open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Fendahl Dev Blog, ARM Scripts and Bandwidth
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Author Topic

The Separatists
Posted - 2007.11.20 05:42:00 - [31]

Okay... My main concern, and what has been for a long time is most definately the Eos.

I really really like the drone bandwidth idea, however, in the previous blog about trinity it said that drone boats would be getting a VERY MUCH NEEDED boost... however all i see is nerf, nerf, nerf, nerf, nerf....

Especially with the Eos... A Dedicated Drone boat Command Ship all of a sudden loses every bit of DPS it originally had... In fact, the astarte is more useful now with drones and guns whereas the Eos, even though its meant for fleet combat and warfare link modules, is now severely made more useless. I am fine with cutting down the drone bay size, i will admit (as a faithful gallente pilot) that it was slightly unbalanced DPS-wise, however please dear god, dont cut down the bandwidth. Thats what makes Creodron what it is...

And when a cruiser can have bigger and better drones than a BC... somethings wrong =\ (however dont take that as a "take the ishtar not the eos" statement because I LOVE MY ISHTAR! TAKE IT AWAY AND FEEL MY WRATH!!!)

Also... I cant say as im following this whole ARM thing... will we still be able to have the same bonuses as before if we dont use the ARM capabilities (such like Heat and its ability to overpower at a cost)? Or is this a permanent nerf on everything and now you have to choose? Please explain more!

Finally, Can you give us a tenative release date on Trinity yet? I have heard rumors from other websites as the first week in December... is this true? =)

Haniblecter Teg
F.R.E.E. Explorer
The Initiative.
Posted - 2007.11.20 05:47:00 - [32]

Edited by: Haniblecter Teg on 20/11/2007 05:47:46
Yea! Gallente drone ships are baised towards damage and amarr to spare drones!

Like I had a frickin choice.

EDIT: Wonk, you're soo behind in the whines man. We've beat the Eos nerf to death. And ofc the astarte is supposed to do better DPS you dumb ass. Dont you know the roles of the CS's?

Josef Amerentev
E.M.P. Industries
Malum Exuro
Posted - 2007.11.20 05:48:00 - [33]

imho it looks a little odd really
gally r supposed to be with heavy drone use?
besides why the pre-script Nerf...
keep the scripts(or get rid of em), but lessen their effects for balance?
as it seems, halving the capability of a sensor booster is nerf (without arm)
and, they are completely destroyed as auxiliary mods(see below)

y make these changes to soo many mods. this is not going to help anything
(even caldari id say) remote sensor damps just got blasted(nerf). so did sensor boosters
the point of the disrupt field gens(focus arm) is to hit lowsec supercaps?
but seriously, it is too powerful when unlimited strength hav it disable jump?
then it kills other caps too. sounds like an integrated exploit.
ship w/ stabs gets hit by hactor all that nerf to fit stabs means nothing.

aux mods, u stick em in because they offer some help
consider the mega. it has four meds.
pre trinity
speed mod, cap mod, track comp, sensor booster
after trinity
track comp(track arm) track comp(range arm) sensor booster(res arm) sensor booster(range arm)
make sense ? (hint, the two setups is to keep the same boost)

oh yea, where are those named drones you guys mentioned?
been on sisi, ive seen the drone components, but no new drones

Loli Killjoy
Posted - 2007.11.20 05:53:00 - [34]

the scripting changes are poorly thought out. Micromanagement of scripts on top of heat, nos/neuts, speed, range, tracking is just plain stupid when lag in eve is a bigger factor than any other mmo on the market.

I predict that trinity will be the worst patch for eve to date.

We'll be talking with our wallets CCP.


Verite Rendition
F.R.E.E. Explorer
EVE Animal Control
Posted - 2007.11.20 06:00:00 - [35]

I also request a review in to the ARM script for the warp disruptor. Blockade Runners are going to be hit hard by this, the Crane in particular has all of 1 low slot (the other housing a PG boosting mod for the MWD) to deal with the HACtor threat.

Tobias Sjodin
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2007.11.20 06:02:00 - [36]

I really like the changes. Well done CCP.

Paddlefoot Aeon
SiN. Corp
Daisho Syndicate
Posted - 2007.11.20 06:08:00 - [37]

Edited by: Paddlefoot Aeon on 20/11/2007 06:09:09
Scripts are just a waste of time. I like the idea of limiting the modules, but needing to carry all these new "things" around in your hold... not to mention stocking them on the markets, it just too much and is over complicated.

Make the sensor booster, sensor damp, tracking disruptor, etc... be limited using a right click toggle menu.

