open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: Capital Ships In Dominion
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 40 41 42 43 [44] 45 46 47 48 ... : last (62)

Author Topic

Jimer Lins
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2009.11.20 22:49:00 - [1291]
 

Since I was the one who pointed out how this will affect Sisi, I think I'll respond to Hammerhead's statement.

Nobody (well, nobody reasonable) would expect that something that goes to Sisi will make it to Tranquility. There's a lot of good reasons why things might change, even significantly. The other (reasonable) expectation is that changes will be more minor over time as you move toward feature completion.

The difference here is that there was one set of changes, tested and vetted by a large portion of the community who would be affected, followed by a massive revamp with zero warning and little justification, followed yet again with a total recall- with even less warning.

It's not so much that people don't expect things to change. It's that they (reasonably) don't expect it to just plain go away. The expectation is that by the time it gets to Sisi, maybe it should at least be a direction that CCP has committed to, that they have agreed is the proper vision.


Isil Rahsen
Gallente
Ferrum Superum
Posted - 2009.11.20 22:50:00 - [1292]
 

Edited by: Isil Rahsen on 20/11/2009 22:51:14


OK then CCP Hammerhead, I would like your *teams* decision making process on returning the Naglfar to a useless split weaponed piece of crap after only one patch cycle of being fixed? Why could the bonuses have not been adjusted but LEFT ON THE GUNS? I'm really trying to understand the rationale here when even CCP have admitted split weapons systems are fail hence the change to the Nag to double gun bonuses in the first place.

Sarah Meow
Biotronics Inc.
Majesta Empire
Posted - 2009.11.20 22:51:00 - [1293]
 

Originally by: CCP Hammer
Hi, everyone
They were potentially too powerful and that would have resulted in a small minority having a lot of fun at the cost of thousands who would be instapopped in 0.0.


So what about Titans instapopping even Motherships?

If you are so much concerned about balancing like you say, why did you come up with the mothership boost in the first place, before really thinking about the results? Now you made hundreds of people angry.

teji
Ars ex Discordia
Here Be Dragons
Posted - 2009.11.20 22:51:00 - [1294]
 

Originally by: CCP Hammer
He is just doing his job trying to improve the game and explain the reasoning for why changes were made.

There was no explanation as to why changes were made. References to target painters and dreads is not a reason, it's a troll.
Quote:
We werenít entirely happy with the direction and balancing of MOMs before development of Dominion began. Even during the SISI tests they still werenít falling into place for us. They were potentially too powerful and that would have resulted in a small minority having a lot of fun at the cost of thousands who would be instapopped in 0.0.

That's news to most people here. Many thought the changes were quite fun. Referring to DCUs and supercarriers also not a reason for changes, it's also a troll.
Quote:
You all made your voices clear with important feedback, we listened and reverted things back to like they are on TQ while we take more time to reassess.

Ah but you aren't. The Nag looks to be getting re-nerfed to uselessness. The titans will now destroy motherships in 2 hits without the hitpoint buff. Things are changing.
Quote:
Only what lands on TQ on patch day is guaranteed.

The truest statement in your whole post.
Quote:
Please remember that we are here to make a game that you all love to play. None of us comes to work thinking of ways to enrage the playerbase.

State reasons and back up those reasons with facts. Anything else will generally enrage your playerbase.

Jack Winters
Rage and Terror
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2009.11.20 22:52:00 - [1295]
 

Originally by: CCP Hammer
bull**** not answering the questions


This reminds me of when CCP weren't making enough $ and decided that despite in being in game for 4 years, and even stating so in their player guide, that you could ghost train with accounts unsubbed, that it was most definitely a "bug" and that you had to pay for your accounts in order to train them. They imployed the same tactics of not answering questions, "accidentally" making it so the thread didnt show up on eveo unless you knew the direct link, and deleting entire pages of player complaints with no explanation whatsoever.

Pointfive
Posted - 2009.11.20 22:53:00 - [1296]
 

Originally by: CCP Hammer
Hi, everyone


We have been carefully watching this thread and I want to set the record straight on a few misconceptions.


