| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
704
   |
Posted - 2012.03.26 20:10:00 -
[31] - Quote
Change its bonuses to HAMs only. 
Rifterlings - Small gang lowsec combat corp specializing in frigates and cruisers (all races, not just Rifters!). US Timezone veterans and newbies alike are welcome to join. Come chat in the "we fly rifters" in-game channel. Free fitted frigates for members! |
Fredfredbug4
Kings of Kill
EVE Animal Control
137
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 20:49:00 -
[32] - Quote
If the Tengu gets nerfed, CCP will handle it the way they handle most nerfs.
The Tengu will be nearly unusable and everyone will start flying Lokis.
Then the Loki's will be nerfed and everyone will start flying Proteuses |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
704
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 21:41:00 -
[33] - Quote
Fredfredbug4 wrote:Proteuses
*Protei
Rifterlings - Small gang lowsec combat corp specializing in frigates and cruisers (all races, not just Rifters!). US Timezone veterans and newbies alike are welcome to join. Come chat in the "we fly rifters" in-game channel. Free fitted frigates for members! |
Tsai Ashitaka
Aether Ventures
Surely You're Joking
7
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 22:38:00 -
[34] - Quote
Voith wrote:Ines Tegator wrote:PotatoOverdose wrote:Would anyone care to link a source for this alleged tengu nerf? There is no source cause there is no nerf. What there IS, is a discussion of ship balance from fanfest, where they state that t3 is ideally more versatile but roughly equal in power to navy faction ships, and t2 ships are more powerful at any given task but specialized. It's a discussion, that's all. Look up the fanfest feeds. Why is it that "not surpassing T2" ships only applies to the Legion and Proteus? Loki's and Tengu's Designers had no problem obsoleting their T2s. (Whose drone subsystem is actually inferior to T1 Vexor/Arb) I really can't imagine how much you were dropped on your head as a child to be able to spout this line.
Yes, because we need caldari ships that are worse than the eagle and cerberus. |
Mfume Apocal
Origin.
Black Legion.
372
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 03:03:00 -
[35] - Quote
Cerb isn't bad. |
Sinigr Shadowsong
Imperial Guardians
The Aurora Shadow
2
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 07:16:00 -
[36] - Quote
Fredfredbug4 wrote:If the Tengu gets nerfed, CCP will handle it the way they handle most nerfs.
The Tengu will be nearly unusable and everyone will start flying Lokis.
Then the Loki's will be nerfed and everyone will start flying Proteuses
They will never nerf Loki, it's brown afterall. |
Meditril
T.R.I.A.D
Defiant Legacy
55
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 08:50:00 -
[37] - Quote
I really do not see what's the problem with Tengu's. I see them dieing on regular basis even if they are pimped to hell. They are really fun to catch and they really motivate everyone to get on the kill mail. So usually it is really no problem to simply and slowly blob them once you have the first point on it. |
Angsty Teenager
Sinister Elite
Black Legion.
49
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 19:48:00 -
[38] - Quote
It doesn't really make sense for them to want T3's to be in between navy cruisers and T2 in terms of ability. A number of T2 cruisers are nigh completely useless, (see Cerberus/Eagle) and others cost ineffective because a battlecruiser can do their job better (Sacrilege). They just aren't used at all really
Unless they want to make T3's a useless ship class, they need to look into rebalancing T2 ships first. And then, even after that, if they want to make T3's less powerful than T2 ships, they need to reduce the price (nobody is going to fly a 500mil ship that is worse than a 150mil ship, and fills the same role), make the flexibility of T3's readily apparent, (like allowing for subsystem swaps on the fly), and remove the skill point loss
I seriously hope they don't nerf T3's, because in my opinion the way they are right now is perfectly fine, with the exception of the legion who desperately needs a buff to it's laser subsystem in terms of dps
As far as reasons for nerfing T3's go, which seem to be either that 100mn AB fits are too strong, or that T3's are too good at missioning (I guess this is really the tengu only), I think that both complaints arise not from the T3 ship class itself but from a side mechanic
In the case of 100mn AB ships, the issue isn't the T3's, it's the gang boosters. If you take any ship, give it loki and tengu(or legion) bonuses, it will seem OP, without exception. I mean, you can make a dual rep thorax that costs 20mil, does ~500dps, tanks around ~600 (or more overloaded I think), and goes 1800m/s non overloaded. Should we nerf thoraxes? No. And if you take the same 100mn AB ship and take away it's gang boosters, suddenly it's not very good. It's still decent because it's fit with faction mods and the like, but it's mobility is greatly compromised
Also, I don't think gang boosters should be nerfed either, but that is a separate issue
In the case of tengu's being pretty much the goto ship for mission runners nowadays, I blame this on the fact that the battleship sized weapon systems for caldari suck. Torps have terrible range and literally cannot hit anything (I mean, seriously, there are 5 target painter golem fits out there CCP, probably should look at making torps actually useful), and cruise missiles are useless compared to heavy missiles because their extra range (outside of 100km) is useless in pretty much all scenarios, and the marginal extra dps you get is mitigated by the fact that the missiles do less damage to the same size target
So yea. Please don't make my tengu(s) as useful as a navy eagle (or navy cerb).
