EVE Search - [CMS Intervention REQUEST] Save the blasters

All Channels

Assembly Hall

[CMS Intervention REQUEST] Save the blasters

» 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)
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Resurgency	Posted - 2008.10.23 17:02:00 - [1] Blasters are getting the shaft as a side effect to the nanonerf http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=834365 please do all you can to preserve this playstyle/weapon system.
LaVista Vista Conservative Shenanigans Party	Posted - 2008.10.23 17:03:00 - [2] What's going to stop you from flying with an AB?
Dizeezer Velar Caldari League of Disgruntled Fast Food Employees	Posted - 2008.10.23 17:07:00 - [3] Originally by: LaVista Vista What's going to stop you from flying with an AB? I'm going to go with common sense and logic. If you think that an afterburner will be an effective mod on a blasterthron, then just lol.
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Resurgency	Posted - 2008.10.23 17:09:00 - [4] Time to target is essiential with any blasterboat due it's very limited range, currently blasters are well balanced in the sense that you may or may not die before getting into range, using ABs would mean death without a shot fired (well a hit that is). Summary thread of important posts: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=894446 - - - Originally by: CCP Wrangler If you can understand our goal, disagree with our solution and offer a solution that is equal or better your opinion has a better chance of being heard...
Liang Nuren No Salvation	Posted - 2008.10.23 17:38:00 - [5] Originally by: LaVista Vista What's going to stop you from flying with an AB? The time to get into effective engagement range, actually. Fitting an AB can make it take twice to three times as long to get into range, It's not at all unthinkable that this can make it impossible to deal effective damage in a gang. Getting into range is extremely important. However, that's only half of the problem - the second part of the problem is that the 60% web uncovers what was already a hole in the tracking formula - it becomes increasingly difficult for blasters to deal effective damage (even supposing that they can manage to get into range). Blasters with 90% webs are extremely sensitive to transversal - the problem gets almost infinitely worse when the average transversal in web range goes up by 3-4x (10% -> 40% = 4x increase in transversal, adjusting for slower ships gives a 3x increase in tranversal). Come on Vista, you know better. :) -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire Liang/Vanesca - Order/Iron Rock@WAR www.kwikdeath.org
The Djego Minmatar merovinger inc	Posted - 2008.10.23 18:52:00 - [6] Thx for the effort to post it here but I don¦t think it will go anywhere further here as in the Game Devolopment Forum. The Thread got tons of Info also a lot of good math and input from Blaster ship users. Bellum even changed the OP because nothing realy happend, not a single note about it in the dev blog, not a dev post that explains the planed route and focusing on the problems that it cause, not a single adjustment about it on sissi in the current State(think the remove of gun Tracking and Range was more like a accident, glad they at least looked into Missles a bit) not realy intedet as a test with a adjusted system. The changes of the Nano Nerf hit any unanoed ship used in small scale and solo PVP just as hard as any nanoed by making it fare harder to control range, tackle Targets, pin them down with webs and hit in web range. All the core elements of Blaster ships that are needet to survive and be effective geting a hit where the usablity is more than just qestionalbe(It is qutestionalbe allready now under current TC conditons) after it. Blaster ships are at the reciving side of the Nerfbat since 2 years non stop now, but this compleetly removes them from the list of usable PVP Ships, together with a huge amount of ships that are geared to solo and small scale PVP in her orginal way. In the beginning I was for the Nano nerf, turning speeds down to a more sane level, alowing more counters and give other fitting styles a come back but as it turned out this patch nerfs so many things in solo/small scale PVP that it is not even funny to see for somebody that loves and does the so called dead PVP style named solo. If somebody think this is a stelth nano whine check my stats on BC I don¦t like Nano ships and don¦t use them very often, and yes I got some in my Hangar. Bottom line, they don¦t care, thats it.