First, Iíd like to say that a single developer cannot come in and unilaterally change everything with no oversight. People are spewing a lot of hate at CCP Nozh but instead itís a case of shooting the messenger. He is just doing his job trying to improve the game and explain the reasoning for why changes were made. We work as a team and agree on the direction things are taking. We want the game to be balanced and fun for everyone to play. We also think about the future of the game and how it will be in years to come after our changes weighing the medium- and long-term repercussions.


We werenít entirely happy with the direction and balancing of MOMs before development of Dominion began. Even during the SISI tests they still werenít falling into place for us. They were potentially too powerful and that would have resulted in a small minority having a lot of fun at the cost of thousands who would be instapopped in 0.0. So we tried to tune them again to a point we felt was balanced, but then the role of the ships wasnít clear once we started to lower the damage. Instead, they started to blur with dreads and carriers.


You all made your voices clear with important feedback, we listened and reverted things back to like they are on TQ while we take more time to reassess. We could have tried to put out ďsomethingĒ just because we have been talking about it, but then we would be in a situation where players are getting into ships that might very well change again in a coming patch. Given the amount of work to get one of these we just didnít feel that was the right thing to do.


The other misconception I want to address is about our public test server. SISI is there so we can have as many people as possible looking for bugs. We think it best to put things out in the public as soon as possible regardless of whether or not itís final so we get more eyes on it. This just makes sense to us from a QA standpoint because EVE is an extremely complex piece of software. SISI isnít really meant to be a place to try new fittings, do FFA battles or preview upcoming features, although we know people use it for that and we really donít mind because more load on our test server helps us find bugs. Itís also not a guarantee as to what will be in the next expansion. There have been plenty of times when we dropped a feature that was partially complete on SISI. Arenas and storefronts are two recent examples. Itís highly probable that we like pulling features from a release even less than you do but sometimes it cannot be helped. So while supercarriers were on the test server and had gone through plenty of testing it still wasnít guaranteed to end up on TQ in that exact state. Only what lands on TQ on patch day is guaranteed.


Please remember that we are here to make a game that you all love to play. None of us comes to work thinking of ways to enrage the playerbase. As the Lead Game Designer, I take my responsibility seriously and that includes taking responsibility for any decisions made by our team. To me, EVE is much more than a job, itís something Iím passionate about constantly improving. I promise you I want EVE to thrive just as much as you do.


Thanks for listening
CCP Hammerhead
Lead Game Designer


What bout dread weapon changes? Citadel damage and target painting? Naglfar nerf? cosmic anomalise upgrades being borked. Its easy to say you want to wait and make stuff balanced. But you already throwing up tons of unbalanced stuff. So what about those things? Delay this patch if thats your true feeling.

Caladain Barton
Navy of Xoc
The Remnant Legion
Posted - 2009.11.20 22:54:00 - [1297]
 

Edited by: Caladain Barton on 20/11/2009 23:00:23
Originally by: CCP Hammer
Damage Control


Please forgive my next words, as i want to put this as bluntly as possible without room for any error.

If you're Passionate about this game, why are you letting someone who clearly has no idea how cap battles work post? Or, better yet, if he really is just the mouth piece, why does the dev team have no idea how cap battles work? Why are you putting the Nag back to being a worthless dread? Why is there zero love, and big nerf bat to the caldari dread? (I'm a rev pilot, and don't fly caldari at all, and even i know the math for cruise and torp damage)

Does the Dev team play eve online in 0.0? Does the Dev team have alts in major (top 15) space-holding alliances? Please tell me you all actually play this game, because honestly putting forward "Fit a full rack of highslot DCU's and 3 TP's to kill a sieged dread" only makes us look at the dev team as a whole and wonder about you guys.

It seems like there is a huge disconnect between CCP Dev/Management and the players. CSM was supposed to help this, but how can they if they are ignored whenever it's convenient. This makes the playerbase ignore CSM, as they are ineffectual, and repeats the cycle.

HTFU, Man up, and answer some questions instead of turning your mod team loose with the delete and banhammer. BTW, the amount of posts being deleted is staggering..this only makes the playerbase more angry. It makes it seem like you are deleting anything that you disagree with. This is not a conversation (which it seems like CCP doesn't actually want to have).