Edit: More or less the thorax fit I was talking about. And this doesn't even include pirate implants/faction mods, as you would see on any self-respecting 100mn AB tengu.
http://i.imgur.com/Ndotd.jpg |
Parsee789
Immaterial and Missing Power
74
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 02:45:00 -
[39] - Quote
^ Agreed with above. The Tengu only looks good, because of how horrible the rest of caldari line up is.
When was the last time you really saw anyone using a Raven for PVP? How many times is it used compared to other Battleships?
Who in world the flies the lolcerberus. By the time your missile hit the far away target, the target will have warped out. Its inferior to the Drake for more damage and lower cost.
The Tengu is more favorable to use that the Caldari Battleships, simply because Cruise Missiles are lols for PVP and torpedoes aren't either. And Caldari Capitals are pretty much failures next to Minmatar - less reason to train Caldari BS to V.
The Tengu is good because Cruisers are used and trained more than ****** Caldari Battleships - Scorpion is exception.
Heavy Missiles actually work, the rest are weak and/or broken. Torpedoes requires tons of support, training, and specialized ships to get to even work right. |
Mfume Apocal
Origin.
Black Legion.
378
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 02:47:00 -
[40] - Quote
Man, the Cerb isn't that bad. Why does everyone keep saying it is? |
|
|
Angsty Teenager
50
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 03:06:00 -
[41] - Quote
Because HAM's are bad without a web/TP on the target and the Cerb has low tank as is without dropping one of it's slots for a TP. And using HAM's is pretty much the only viable thing to do on the Cerb because if you don't, your range bonus goes to waste as the Cerb has a targeting range of 100km and an effective range of 170km with all V skills and HM's w/ scourge fury in. Even if it could target out that far, missiles aren't really that viable for sniper platforms for obvious reasons (flight time), and assuming an engagement range of under 100km the drake is cheaper, has more tank, and does more dps than a cerb.
Particularly if you consider a nano drake, you do more dps, have more tank, less fitting issues, less cap issues, roughly the same speed, and drones and a web (or 2) to deal with frigs. |
Tikera Tissant
24
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 09:41:00 -
[42] - Quote
To be honest I don't see any reason to nerf the tengu at all.
For a ship which cost 3 or maybe 4 times the cost of the T2, and with the dying skill penalty, the ship is right where it should be.
The T2s are just aren't as good as they should be, and I don't see a reason to nerf the T3 to be below a bad ship because the bad ship is... bad.
But I do think that the other T3s need to be similar in the versatility.
Proteus for example is pretty crap for PvE (without 100 AB and blasters, the dps is just horrid), but close contact PvP it does great.
The loki and legion are somewhere in the middle, and I would love to see them buffed a bit (and the proteus being better in PvE). |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
965
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 09:44:00 -
[43] - Quote
Fredfredbug4 wrote:If the Tengu gets nerfed, CCP will handle it the way they handle most nerfs.
The Tengu will be nearly unusable and everyone will start flying Lokis.
Then the Loki's will be nerfed and everyone will start flying Proteuses
Add that we're not used at all to see Minmatar ships ruling almost everywhere and aspect of the game, indeed Loki is in need of a buff. I don't care the only one I can't fly is Legion (yet) but it's not even a problem. |
Viribus
Love Squad
Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
33
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 01:08:00 -
[44] - Quote
They should just buff the damage subsystems of the other T3s to be roughly in line with a Tengu's. The tengu's combined damage and ROF bonus works out to 100% dps increase over unbonused launchers. The other T3s have to make do with a 50% increase to DPS (yes the loki's 37.5% RoF reduction works out to 50% more dps).