Liang Nuren No Salvation	Posted - 2008.10.23 19:27:00 - [7] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 23/10/2008 19:27:59 Originally by: The Djego Bottom line, they don¦t care, thats it. Djego, I know we haven't always seen eye to eye... but I couldn't agree more. CCP simply doesn't care at this point. Blasters and ACs have been deliberately sidestepped at every turn when CCP has discussed the "nano" nerf. It's really frustrating though, because they gave us plenty of time to realize that there was a nano nerf coming (over a year!), and some of us got to training things that didn't have anything to do with nano ships - ships that had been traditionally effective. Nerfing battleship mass/acceleration/velocity and the web nerf was just out of left field though. The game is roughly fine outside of a few nano problems, and is balanced far better than it's been in ages... adjustments of this magnitude make it a brand new game in everything but the abysmal UI and even worse PVE experience. People like you are the the people I'll miss most when I end up dropping 3 35M SP characters on the floor. -Liang
LaVista Vista Conservative Shenanigans Party	Posted - 2008.10.23 20:06:00 - [8] Originally by: Liang Nuren Come on Vista, you know better. :) Well, from the sisi testing I have been doing, an AB works pretty well. However, it is just sisi testing. Do also remember that if you do get into 7,5km range, assuming you had a MWD, you will have some inertia build up that will get you close. I assume most people fit a web to their blaster-bloat where it would be needed to(Very small gangs). So once you do get inside that 7,5km range, you will both have inertia and a web. I'm not saying that's perfectly good. But do remember that all your targets are going to be equally as slow as you. I think it's a matter of blaster boats taking a bit more actual skills than they used to. However, this is just based on theory and I think we will have to wait and see until the final tweaks have been made to sisi to see how it actually works out. There's still daily changes to sisi all the time.
Liang Nuren No Salvation	Posted - 2008.10.23 20:27:00 - [9] Originally by: LaVista Vista Well, from the sisi testing I have been doing, an AB works pretty well. However, it is just sisi testing. Exactly - and sisi testing usually discounts the situations where someone literally does not want to engage you. Quote: Do also remember that if you do get into 7,5km range, assuming you had a MWD, you will have some inertia build up that will get you close. I assume most people fit a web to their blaster-bloat where it would be needed to(Very small gangs). So once you do get inside that 7,5km range, you will both have inertia and a web. Getting inside 7.5km before kicking off your disruptor is simply not an option. Even the slowest of ships are able to warp before a blaster ship can cross the required range to put a point on someone. Fitting the scram + dual web is simply so that you can get someone going slow enough to actually deal damage to someone. Why should this be required when you can get 80-93% of blaster damage from a certain other turret ship out to 50km+? Quote: I'm not saying that's perfectly good. But do remember that all your targets are going to be equally as slow as you. As a general rule, they will not be as slow as you are. There's multiple reasons: not everyone armor tanks and not everyone is running in battleships (in fact, it'll be flat stupid to fly a BS sized blaster ship after this patch). This patch is probably not supposed to nerf things that weren't even working as well as should be expected on TQ. Yet it does. Quote: I think it's a matter of blaster boats taking a bit more actual skills than they used to. If it were just a matter of using skill, it would be fine - but it's not. Additionally, there should be a certain amount of consideration for the difficulty with which you are able to successfully bring your damage to bear. Quote: However, this is just based on theory and I think we will have to wait and see until the final tweaks have been made to sisi to see how it actually works out. There's still daily changes to sisi all the time. According to what I've read, there are changes by the hour on Sisi these days, but they're almost wholly focused on the new missile damage formula. In any case, that doesn't explain why CCP has deliberately ignored and side stepped the Blaster/AC issue time and time again when it's been brought up. -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire Liang/Vanesca - Order/Iron Rock@WAR www.kwikdeath.org
Liang Nuren No Salvation	Posted - 2008.10.23 20:39:00 - [10] And it actually looks like there was a live dev blog where Zulupark has said that there are no problems with blasters. After his previous record of believing that the Helios had 3 high slots and that Gallente recons were not negatively affected by the damp nerf... I give up. CCP has hired morons and has decided to suicide Eve. I guess it's a good time for "certain" other MMOs to be coming out. At least they're more fun anyway. -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire Liang/Vanesca - Order/Iron Rock@WAR www.kwikdeath.org