Why are you deleting any post that asks hard questions? You'll notice, i'm not flaming, i'm honestly wondering and asking a direct series of questions. Doesn't matter though, this post will just get deleted without a word..right mods?

Sertan Deras
Gallente
Merch Industrial
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.20 22:55:00 - [1298]
 

CCP's answer to the issue? Leave an extremely expensive class of ship completely useless for another six months. Bravo.

Greg DaimYo
Caldari
Biotronics Inc.
Posted - 2009.11.20 22:55:00 - [1299]
 

Finally someone with a brain answered.

Okay, I understand your reasoning. You had the feeling that SC's were overpowered. Maybe you are right, because my first reaction after I read the initial Devblog was to go and get one. Very Happy

On the other hand I see a problem that was voiced a couple of times in this thread: The other Capital- and Supercapitalchanges along with the sovereignity-changes were made (at least it is my perception) with the use of Supercarriers in mind.

Changes can never be looked at in a singular way but you have to keep the whole puzzle in view. Let's face it: Caps are the dominant feature in 0.0-Warfare and have been in this role for the past three years. The current changes to dreads and titans make them a lot more vulnerable to smaller ships witout the proper support-fleet. And since it is a bit easier now to wipe the sovholding structures (with the exception of outposts maybe) without the massive dps dreadnoughts provide, it has become pretty much pointless to field caps in the first place (Exception: Carriers).

So, to give a tl;dr: Current situation makes dreadnoughts worthless and very vulnerable to BS-Pax, too.

Itzena
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.20 22:56:00 - [1300]
 

Edited by: Itzena on 20/11/2009 22:58:11
So, essentially CCPs stance is "We have no clue what to do with motherships so we're just going to ignore them for another year"?

Karlemgne
Tides Of War
Posted - 2009.11.20 22:56:00 - [1301]
 

Edited by: Karlemgne on 20/11/2009 22:58:21
Edited by: Karlemgne on 20/11/2009 22:57:45
Originally by: H Zebra
Originally by: Karlemgne
Originally by: H Zebra
how about you leave all capitals as they are on tq now and if you must, install that bad sov system.

that would be better than screwing over every dread and leaving moms to gather dust in the pos




Half the player base? 98% of the player base doesn't give 2 ****s about mom changes.

And of the 2% that do, only the very vocal half of 1 percent were getting ****ed.


did you read what i posted? half of what? dreads?


edit

My bad, quoted the wrong person.

Okay, add dreads. I fly a Moros. I represent maybe the 10% of the player base that flies dreads.

And I'm not emo ragging at CCP threatening to quit the game.

So how you arrived at 50% of the player base being angry, I still don't understand.

Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
Posted - 2009.11.20 22:57:00 - [1302]
 

Originally by: CCP Hammer
First, I’d like to say that a single developer cannot come in and unilaterally change everything with no oversight ... We work as a team and agree on the direction things are taking.


Yay for Hammerhead!

Thanks for the reply. Late maybe but not too late.

However, if these capital changes are the result of teamwork, how does it come that no one noticed that strange role of target painters is going to play for those new balanced capital weapons? Target painting sieged dreads, seriously teamwork?

And how can I understand that titans have no clear role and are still changes, yet moms don't get changed because they have no clear role?

And what about instapopping moms now by 2-3 titans? That cannot be right either, even not for a temporary solution!

So, the supercarriers didn't make it in because they were overpowered? Well ... communicating this to the players was a pretty big failure Razz I hope you will implement Abathurs original concept and tone down the effectiveness of remote reps on moms, then they should be really fine.

Ghuarran
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2009.11.20 22:58:00 - [1303]
 

Quote:
First, I’d like to say that a single developer cannot come in and unilaterally change everything with no oversight. People are spewing a lot of hate at CCP Nozh but instead it’s a case of shooting the messenger. He is just doing his job trying to improve the game and explain the reasoning for why changes were made. We work as a team and agree on the direction things are taking. We want the game to be balanced and fun for everyone to play. We also think about the future of the game and how it will be in years to come after our changes weighing the medium- and long-term repercussions.


