situation but you should do it with rails. Pulses can melt most tacklers even now. After speed reduction they will became just deadly.
Chi Quan Perkone	Posted - 2008.07.30 12:55:00 - [21] Originally by: Kagura Nikon Why in hell peopel keep sayign that lasers track wel and blasters track poorlyl? Compare the tracking of a MEga PUlse against a NEutron blaster for god sake. Its HUGE advantage for blasters. tangential velocity is much higher when a target is close (blaster range), at about 3 times the range (comparing mega pulses to neutrons) that speed has to effectively be 3 times as high to get the same bad tracking, so a cruiser orbiting an antimatter neutron blaster cannon at 3 km with 1000m/s would have to be compared to a one orbiting a MF mega pulse at 18km (theoreticaly 20, but i'll just take the slower number) at a whooping 6 km/s. isn't this the issue why we are all rabbling here now. ---- You don't have to like it - I don't blame you for not liking it.
Euriti Gallente SniggWaffe	Posted - 2008.07.30 14:14:00 - [22] Originally by: Kagura Nikon Why in hell peopel keep sayign that lasers track wel and blasters track poorlyl? Compare the tracking of a MEga PUlse against a NEutron blaster for god sake. Its HUGE advantage for blasters. You should stop posting about blaster issues again. Because you do not have a clue.
Lilith Velkor Minmatar Oyster Colors	Posted - 2008.07.30 18:09:00 - [23] Originally by: Euriti That is after resists + you are using CRUISE MISSILES. Try fitting AMLs. It's like me trying to want to hit interceptors with 200mm railguns. Indeed, massive levels of FAIL detected. These numbers show how broken things are atm, BS size missiles even hitting a interceptor on mwd, so much for "missiles and drones should intercept ships of their own size class".
Lilith Velkor Minmatar Oyster Colors	Posted - 2008.07.30 18:10:00 - [24] Originally by: Kagura Nikon Why in hell peopel keep sayign that lasers track wel and blasters track poorlyl? Compare the tracking of a MEga PUlse against a NEutron blaster for god sake. Its HUGE advantage for blasters. Hmm, did you bother to check the ranges for these guns? Obviously not...
Vengal Seyhan Sten Industries	Posted - 2008.07.30 18:56:00 - [25] Edited by: Vengal Seyhan on 30/07/2008 19:01:43 Originally by: P'uck Edited by: P''uck on 30/07/2008 06:00:51 Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: P'uck tracking fixed it for you but yeah :P drones but mostly the way they track, thus tracking. You ain't fixin nothing. Just for shits and giggles I slapped 3 navcomps on my phoon (unrealistic, but imagineable on a domi in a gang) and launched a buncha t1 valks, which went around 4.6k Fully skilled t2 push over 5k I bet... Easily. T2 goes 20% faster, so that's an estimated speed of about 5.7K/sec. And then you get rigs. Drone Speed Augmentors - great fun on the few times I've plugged one in. I actually used them on an Arazu once; they work great on Valkyries. Haven't been on Sisi to test, but I'm thinking one major role for an Ishtar post nerf is as an anti Inty and frigate platform - stick it somewhere at range, plug in drone speed mods and rigs, fill the drone bays full of warriors (with 50% more hitpoints and damage to boot) and just obliterate anything small and not-quite fast enough. (Which would be everything) Edit : Hell, what am I saying? > 5k/sec? Plug in the modules and fill up with Valkyries. Keep a few Warriors aside for those HG Snake Inty pilots that can actually go fast enough the Valks don't catch him. More than 2x the DPS and a hell of a lot more resistance to being popped by puny frig guns :D Oh, and keep a few other types of drones just in case you need to mess with other types of ship, too. The Ishtar was always intended as a rear-areas support HAC before the nanoing started. It'll just go back to that... though the CPU is really gimped, which is a bit crap.
TZeer BURN EDEN	Posted - 2008.07.30 19:07:00 - [26] Originally by: Lilith Velkor Originally by: Euriti That is after resists + you are using CRUISE MISSILES. Try fitting AMLs. It's like me trying to want to hit interceptors with 200mm railguns. Indeed, massive levels of FAIL detected. These numbers show how broken things are atm, BS size missiles even hitting a interceptor on mwd, so much for "missiles and drones should intercept ships of their own size class". So in other words, large turrets should not be able to hit any frig/inty at all, even if the transversal velocity is 0m/sec?
Vengal Seyhan Sten Industries	Posted - 2008.07.30 19:21:00 - [27] Originally by: TZeer Originally by: Lilith Velkor Originally by: Euriti That is after resists + you are using CRUISE MISSILES. Try fitting AMLs. It's like me trying to want to hit interceptors with 200mm railguns. Indeed, massive levels of FAIL detected. These numbers show how broken things are atm, BS size missiles even hitting a interceptor on mwd, so much for "missiles and drones should intercept ships of their own size class". So in other words, large turrets should not be able to hit any frig/inty at all, even if the transversal velocity is 0m/sec? Personally, yeah I'd like to see that, reduced to near to zero on average for long range, large guns. It's faintly absurd that a salvo of 42.5cm Railgun shell (or 1.4 metre calibre arty) shells splatter an inty at 100km because it isn't moving sideways. Now a lucky hit (ie wrecking), that might be a different story. Wrong place, wrong time, and bam massive hunk of lead through the front windshield of your inty. :D NB - 425mm is close to the size of the guns on the Missouri.
Carniflex Caldari StarHunt Fallout Project	Posted - 2008.07.30 20:54:00 - [28] It would be good to take a look at blocade runners. Perhaps make it's inhenerent bonus also apply against warp scrams - at least against first one.
Praesus Lecti Gallente Blueprint Haus Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2008.07.30 21:22:00 - [29] Edited by: Praesus Lecti on 30/07/2008 21:22:57 Bombs (Concussion, Electron, Scorch, Shrapnel) which are already quite worthless will be even less useful with more ships fitting ABs. Void and Lockbreaker will see in increase in usefulness because fewer ships will be able to escape the area of effect in time. Overall though, the cost of the bombs still precludes widespread use. Probing. Having high skills plus the correct implants will make it even easier to catch non-cloaking ships warping between safespots. Slower align times and slower acceleration means more time spent at the safespot. I'm not suggesting that these two things need rebalanced but they are being affected. To what degree they are affected remains to be seen.
Reem Fairchild Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2008.07.31 01:09:00 - [30] Originally by: TZeer Originally by: Lilith Velkor Originally by: Euriti That is after resists + you are using CRUISE MISSILES. Try fitting AMLs. It's like me trying to want to hit interceptors with 200mm railguns. Indeed, massive levels of FAIL detected. These numbers show how broken things are atm, BS size missiles even hitting a interceptor on mwd, so much for "missiles and drones should intercept ships of their own size class". So in other words, large turrets should not be able to hit any frig/inty at all, even if the transversal velocity is 0m/sec? No guns will ever miss anything if transversal is exactly 0 and the target is inside optimal range. Originally by: CCP Wrangler We are pleased to aim! Or was that the other way around?

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.