The Djego Minmatar merovinger inc	Posted - 2008.10.23 21:33:00 - [11] Edited by: The Djego on 23/10/2008 21:37:33 Well I would realy sugest reading the Thread a bit, it isn¦t this bad like many other Threads regarding changes and stayes on topic most of the time. Problem is everything bigger than a Frigate will need a MWD to get in Range quick, especialy when fitted with Turrets that got a short range. It is possible to use AB on Cruisers and HACs and it is indeed very effective in 1o1s but it is sissi, people want to fight you, while in general PVP on TQ you have to force them not to warp off most of the time. Here starting the problems when it takes to long to get in range most of the Targets will warp off, so you need a Disruptur to stop the other ship from warping off. The Scrambler sounds good in theorie but any ship that got a doubt if it can win will be warped off long before you in range for a Scrambler. The other point is the ship need fare more Cap(more MWD cycles) to get in range and it takes fare longer meaning you take fare more Damage most of the time. Since Blaster Ships got the shortest Range and have to MWD into Web Range to be effective most off the time this is realy a big drawback. The interia will carrie you further even with MWD off but the target will move out of your Range even within web range. A plated Blaster ship deaccelate like a soap on a wet flore, with the 60% web it is very unpredictalbe where it lands so both ships have to manuver in web Range even more than out of web Range. That puts Blaster Ships in a disavatage in the end because it got the shortest Range, a Thorax with Ions or Electrons are mostly helpless against a other Cruiser/Frig if it¦s further away than 4-5 km of the target with MWD shut down it allready looses the fight, if you are still able to use it you burn more cap by MWDing in web rage. A Blaster BS got a very hard time to, the other ships will get close and start orbiting what is absolutly enught at a Cruiser class, even webbed to outrun Tracking compleetly. This is a serious problem for any kind of short range fitted solo ship in the Cruiser, BC and BS class. Originally by: Liang Nuren People like you are the the people I'll miss most when I end up dropping 3 35M SP characters on the floor. Hope you keep the Liang Forum Bot running at least. Realy not shure, the game changed much in the 2.5 years that I play it, most of the time not in the better direction in my personal opinion, but well we will see. Edit: Damn the Liang Forum bot was faster than me. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
Liang Nuren No Salvation	Posted - 2008.10.23 21:43:00 - [12] Originally by: The Djego Hope you keep the Liang Forum Bot running at least. Realy not shure, the game changed much in the 2.5 years that I play it, most of the time not in the better direction in my personal opinion, but well we will see. Edit: Damn the Liang Forum bot was faster than me. I'm not certain that I'm willing to give CCP the cash that it would take to keep Liang up. I could buy a bottle of liquor per month or try 3 new MMOs per month with the cash I'll save from dropping Eve. I'll miss the really exceptional people that I met in Eve, though. I'm thinking about dropping an Eve mail address into the forums for people that want to get ahold of me. For now, Warhammer is probably the best solution - Liang's settled down there as a Shadow Warrior on Iron Rock. -Liang
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Resurgency	Posted - 2008.10.23 22:55:00 - [13] Totally offtopic but Guildcafe.com is a nice place to keep in touch with mmo buddies. - - - Originally by: CCP Wrangler If you can understand our goal, disagree with our solution and offer a solution that is equal or better your opinion has a better chance of being heard...
Liang Nuren No Salvation	Posted - 2008.10.23 23:03:00 - [14] Originally by: DrAtomic Totally offtopic but Guildcafe.com is a nice place to keep in touch with mmo buddies. Great link, thanks. I've been sitting here plotting a way to post my email address without getting spammed to death. -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire Liang/Vanesca - Order/Iron Rock@WAR www.kwikdeath.org
Blastil	Posted - 2008.10.23 23:06:00 - [15] When I started playing a little over a year ago, I chose galente because of their awesome ship design. I didn't know i was getting on board a sinking boat. At first I was excited about the nano nerf, because that meant that my Deimos that I had been skilling up for a long half a year was finally going to pay off, and that ships that I could never dream of catching would finally be in range to die. Then this **** comes out. It really woudln't be that hard to fix really, just give blasters a boost in tracking, or hell, DPS, so they could compensate for the lesser damage they pumped out. At this point, about the only thing they're good for is suplimental DPS when shooting at TITANS, and other Cap Ships. Please, STOP NERFING GALENTE before you lose 1/4 of your player base because the race sucks.