I respect your position, I really do. But it's kind of disturbing that such a director could publish changes as sweeping as this, referencing mechanics that simply do not work in game, and have the team not notice or care. Surely a team of developers would notice that you cannot target paint supercaps, or seiged dreadnaughts. Shouldn't that thing have been caught?

Kraken Kill
Menace ll Society
Posted - 2009.11.20 23:00:00 - [1304]
 

Edited by: Kraken Kill on 20/11/2009 23:01:12
Motherships DO NOT instapop Carriers. 2 Dreads = the Same DPS as the Motherships Bombers. 2 Dreads Do not Instapop Carriers.

GAH Carrier blobs are able to Remote Rep together. all this is totally nonsense. GAH GAH GAH You wanted Motherships to be Capital Killers then you dont? Whats going on? You wanted Titans to be on the Battlefields for extended periods of time then you dont?

What about what the playerbase wants? The playerbase wants the original plans for the Titan and Supercarriers and NO ONE wants the nerfs to the nag and Phoenix torps.

Explain how its logical now to release Titans with their boosts and allow Supercarriers to go unboosted in the same patch?

Sertan Deras
Gallente
Merch Industrial
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.20 23:01:00 - [1305]
 

Originally by: Ghuarran
Quote:
First, Iíd like to say that a single developer cannot come in and unilaterally change everything with no oversight. People are spewing a lot of hate at CCP Nozh but instead itís a case of shooting the messenger. He is just doing his job trying to improve the game and explain the reasoning for why changes were made. We work as a team and agree on the direction things are taking. We want the game to be balanced and fun for everyone to play. We also think about the future of the game and how it will be in years to come after our changes weighing the medium- and long-term repercussions.


I respect your position, I really do. But it's kind of disturbing that such a director could publish changes as sweeping as this, referencing mechanics that simply do not work in game, and have the team not notice or care. Surely a team of developers would notice that you cannot target paint supercaps, or seiged dreadnaughts. Shouldn't that thing have been caught?


If there is one thing I've learned about CCP, it's that they have very little regard for how the game actually works. Instead, they have a fantasy in their head about how they think it should work, and they project that fantasy on to the player base that actually plays the game. In their mind, you should be using target painters, and they are going to balance with that in mind.

H Zebra
Zebra Corp
Posted - 2009.11.20 23:01:00 - [1306]
 

Edited by: H Zebra on 20/11/2009 23:02:48
Originally by: Karlemgne
Edited by: Karlemgne on 20/11/2009 22:58:21
Edited by: Karlemgne on 20/11/2009 22:57:45
Originally by: H Zebra
Originally by: Karlemgne
Originally by: H Zebra
how about you leave all capitals as they are on tq now and if you must, install that bad sov system.

that would be better than screwing over every dread and leaving moms to gather dust in the pos




Half the player base? 98% of the player base doesn't give 2 ****s about mom changes.

And of the 2% that do, only the very vocal half of 1 percent were getting ****ed.


did you read what i posted? half of what? dreads?


edit

My bad, quoted the wrong person.

Okay, add dreads. I fly a Moros. I represent maybe the 10% of the player base that flies dreads.

And I'm not emo ragging at CCP threatening to quit the game.

So how you arrived at 50% of the player base being angry, I still don't understand.


how you arived at me stating anything about the player base is beyond me.
imo dreads are fine the way they are. i fly a moros and a rev, and will use them less after the patch. was looking to gte 2 mom's but hey im not to bothered will just save the isk till there usefull. reading ftw

edited to note edit. bloody forums and mod deleting evrything making them laggy as hell

Gergragda
Caldari
Ars ex Discordia
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2009.11.20 23:02:00 - [1307]
 

Edited by: Gergragda on 20/11/2009 23:03:20
Originally by: CCP Hammer
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.


Quit letting over eager developers make announcements in devblog comments about what one of the most expensive ships in eve will be like and then try and explain balancing capital weapons around a system that can't be used in capital warfare.

Quit letting forum moderators delete feedback because it doesn't blatantly agree with the drivel that aforementioned over eagar uninformed developers spout.

Listen to your customers that actually use these ships every day

and expect to be called out for stupid game decisions when stupid game decisions are made. If you want constructive criticism it helps to start from a position that doesn't make your customers fill like complete idiots for handing over 15 dollars per account per month.