Again, I'm fine with the balancing to these modules, but having to buy scripts is just a pain in the ass.

A Ingus
Posted - 2007.11.20 06:20:00 - [38]

Rant incoming (and yeah caldari players flame away because this toon is gallente)

So, all these turret specific mods essentially get their effectiveness cut in half, massive changes to drones on the whole reducing their damage, meanwhile torps get boosted for damage, and ecm boats get an ill thought out massive boost. And, defender missiles still don't work (except from rats in missions). Caldari Online to Gallente Online to Caldari Online. Haven't you heard of small steps toward ballance? The gyrations are making me dizzy.

Additionally, where is a fix for lasers? You moved pretty damn quick on torps and ecm for caldari, but no changes for lasers? Amarr has been in deep trouble for a long while. How about just slightly reducing the fitting costs and base energy use on lasers? Is that too hard? Amarr needs some help, ffs.

Do you look at the stats on character creation as well as ship types? How about population density of different empires? Amarr space is incredibly depopulated in some areas, can't you see that? All I see is a developing plague of caldari with your proposed changes, because there is less balance and achura don't waste attribute points on charisma. It will become a very boring game if everyone is the same.

Sort of depressing looking at these changes and their likely effect.

Tareen Kashaar
Gyoza Society
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2007.11.20 06:29:00 - [39]

Nice. Contrary to most others, as an Amarr pilot I wholeheartedly approve of these changes! No longer will a single tracking disruptor totally gimp my Absolutions! Nor will damps, unless used smartly, or with ECM drones.

Bandwidth is pretty nice as well, finally some replacement drones on our little ships! (Sentinel is a beast btw)

Tareen Kashaar
Gyoza Society
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2007.11.20 06:30:00 - [40]

Oh also: LOL at the scripts description on Sisi. "Fendahlian Society", eh? X-D

Redd Dredd
State War Academy
Posted - 2007.11.20 06:36:00 - [41]

Nos nerf... TD nerf... remind me again why I trained for amarr recon. Honestly, the arbitrator is a better ship.

Miner Tech
Posted - 2007.11.20 07:36:00 - [42]

What is the counter of the heavy interdictor with this focused warp disruptor beam?

There should be always some counter for each ship. Since the warp disruptor beam gives no drawback (as far as i understood) people will just use this as the new warp scrambler. Sounds like a strange decision here, CCP. Still wanting to make low sec more attractive?

The other things...well... *shrugs* I wouldn't have minded if you would have invested all the time for more bugfixing instead. But I understand that you have to produce 'new' content all the time.

Posted - 2007.11.20 07:43:00 - [43]

Edited by: ArmyOfMe on 20/11/2007 08:01:25
Originally by: Lorette
Edited by: Lorette on 20/11/2007 03:39:12
Only thing im not to happy about is that as stated in the blog, gall with have say ability to use 3 heavy but have a smaller drone bay than a ship that can 'only' use 5 mediums....dont know about anyone else but ive never used 3 heavy over 5 medium.
Seems pretty silly, i get less space and zero benefit.

/signed, this is one of the things i find very bad.
Change it to havint 50mb bandwidth and 150m3 drone bay so it can carry 2 waves of mediums and lights.

You guys are doing to many changes now in to short a time, i honestly wish ccp had considerd how things like this will be affected in laggy fleetfights wish happens all the time due to poor game mechanics(pos wars 4tl).
fleet battles are hard enough as they are, we dont really need another element to add to the pain it allready is to sit for 10min to try and reload anything.

Oh, and a lot of ppl are still waiting for a boost to amarr and even tho i dont fly amarr ships i have to say that rather then focusing on changes a lot of ppl dont want and dont care about you could have tried to fix that first.

Association of Commonwealth Enterprises
Posted - 2007.11.20 07:53:00 - [44]

I normally don't answer often, because I don't fell it necessary. But now it's getting ridiculous:

The micro management of this game will become a serious issue. The game is getting more complex and a lot more complicated. The problem is, that it already is complicating enough.

Just imagine:

- new heat distribution: it actually matters where you place your modules how heat is mitigated. ok, now I need to move my modules while I am fighting or I need to think it up beforehand.

- ARM scripts: up to now it was sufficient for me to know a lot of different modules to fit a sniper BS, a bait, whatever.. I do so in advance.. additionally I need to think about HOW my modules are going to be scripted... and of course I need to have the scripts, dozens more items in my item hangar..

- Bandwidth: Ok, I fire up my drones, tell them to attack a target, that's it.. damn man, I didn't even bother to read the part about Bandwidth in detail.