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2008.10.23 23:33:00 - [16] The tracking formula NEEDS fixing. Do the devs not understand the concept of size vs distance? Fix that and Blaster 'tracking' issues go away, then work can be done on the DPS balance between Blasters/Torps/Pulses. Personally, I'd say cut the damage on the latter two.
Another Forum'Alt	Posted - 2008.10.24 01:20:00 - [17] +1
Ankhesentapemkah Aliastra	Posted - 2008.10.24 09:49:00 - [18] Originally by: Gabriel Karade The tracking formula NEEDS fixing. Do the devs not understand the concept of size vs distance? Fix that and Blaster 'tracking' issues go away, then work can be done on the DPS balance between Blasters/Torps/Pulses. Personally, I'd say cut the damage on the latter two. I'm in favor of this. Anyway, let me get it straight and sum up the issues please. 1) Web nerf reduces blaster damage due to tracking, or causes blaster ships being unable to hit most of the time 2) Web nerf makes it more difficult for a blaster ship to remain in range 3) Speed reduction increases time it takes to get in range 4) Blaster DPS gets approached by torps and lasers, which have a much larger range, putting blasters at a disadvantage Anything else? --- Thanks for all that supported me. Let me know if there's anything I can do for you.
Bellum Eternus Death of Virtue	Posted - 2008.10.24 10:18:00 - [19] Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah I'm in favor of this. Anyway, let me get it straight and sum up the issues please. 1) Web nerf reduces blaster damage due to tracking, or causes blaster ships being unable to hit most of the time 2) Web nerf makes it more difficult for a blaster ship to remain in range 3) Speed reduction increases time it takes to get in range 4) Blaster DPS gets approached by torps and lasers, which have a much larger range, putting blasters at a disadvantage Anything else? 1. Yes, 90% webs covered up the problem of large blasters not being able to hit anything inside their own optimal range unless it was held perfectly still. 2. Correct, the web nerf, particularly in conjunction with the 2pt scram turning off MWDs, has made it very difficult to maintain range, as well as keep the target from escaping by making it back to the gate/dock range and jumping out. Secondly, other 'solutions' such as fitting dual webs or a web and a disruptor and a 2pt scram are only viable on ships with 5x mids and additionally take away those ships' existing versatility by requiring the extra tackle gear. 3. The speed reduction increases the time required to cover the same distance, requires that more total distance be covered (this is very important when trying to tackle a ship trying to get back into dock/jump range) and also consumes a TON more cap. This is critical as you don't want to be completely out of cap/cap charges when you finally arrive at your required range. 4. Due to a long list of changes (resist changes, T2 ammo nerfs, Torp ROF buffs, ability to tune damage type to weakest resists, etc.) other weapons are able to equal or surpass blaster DPS at most common combat ranges, and definitely at anything over 8-10km. When targets are within blaster optimal other weapons (lasers, torps) have equal or greater on-target DPS than blasters, and blasters are supposed to be unequaled in their damage output, by a large margin. If you have any specific questions or need exact details about blaster ships, their fitting, how to fly them, etc. please feel free to ask/contact me here or in game. Thanks in advance. Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Zubakis Bambooule	Posted - 2008.10.24 11:07:00 - [20] I support this thread. Blasterships need to be looked at. -- Zuba
Kunming T.H.U.G L.I.F.E White Core	Posted - 2008.10.24 12:59:00 - [21] Edited by: Kunming on 24/10/2008 12:59:38 I think CCP decided at one point and said: Hey look, we got the majority of players using caldari ships lets boost caldari and nerf the rest so the majority is happy Seriously I dont understand why missiles get boosted EVERY patch while turrets get hit by the nerf bat with each. I wish my blasters would use 0 cap and hit from over 50km, while doing 1k+ DPS Edit: thumbs up for this one ofc
Hooded Person	Posted - 2008.10.24 19:44:00 - [22] Supported
Karentaki Fighting While Intoxicated Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2008.10.24 19:54:00 - [23] Yeah, I'm sick of gallente getting hit with the nerfbat almost every patch. Quote: EVE is like a sandbox with landmines. Deal with it.