[1312]

Itzena
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.20 23:02:00 - [1308]
 

Originally by: Caladain Barton
Edited by: Caladain Barton on 20/11/2009 23:00:23
Originally by: CCP Hammer
Damage Control


Please forgive my next words, as i want to put this as bluntly as possible without room for any error.

If you're Passionate about this game, why are you letting someone who clearly has no idea how cap battles work post? Or, better yet, if he really is just the mouth piece, why does the dev team have no idea how cap battles work? Why are you putting the Nag back to being a worthless dread? Why is there zero love, and big nerf bat to the caldari dread? (I'm a rev pilot, and don't fly caldari at all, and even i know the math for cruise and torp damage)

Does the Dev team play eve online in 0.0? Does the Dev team have alts in major (top 15) space-holding alliances? Please tell me you all actually play this game, because honestly putting forward "Fit a full rack of highslot DCU's and 3 TP's to kill a sieged dread" only makes us look at the dev team as a whole and wonder about you guys.

Well, they used to, but there were certain...issues, shall we say?

Wilhelm Caster
Caldari
Most Wanted INC
White Noise.
Posted - 2009.11.20 23:02:00 - [1309]
 

Naglfar was finally on par with the other Dreads dps wise and could fit a DECENT tank. Removing the 1 midslot serves what purpose?

RahSun
Ars ex Discordia
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2009.11.20 23:02:00 - [1310]
 

Originally by: CCP Hammer
We also think about the future of the game and how it will be in years to come after our changes weighing the medium- and long-term repercussions.


If you are willing to think long term, also consider the player perspective as well. Please don't dump changes on players with a 2 week window for feedback then, especially on a ship that people often plan months ahead of time when deciding to purchase/build one.

Most people are distressed with 2 things: 1) the sudden shift in the Mothership design plan without the Dev team giving the reasoning behind the changes 2 weeks before a major patch, and 2) the fact that we were expected to need a bellicose support fleet to use missile systems on cap ships or with the proposed fighter bombers.

tszun
Task Force Zener
Atlas Alliance
Posted - 2009.11.20 23:02:00 - [1311]
 

Was good of Hammerhead to post.

However once you remove the padding all he essentialy said was;

Nozh; Dont blame Nozh, blame all of us.
Suppercarriers; What Nozh said.
Sisi; Your testing was a waste of time.

falcoon24
Biotronics Inc.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2009.11.20 23:02:00 - [1312]
 

With every post you really make it worse. I am playing Eve now for two years. It is the first time, I consider ending my subscription. I payed a lot of money/time to train a Mothership pilot, who is now stucked and 15b investment for the ship itself are simply gone.

I want reimbursement!!! You scammed me.

Seriously, I want my money back.

Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2009.11.20 23:02:00 - [1313]
 

Originally by: CCP Hammer
Hi, everyone



heya noah



I listened, did you?

You say you read the responses, but haven't addressed them. Why were the changes suggested to the Phoenix ignored? Why was the Nag rolled back to useless?

Why do you feel the supercaps were overpowered? overpowered, what the couple hundred of them? It's not like you're redefining a battleship, it's a ship that a very small percentage can get in.


You didn't make the mom overpowered, you gave it a purpose. You made it a cap killer. That is a shiptype the game has been lacking for years. You made it the combat flagship, and the titan was again the "oh crap" ship.


how was the previous iteration of the SC overpowered? And if so, in my opinion it would have been better to let Seleene's change go onto TQ and had "nerf SCs!" threads. You would have at least made a diffference, a baseline to work with in a live environment.

You could then re-evaluate the situation and make changes based upon how they end up actually used in game.

instead, you are trying to start over. beyond the obvious frustrations you're giving long term player by essentially taking away their shiny new xmas toys, you're also going to come across the same challenges when you try to change them again.

Stop trying to assign a role for the ship, when the actual pilots have told you what they want to do. and they have done it in unison.


Sally Bestonge
Ministry of War
Posted - 2009.11.20 23:05:00 - [1314]
 

CCP Hammer,

The fact that you renege on changes that proved to be extremely popular shows that your supposed passion does not lie with the players but rather in profits.