All in all that means we have to learn again how to 'behave' in combat, and we need additional time fitting our ships, getting the right equipment, and need to spend more time during combat to think about essentially non-relevant issues which have just been made up by a developer so that it stays 'more interesting'.

Dude, believe me, it won't get more interesting with these changes, just more difficult. Is that your ultimate goal which you wanna achieve with EVE? The world's most unaccessible MMO? Surely, some may be proud of it, but don't forget what's REALLY important, because that's having fun.

Capital Enrichment Services
Posted - 2007.11.20 07:58:00 - [45]

Speaking as a gunship pilot, I'd like you, the game designers, to review, REALLY review, the whole scripts thing, and which modules are going to need them. And perhaps give us the split bonus thing that someone above posted, instead of all to one and none to the other attribute. That or give gunships one more midslot, because right now you're severely nerfing every ship that relies on turrets to deal damage.

Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter.

Max Hardcase
The Scope
Posted - 2007.11.20 08:04:00 - [46]

Originally by: Gnulpie
What is the counter of the heavy interdictor with this focused warp disruptor beam?

There should be always some counter for each ship. Since the warp disruptor beam gives no drawback (as far as i understood) people will just use this as the new warp scrambler. Sounds like a strange decision here, CCP. Still wanting to make low sec more attractive?

The other things...well... *shrugs* I wouldn't have minded if you would have invested all the time for more bugfixing instead. But I understand that you have to produce 'new' content all the time.

Friends with guns are the counter to Hactors.

NQX Innovations
Posted - 2007.11.20 08:12:00 - [47]

Love it all!

Particularly the ARMS - the more customizable a module or at least the use of a module is the better, imvho. Good job. Keep 'em coming. I'm loving the look of this patch very much.

Mugen Shipyards
Posted - 2007.11.20 08:16:00 - [48]

Well for low-sec couriers and industrialists,i'd like to see a covops blockade runner added,to dodge these new Heavy Interdicotrs.
Also you need to give more of a bonus to the Gallente Recons Damping abilites,as it stands atm its a poor gang support ship,something along the lines of ECM would do.
Drone changes,much needed but I dislike the shield regen facility.
Nuff Said.

Aperture Science Enrichment Center
Posted - 2007.11.20 08:21:00 - [49]

Tracking links and remote sensor boosters now give better bonuses than before, though ARM scripts are still needed to reach their full potential. The Scimitar and Oneiros, which get a bonus to tracking links, have had their bonus increased to 10% to compensate for the new mechanics.

For both ships the bonus they give on one attribute with a script is less then the bonus they now give for both attributes. Is this bonus to be further increased or is this a nerf on a rarely used tactic ?

Target Practice incorporated
Posted - 2007.11.20 08:26:00 - [50]

Why nerf hardly used modules like tracking disruptors (there is a reason they are hardly used, they suck donkey balls compared to normal ECM even on bonussed ships like the curse it's better (and will be better) to fit a damp or ECM)? Just for consistency?

Well in order to maintain consistency I demand the following items to be scripted as well;

-Damage mods (rof and damage bonus?! NERF)
-EAM/invul fields (ZOMG 4 bonusses on 1 item?!! NERF)
-PDU (5 bonusses?!)

So quite frankly nerfing TD's for consistency is stupid when there are so many items that will already defy the said rules.

Also making stabs even more worthless as they currently are with the introduction of a HiC that can scramble no matter the ammount of stabs isn't the best of ideas I think. A change like this will only make low sec even more deserted (sure you can attack caps in lowsec then but quite frankly the risk/reward is going even futher down the drain for all players).

Mrs M34N
Posted - 2007.11.20 08:37:00 - [51]

Hm.... ARM scripting... hm....
another Button to klick in a Lagfest-Battle, that will realy help <g>

SD nerf... blah
the only "small" defense on a StealthBomber u have :-(

NERF everything, remove all med & low slots, make it
a simple space shooty pewpew game

Posted - 2007.11.20 08:41:00 - [52]

Originally by: Liang Nuren
So, the problem is that this dev blog seems to be *wrong*. Everyone is reporting that a scripted rigged max skilled Triple phased muon Arazu will have half of the dampening power of a T1 unrigged Thrasher now.


Thats a strange attitude. If the test server doesnt match the what the devs want the devs are wrong? I would see it kinda the other way, its the testserver thats wrong and the devs are still trying to fix things on it to their liking.

Lady Ione
Posted - 2007.11.20 08:51:00 - [53]

*WARNING sarcasm post upcoming*

I like the changes CCP. Having just spent the better part of a year getting all 4 racial cruiser V, command ships V and recon V, you're nerfing ("balancing") the game so much that the cost/benefit of flying commandships/recons over battlecruisers/t1 ewar cruisers is negligable. The result being that CCP just inceased my buying power by 5-10x.