Then maybe CCP can think about fixing the multitude of other things wrong with T3s (like the Legion's weird slot layouts, useless drone sub, semi-useless neuting sub, the Proteus' underpowered drone sub, etc.) but they'd probably end up doing more harm than good
EDIT: Also my theory regarding the perception that 100mn Tengus are OP are due to idiots flying nothing but cookiecutter shield battlecruisers and don't realize the value of recons, bonused webs, heavy neuts, logis, TPs, or any of the many things that severely mess up 100mn AB fits. Because, spoilers, 100mn ABs are a direct counter to flavour-of-the-year shield BC/hac fleets. |
Roosterton
Syndicalis Immortalis
339
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 02:11:00 -
[45] - Quote
Quote:yes the loki's 37.5% RoF reduction works out to 50% more dps
Please do explain these mathematics.
If a gun shoots once per ten seconds, doing 10 damage, it's doing 1 damage per second.
If a gun shoots 1.375 times per ten seconds, doing 10 damage, it's doing 1.375 damage per second. |
JackStraw56
Run Like an Antelope
Knights of Tomorrow
45
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 03:03:00 -
[46] - Quote
I'd like to see them nerf 100mn afterburners on cruiser hulls somehow. This would qualify as a nice tengu nerf. |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
658
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 03:25:00 -
[47] - Quote
JackStraw56 wrote:I'd like to see them nerf 100mn afterburners on cruiser hulls somehow. This would qualify as a nice tengu nerf.
this would be a t3 nerf. problem is the tengu. Not saying that it would be a bad thing but it wouldn't solve the issue.
a eve-style bounty system https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=359105
You fail you fail you fail you fail you fail you fail you fail to jump because you are cloaked |
Viribus
Love Squad
Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
33
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 04:53:00 -
[48] - Quote
Roosterton wrote:Quote:yes the loki's 37.5% RoF reduction works out to 50% more dps Please do explain these mathematics. If a gun shoots once per ten seconds, doing 10 damage, it's doing 1 damage per second. If a gun shoots 1.375 times per ten seconds, doing 10 damage, it's doing 1.375 damage per second.
That's not how RoF bonuses work, they reduce the cycle time of the module by a percentage. Because of how awesome RoF bonuses are, a Loki actually gets effectively a 60% bonus to dps.
So a gun that shoots once every 10s gets its duration reduced by 37.5%, it gets reduced to 6.25s (10 * (1 - 0.375)).
(1 / 6.25) / (1 / 10) = 1.6 = 60% dps bonus.
Or just open up EFT, put some autocannons on a Ferox and some on a Loki and compare the DPS.
This is also why a 5-gun zealot out-damages a 5-gun legion by a fair amount (25% dmg 25% RoF bonus > 50% dmg bonus)
PS, Tengus are not the problem, 100mn tengus have lots of weaknesses, it's just that no one flies the ships it's weak to because they're not DRAKES N CANES |
Sunviking
The Shining Knights
25
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 07:19:00 -
[49] - Quote
CCP just need to increase the Powergrid requirements of battleship-class Afterburners to the point where no Tech3 can fit them.
Job done. |
Joyelle
State War Academy
Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 10:44:00 -
[50] - Quote
Sunviking wrote:CCP just need to increase the Powergrid requirements of battleship-class Afterburners to the point where no Tech3 can fit them.
Job done.
no |
|
|
Roosterton
Syndicalis Immortalis
339
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 14:39:00 -
[51] - Quote
Viribus wrote:Roosterton wrote:Quote:yes the loki's 37.5% RoF reduction works out to 50% more dps Please do explain these mathematics. If a gun shoots once per ten seconds, doing 10 damage, it's doing 1 damage per second. If a gun shoots 1.375 times per ten seconds, doing 10 damage, it's doing 1.375 damage per second. That's not how RoF bonuses work, they reduce the cycle time of the module by a percentage. Because of how awesome RoF bonuses are, a Loki actually gets effectively a 60% bonus to dps. So a gun that shoots once every 10s gets its duration reduced by 37.5%, it gets reduced to 6.25s (10 * (1 - 0.375)). (1 / 6.25) / (1 / 10) = 1.6 = 60% dps bonus. Or just open up EFT, put some autocannons on a Ferox and some on a Loki and compare the DPS. This is also why a 5-gun zealot out-damages a 5-gun legion by a fair amount (25% dmg 25% RoF bonus > 50% dmg bonus) PS, Tengus are not the problem, 100mn tengus have lots of weaknesses, it's just that no one flies the ships it's weak to because they're not DRAKES N CANES
Ah, I get it. So saying that the rate is being increased by 37.5% would then be incorrect terminology - shouldn't the bonus say "-37.5% to turret cycle time" instead?