On top of that, CCP's public relations with its paying customers has reached an all time low. You do not understand the implications of ignoring your PAYING CUSTOMERS and hiring people who clearly do NOT understand the mechanics of the game.

Yours,
Sally B. et al

Grimpak
Gallente
Midnight Elites
Echelon Rising
Posted - 2009.11.20 23:06:00 - [1315]
 

Edited by: Grimpak on 20/11/2009 23:07:27
Originally by: CCP Hammer
stuff



goddamnit man, how hard can it be?

carriers: capital fleet workhorse
dreadnaughts: fleet XL turret batteries
motherships: fleet logistical core
titan: mobile battlestation



there, here's a set of roles, now expand it.

Der Lemming
Posted - 2009.11.20 23:09:00 - [1316]
 

Another slap in the face Crying or Very sad

Undertow Latheus
Posted - 2009.11.20 23:11:00 - [1317]
 

Oh yeah, and regarding noah's post, it really only addresses moms. Whilst that is a huge part of the playerbase's frustration, you fail to mention any of the other things that people have been screaming about.

Exactly how is instapopping a dread every ten minutes significant in a large cap fight? It will only conceivably be useful for hit and runs on lone caps on stations and such. I thought we were trying to get away from those tactics?

Why does the Phoenix, already considered to be by a fairly large margin the worst dread, getting nerfed in the form of ludicrously high explosion radius? I'm sorry, but it's just stupid on epic proportions that it will do less than 1/2 damage on a small tower, and only about 50-80% damage (depending on if there is a ragnarok or claymore in enemy gang) on its primary target, sieged dreads.

Why is the Naglfar getting a stealth nerf? Ever since the nag has existed up until a few months ago, it was considered by everyone in the game to be absolute garbage, with its only merit that its 'FREAKIN VERTICAL'. CCP finally listened to the hordes of upset minmatar pilots screaming for balance and made it useful with two 7.5% dps bonuses to turrets and one more mid slot, making it possible to have a respectable shield tank. Now after just a few months of it being decent, you stealth nerf its skill bonuses without saying anything about it, even when questioned. It's not just frustrating that its getting nerfed, but that we have no clue WHY you're doing it. Talk to us FFS.

Short range XL weapon balance. Or lack thereof. First, we've already established that citadel torpedoes are complete garbage thanks to their explosion radius. Now on to the turrets. In the devblog such ridiculous comments were made such as "While the 6x2500mm Repeating artillery might look poor, the fact that it doesn't consume any capacitor must be taken into consideration. With a single Gyrostabilizer it overtakes the Ion Siege blaster in damage and has excellent falloff."

What??? And with 3 gyros a tempest will do as much damage as a megathron without any magstabs. Therefore, Tempest and large AC's do as much damage as large blasters. Furthermore, the range on autocannons is just abysmal. It says that AC's have a range bonus of falloff, but ccp/nozh seems to pretend that a revelation or moros wont simply switch to longer range ammo and be doing MORE dps, IN OPTIMAL than the AC's. Real nice. The same holds true with artillery -- The graph shows that artillery has more dps at range thanks to its falloff, but the graph only shows when using short range ammo. In reality, the revelation or moros wont just sit there missing with short range ammo while the arty does more dps in falloff, they'll just once again load long range ammo and completely slaughter the artillery in every way.

McTecman
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2009.11.20 23:12:00 - [1318]
 

Originally by: Ghuarran

I respect your position, I really do. But it's kind of disturbing that such a director could publish changes as sweeping as this, referencing mechanics that simply do not work in game, and have the team not notice or care. Surely a team of developers would notice that you cannot target paint supercaps, or seiged dreadnaughts. Shouldn't that thing have been caught?


I'd like to believe they'd notice as well. But in the end, this is the development team that allowed the infamous "boot.ini" fiasco to happen. ugh

It's one thing to explain that changes on SiSi don't always translate into changes on Tranquility via patch or an expansion, because that's obvious with a piece of software like EVE that's constantly a work in progress. However, it's an entirely another situation where one of the changes inside an upcoming expansion that's essentially two weeks from launching isn't up to spec yet or has directly conflicting settings which "break" a certain, quite expensive, playstyle - ESPECIALLY if the player group that will end up being the target usergroup has done so much in terms of testing and feedback on the entire situation and was more or less happy with the proposed, initial variables (and was expecting nothing more than tweaks, not a goddamn chainsaw).

If the developers feel like something is amiss, don't try to forcefully release an unfinished expansion, especially one that involves a very delicate network of endgame player-driven space empires and warfare with tons of possible screw-ups. I'm starting to understand why 0.0 has been left alone for so long, it's essentially a designer's nightmare to fix.

The funny bit however is that all it took was to slightly alter Supercarriers and we would've been fine. Now we're stuck with this mess.

Honestly, either delay all of Dominion, or delay the entire Capital and Supercapital restructuring so you don't break it all by having one or more of the set pieces out of focus or sub-parly designed.

Vadinho
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2009.11.20 23:13:00 - [1319]
 

Originally by: Undertow Latheus
Oh yeah, and regarding noah's post, it really only addresses moms. Whilst that is a huge part of the playerbase's frustration, you fail to mention any of the other things that people have been screaming about.

Exactly how is instapopping a dread every ten minutes significant in a large cap fight? It will only conceivably be useful for hit and runs on lone caps on stations and such. I thought we were trying to get away from those tactics?

Why does the Phoenix, already considered to be by a fairly large margin the worst dread, getting nerfed in the form of ludicrously high explosion radius? I'm sorry, but it's just stupid on epic proportions that it will do less than 1/2 damage on a small tower, and only about 50-80% damage (depending on if there is a ragnarok or claymore in enemy gang) on its primary target, sieged dreads.

Why is the Naglfar getting a stealth nerf? Ever since the nag has existed up until a few months ago, it was considered by everyone in the game to be absolute garbage, with its only merit that its 'FREAKIN VERTICAL'. CCP finally listened to the hordes of upset minmatar pilots screaming for balance and made it useful with two 7.5% dps bonuses to turrets and one more mid slot, making it possible to have a respectable shield tank. Now after just a few months of it being decent, you stealth nerf its skill bonuses without saying anything about it, even when questioned. It's not just frustrating that its getting nerfed, but that we have no clue WHY you're doing it. Talk to us FFS.

Short range XL weapon balance. Or lack thereof. First, we've already established that citadel torpedoes are complete garbage thanks to their explosion radius. Now on to the turrets. In the devblog such ridiculous comments were made such as "While the 6x2500mm Repeating artillery might look poor, the fact that it doesn't consume any capacitor must be taken into consideration. With a single Gyrostabilizer it overtakes the Ion Siege blaster in damage and has excellent falloff."

What??? And with 3 gyros a tempest will do as much damage as a megathron without any magstabs. Therefore, Tempest and large AC's do as much damage as large blasters. Furthermore, the range on autocannons is just abysmal. It says that AC's have a range bonus of falloff, but ccp/nozh seems to pretend that a revelation or moros wont simply switch to longer range ammo and be doing MORE dps, IN OPTIMAL than the AC's. Real nice. The same holds true with artillery -- The graph shows that artillery has more dps at range thanks to its falloff, but the graph only shows when using short range ammo. In reality, the revelation or moros wont just sit there missing with short range ammo while the arty does more dps in falloff, they'll just once again load long range ammo and completely slaughter the artillery in every way.
this is also a good post

ccp hammerhead are you getting this because youve got customers thinking circles around your development team

KeratinBoy
GoonWaffe
SOLODRAKBANSOLODRAKBANSO
Posted - 2009.11.20 23:15:00 - [1320]
 

Edited by: KeratinBoy on 20/11/2009 23:15:01
Dominion is pretty much a joke now. It is a mess, an unbalanced mess. Your handling of player concerns is abysmal. Your obvious evasions of core matters bespeaks of spinelessness and ignorance. Your censorship makes your claims of listening to feedback a lie. Your credibility approaches zero (again) and still you insist on trying the same things that repeatedly do not work.

Small children learn to not touch hot things when they burn themselves, why don't you?

1336, p45


Pages: first : previous : ... 40 41 42 43 [44] 45 46 47 48 ... : last (62)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only