Awesome! no more flying expensive t2 ships. Just expendable cheap t1 ships!

*END sarcasm post*

nono... wait, thats bad right? because with making invention easier you're trying to make t2 more accesable before t3 right?

I'll say it simple. STOP NERFING. STOP CALLING NERFS "BOOSTS" (despite what you may think, the playerbase simply isn't that stupid). LISTEN to what where telling you on the forums every day! (the recent carrier debacle comes to mind)

Malen Nenokal
The Nightshift
Posted - 2007.11.20 08:56:00 - [54]

Any chance of Mining Lasers getting something along these lines? Something to boost range versus efficiency and vise versa?

Bellum Eternus
The Scope
Posted - 2007.11.20 08:59:00 - [55]

This blog is completely redundant. At least include something new with all of the stale info.

More drone ships have been nerfed with this change than have been improved. I see the Onieros gets buffed to make sure that tracking links maintain their effectiveness. What about dedicated damp ships?

Angelus Custos
Amarr Electronics
Posted - 2007.11.20 09:11:00 - [56]

Drone BW: I like. I see the potential of increasing all dronebaysizes for all ships for more waves without changing DPS. Even though you nerf my overpowered Myrmidion of near AFK killing.

Damps: Nerf them more Very Happy
Sensor boosters: It will hit snipers, especially in empire where they already are close to useless. For everything else it's ok
Tracking disruptors: Never was that good, but useful in many situations because of lower CPU compared to other EW. I can't really see myself using them at all after this. At least make them affect falloff as well...
Tracking comps: ok

Sphynx Stormlord
Federal Defence Union
Posted - 2007.11.20 09:13:00 - [57]

Well, a blog about two huge nerfs, which fails to address why it was thought that the nerfs are necessary, and fails to give any new information.

This is going to be a disapointing expansion for drone users: +1 drone ship which is very hard to train for (Sin), -2 drone ships due to nerfing (Eos and Myrmidon).

I dont understand why they are nerfing the drone bays so hard, instead of reducing the number of turrets. I cant be the only pilot who primarily looks for drone space (bandwidth) when choosing a ship, and considers turrets of secondary importantance.

Lord Rahvin
Crimson Empire.
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2007.11.20 09:20:00 - [58]

CCP, how about instead of spending/waisting so much time on things that don't need fixed. Or barely need fixed. And focus more on new and exciting ships or modules. Instead of nerfing and ****ing off loyal customers, try making some new things to make it different and exciting. Instead of nerfing things to make it easier for 1mil sp noobs not to suck.

I'm a pure gallente pilot, but I'll try to be as objective as possible.

Bandwidth - I understand the idea, but you are taking all skill away from the use of them. Now instead of having to worry about them you can just keep sending them out constantly. So now pilots that have skill in keeping their drones alive (thus giving a slight advantage for the work and effort of keeping them alive) don't need to do anything but sit there since it wont help them at all anyways. If someone takes the effort to keep their drones alive more than an enemy pilot, they should have something to show for it. (They have drones, enemy doesn't)
Instead of nerfing drones, how about a turret module specificly designed to destroy drones?

For whatever reason CCP obviously wants to turn drones into a type of background passive dps system. Personally i think its stupid. Main weapons should be Missiles, Turrets, Drones.

How about creating "Carrier" type ships for the bc's and battle ships. Give them hardly no turrets but allow them to control more than 5 drones. So my 2 million sp's in drones don't go to waist. The only problem I can for see with this is that 100% of cap can be dedicated towards tanking. The split of cap between hybrid turrets and tanking is usually the limiting factor for gallente. But then i realized that caldari already dedicate 100% cap towards tanking since launchers dont need cap at all... (which doesn't make sense since something has to load the missiles into the missile tube..)

I'm not amarr, but I know they suck because Amarr space is dead and I never see them in low sec. Theres a reason caldari space is 100x more crowded than amarr space...So please start focusing on improving things rather than nerfing them.

Lord Rahvin
Crimson Empire.
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2007.11.20 09:25:00 - [59]

P.S. Could we get some dam exact numbers on the band width for all the ships? you've been at it for months and seem to have no exact numbers... really stupid to be waiting this long and still only getting vauge refrences to a few ships for examples.

Gold Rogers
von Dutch Enterprises
G String University
Posted - 2007.11.20 09:25:00 - [60]

Will the Curse and Pilgrim also get a 150m3 drone bay for spares?

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

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


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to

These forums are archived and read-only