Zacheria Malfor Pernicious Creed	Posted - 2008.10.24 20:36:00 - [24] Edited by: Zacheria Malfor on 24/10/2008 20:37:33 Blaster pilot throughout my time in Eve (over 5 years), if this change goes live, well, it might give me enough reason to head back to the ever so popular mmo called RL. Edit - Fully support Bellum's post, rarely have issue with what he says as he takes the time to articulate his point. Keep up the good work Bellum. /Zacheria Malfor Do not fear the reaper, for death is the only certainty in life.
Tempest Inferno Davy Jones Locker Einherjar Alliance	Posted - 2008.10.25 12:07:00 - [25] One adjustment would be to go through the ships that the database shows as your typical mwd blaster ships (Thorax and Megathron) and add bonuses to Afterburners, Tracking Speed, and possibly Stasis Webs or Max Velocity. This is what I was hoping would happen to the Thorax's MWD bonus as, from what I understand, CCP wants to see more afterburners used in combat. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eaterof Children	Posted - 2008.10.25 12:16:00 - [26] I wish to add that blasters need to be generally looked at. But, at the very least, now that webs will not be on/off weapons, they need to have their tracking increased so that blasterships have about the same chance to hit AT THEIR OPTIMAL ENGAGEMENT DISTANCE (say, optimal + falloff) like pulses and autocannons. Just so that people can use their guns pretty much fairly. And then the whole "I can not approach fast enough so I die" idea needs consideration. But blaster tracking should be way, WAY higher just because of their smaller range. Otherwise they will simply not be usable without the web to freeze the target.
Ankhesentapemkah Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2008.10.29 09:49:00 - [27] http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=905797 What do you guys think about this testing? How should battleships be able to handle smaller ships, and to what extent? --- CSM Campaign Thread
Kel Solaar Soulbound.	Posted - 2008.10.30 10:33:00 - [28] What I don't understand, is that we are on a forum, and the advantages of a forum are there are many tools to audit and listen to the suscribed people, like rating for the thread and polls thread. let's say I'm selling a program and I'm about to make deep changes in the way it's used. Shouldn't I ask my usersbase if the changes I'm trying to implement are not gonna put them in troubles ? ( especially when those same users are paying 2 or 3 times the license to use it because of their multiple accounts ) Now let's say we are in the future in 2014, everything is done server/client side. CCP programmers/3d graphists are respectively using Microsoft Visual Studio 16 and Autodesk Maya 2014, each morning they launch their client to use Maya or Visual. Suddendly Autodesk say hey : we are gonna change Maya architecture, now you will need to do your modelling with Metaballs ! Hope we don't put the crap in everything you have done for years ? You are not happy aren't you ? ( since the software is working online CCP don't have the choice and is fu**ed ). I guess they would not be happy themselves... So It would be nice if CCP Developpers: - Play their game. - Play it well ( not doing crappy pew pew on SiSi, that does'nt count and isn't representative of TQ ). - Respect their customers that give them a lot of money every months to get fun. - Listen their customers. - Talk with them whenever you are doing deep changes that compromise a lot of stuff. It's the minimal to do, but that's get really rare these days. Now I'm waiting for the Blaster Poll, don't tell us it's impossible to put this mechanism on track, every forum on internet as it.
winthrowe Node Alpha Defense Research	Posted - 2008.10.30 14:32:00 - [29]
Dizeezer Velar League of Disgruntled Fast Food Employees	Posted - 2008.10.30 16:18:00 - [30]

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.