|
Viribus
Love Squad
Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
33
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 16:08:00 -
[52] - Quote
Roosterton wrote:Ah, I get it. So saying that the rate is being increased by 37.5% would then be incorrect terminology - shouldn't the bonus say "-37.5% to turret cycle time" instead?
Yeah it's really semantics.
Anyway people are being babies about the 100mn thing, they're strong against certain ships but have a number of weaknesses (namely the inability to turn and very slow acceleration) and require gimping your fit in some way to shoehorn on the oversized AB |
lacal
Ministry of Destruction
SCUM.
5
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 17:06:00 -
[53] - Quote
Viribus wrote:Anyway people are being babies about the 100mn thing, they're strong against certain ships but have a number of weaknesses (namely the inability to turn and very slow acceleration) and require gimping your fit in some way to shoehorn on the oversized AB
Agreed, no need for a tengu nerf - the more people flying them the better as far as I'm concerned.
|
JackStraw56
Run Like an Antelope
Knights of Tomorrow
46
|
Posted - 2012.04.04 22:09:00 -
[54] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:JackStraw56 wrote:I'd like to see them nerf 100mn afterburners on cruiser hulls somehow. This would qualify as a nice tengu nerf. this would be a t3 nerf. problem is the tengu. Not saying that it would be a bad thing but it wouldn't solve the issue.
100mn works much better on tengu than the other T3s though because of its extreme range and no tracking issues, so it would be much more of a tengu nerf than any other t3. |
deppth
Everybodys-Dead-Dave
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 11:13:00 -
[55] - Quote
Buff the Legion to be in line with other T3's!! |
Jerick Ludhowe
Wraiths of Abaddon
63
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 19:49:00 -
[56] - Quote
I'm on board with a change to over sized prop mods making them unable to be fit on anything but intended hull size. |
saucy jackass
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 18:01:00 -
[57] - Quote
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:I'm on board with a change to over sized prop mods making them unable to be fit on anything but intended hull size.
^^Im too cheap to buy a 100mn tengu or too scared to lose one. So nerf it because im jealous!^^ |
Dio Chrysostom
8 Bit Redux
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.09 02:11:00 -
[58] - Quote
I swear to god, between CCP and Blizzard player base will never trust another MMO company again. Why the F@@@ would you nerf the Tengu it is a PVE boat and your already nerfing the drakes tank. What the F%%% are you going to run sites in ? ? that can shoot farther than 5km ?
People !!! The only way we can punish CCP for their Greed and lack of intellect is by hurting their wallets. with all forms of PvP save for blob warfare nerfed. And the nerfing of the 2 most popular site running ships (Drake & Tengu) to the point of them being wothless for running sites. What do some players have left besides going to another MMO that has not sold out for profit yet.
I used to love Eve like family I held out after watching multiple friends quit over the years. I used to feel that no matter what I would never ever quit eve. But in the past 6 months CCP has ruined or announced they are ruining every single way I play the game. Now short of running sites here and there before they nerf the Tengu, all I do is log in and talk with friends who like me have been patched out of their way of life and cannot do antyhing besides talk anymore. How about you nerf something that really f's the ballance of the game up instead of make believe f's it up something like the new ASB.
I will take pleasure in CCPs demise along with actively participating in campaigns against CCP/Eve right after I let my 3 paying characters sub's run out even though I have been plexing them for months. I only wish I could take back money that I already payed to CCP in order to hasten their failure. Me and another scorned buddy of mine are going to start an anti-dust/ anti-CCP blog soon and promote it with vigor across the gaming world. Not that it will really be needed CCP will never be able to compete with GW2 when it comes out because unlike CCP GW has not spurned the hardcore PvP market (yet) |
Saile Litestrider
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
26
|
Posted - 2012.07.09 02:27:00 -
[59] - Quote
So, your stuff, can I have it? |
Nikodiemus
Jokulhlaup
38
|
Posted - 2012.07.09 02:30:00 -
[60] - Quote
Source?
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |