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

a51 duke1406
Original Sin.
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
Posted - 2007.11.21 13:17:00 - [181]
 

I love this, I really do, I cant wait for the first few replys from the devs, Will it explain to us what we need to know? Nope, as always it will be a reply to some random post asking about an ishkurs drone bay or something. Rather then addressing anybodies real concerns, do hics work in low sec, what about the shield recharge on drones etc. It always makes me laugh to see what they reply to.

Anyway people keep it up, I think after we got them on the carrier changes, we might only need 200 pages + to get them on a few of these issues, Im not sure when it happened, but this game now makes me feel like Im in prsion, its us against the screws Rolling Eyes










Michael McNeil
Posted - 2007.11.21 13:27:00 - [182]
 

on that the 180km range is at a minimal to dodge interceptors or vagabonds..
With the range now even shorter means that solo sniping isnt doable anymore even not with fly by bm`s

Ive never liked solo snipping, but its easy enough to get away from. as for the comment about the 180km your right, this will only encurage much larger gangs to fight in if using bs's resulting in more lag or a battle inwhich noone shows up for.

Vyger
Posted - 2007.11.21 13:38:00 - [183]
 

I assume the ARM scripts apply to all types of the modules listed in the blog, T1, T2 and faction. Correct?

But why make them 'charges'. I know they are not consumable but aren't you just filling your database, and my cargo hold, with even more stuff unnecessarily? Why not just make them part of the module itself? i.e. you get all of the functionality built in automatically and you can switch via the right click menu on the module.

Keitaro Baka
Babylon Scientific and Industrial Enterprises
Babylon Project
Posted - 2007.11.21 13:57:00 - [184]
 

Drone bandwidth + no shield recharge on re-deploy = you might wanna train amarr for drones.. At least you get to 'drop' drones in space, to relaunch new ones, how useful this is on gallente remains to be seen in pvp.

I suspect to see more stationary domi's just dropping 12 t2 sentries and scoop/dropping them to avoid them being killed too easily.. Drones should get a hp bonus ..

oh well, when drones didn't get attention they were bugged, now they will most likely be silly and more complex, time consuming and difficult to use.. I'll wait to see how much will reach TQ before I burn the devs on drone abuse even more / again...

Darth Felin
Posted - 2007.11.21 14:11:00 - [185]
 

Originally by: Pang Grohl

Sensor Damper change is bad for Gallente e-war pilots. Is it really that bad? You were fitting them with one of the two effects in mind, and therefore the other was overkill anyway. You can still effectively remove an opponent from a fight. Now you have to decide how best to do that.



Really??? Do you know that even against only one attribute Rigged Arazu with perfect pilot will have much less than half of its former effectiveness/

Darth Felin
Posted - 2007.11.21 14:14:00 - [186]
 

Originally by: Reto
Edited by: Reto on 20/11/2007 23:59:21
Dronebandwidth changes:

is it just me or is the gain of 50 dps not worth the loss of 50m dronebay if u compare the arbi and the vexor?

whats the comon droneboat pilot's opinion on that matter ?


I will prefer Arbi dronebay at my Vexor.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2007.11.21 17:00:00 - [187]
 

I really like these two changes and where they will be taking the game. CCP is hit or miss as always, but recently its been a lot more hit than miss.

Veng3ance
Multiversal Enterprise Inc.
Cry Havoc.
Posted - 2007.11.21 18:00:00 - [188]
 

Edited by: Veng3ance on 21/11/2007 18:00:35
Wow a dev blog. Finally.

Let me just paraphrase everything I said in game development forum.

**** SCRIPTS!

Haniblecter Teg
F.R.E.E. Explorer
The Initiative.
Posted - 2007.11.21 18:31:00 - [189]
 

I think alot of people see the need for the nerfings, but man, do they sting. Damps have become a stable of pvp fits for years now. Carrier pilots abound. Drones have been a surefire thing for ages, now, the drone ships are really getting taken down a notch.

Its a whole lot of sting, for the good im sure, but man, does it hurt. Stagger these nerfs next time.

Hatch
Minmatar
4 Marketeers
Rura-Penthe
Posted - 2007.11.21 18:44:00 - [190]
 

Edited by: Hatch on 21/11/2007 19:30:02
Ok, so, for the last 5 years of the game, all of these mods have been fine and dandy, and now they are all of a sudden over powerfull?!?!?! Where is the logic in fixing what isn't broke... So the modules have dual purpose, every single gun in the game has multiple purpose of range and damage modifiers. Are they going to be split nerfed as well? This does not make anything more flexible when you cut something in half and give it the ability to make up for it with a "script". what now takes 3 modules to achieve a certain effect will take 6, all in the name of not being able to pop a tech 1 frigate as easily with a battleship. I fail to see how this is a problem. Should the people who have trained battleships to a level where this can be acomplished be held to the complaints of newb pilots that want everything handed to them on a silver platter?

I'm not against the idea of scripts. I'm against the manner in which it is implemented. We already have a stacking nerf on them and as it stands now, i have a 2.5 second lock time on a frigate, with 3 t2 sensor boosters. This is way more than enough time for an intelegent pilot to get up transversal speed and evade my fire. Cutting the attibutes in half, only to have to double the modules on the ship to make a default level is a slap in the face to the old guard, who have long trained for a sniping capable ships. Script can be implemented with out cutting the current attributes in half first. keep the 60% effectiveness and allow it to be built on, but with a price, the drop in effectiveness of the other attribute. But don't drop it to 0. take it down 50% and give the bonus of an additional 20-30% effectiveness to the gaining attribute.
IE

sensor booster
60%-60% ---> 30%-75%

This could be fit into a story line by advancements in technology modification allowing power to be shifted from one attribute to another of the same module, but at a steap energy cost. You could even take it down by 75% instead of 50 and only give a 10% increase. It give an edge to current technology, but doesn't kill it all together. Also, this doesn't nerf the mods in question, it gives them the flexibility to choose where they want their attributes increased a small amount with out sacrificing the other attribute all together.

It seems that ccp's policy of nerfing to change the game is an incredibly unpopular way of doing things. Instead of decreasing the functionality of modules and ships, ccp should look at what can be modified in a positive manner while keeping true to the original design of the ship/ammunition/module/drone. adding to the existing functionality of an item is a much more attractive way of advancing the game than destroying it's functionality. Changes in the game used to have a storyline to them. Now they only have a dev blog entry and no change in the story of the game. Advancement in technology can be explained in plot alot easier than reduction in technology.

Steppa
Gallente
Posted - 2007.11.21 19:19:00 - [191]
 

Edited by: Steppa on 21/11/2007 19:20:33
Why in the world would we be worried about bandwidth when such stupid things as carrier pilots not being able to ACCESS THEIR OWN HOLDS without director-level access have existed since RMR? How hard can that be to fix?

Let me rephrase...how hard can that be to fix compared to the huge task of implementing a new and, seemingly, unpopular drone update?

Give me my skill points back. I want to put everything into Minmatar, since Gallente drone-users are getting the ol' screwball.

Cordial Ripper
Minmatar
g guild
Imperial Republic Of the North
Posted - 2007.11.21 19:50:00 - [192]
 

hmm i've read the dev blog sevral times, with the drone changes i see a cicle, u removed the swarm of drones in rmr so u can introducce it available only for carrier pilots - reasonable here and verry true but now with these changes what do we have ? more drone power (in cargo) but outside we have ... 40% drone power used ... ok we dont want cruisers ejectign 5 heavy drones .... but let's not forget that there is a race specialized in drones ...(/me points out -> direct nerf to a race = big unbalance in game)

i'll let u guys see what i am talking about after it gets in game.

let's move on to the sensor booster changes. so now if i want to target at longe range i will have to wait 30 seconds to lock an inty in sniping fiting. hmm that kinda kills the fun in using sniping ships and kinda makes u wonder waht' the point having alot of optimal if u cant use that advantage. ok let's watch the artilery, the railguns and beams ... they are suposed to be long range... ok long range.. sniping ... what do i fit for tank ? answer: snipers don't use tank they are crazy suiciders basicly. ok that's a big hit if a frigate get's u scramed. now if i have crapy locking time sniping is dead. if i have good locking tiem but no range at all what's the point ?

realy guys think this again. nerfign does mods actualy interfeers with game mecanics. the changes are they are now will make players ask what are long range guns for ?

what ever reasonable answer i will get taht this is for the best ... i realy doubt it... not to mention complicating even more the game will make the live for new players a living hell and will result in making them quit.

i think the guys geting new ideeas for the game should realy think twice before changing stuff that isnt broken.

if u guys are changing the game in such maner that hiting at great distance is imposible or more likely to hard and troublesome pls consider on doing this : change the calss guns remove lets say the autocanons and artilery and introduce the "projectile gun": autocanons range, artilery falloff, autocanons rof, artilery damage mod and tracking somewhere combined.At elast u wont have to bother about changing the ammo after.

P.S.: the sensor booster was just an example. i could doo a lecture about every mod changed but that would take to loooong.

Alteris Domond
Posted - 2007.11.21 20:31:00 - [193]
 

I don't know if it's been asked or answered... but I fly a Ishtar, which really is meant for drones and using them as primary dps. Is this ship's Bandwith, which SHOULD be on par with a bs, going to balanced as with a BS because they rely so heavily on heavies and on their drones in general to function??

Wu Jiun
State War Academy
Posted - 2007.11.21 21:59:00 - [194]
 

Originally by: Freyya
Arbi - vexor; WTF!!?? Vexor (Gallente droneboat, Gallente who invented drones you know) gets a 75 m3 space and the arbi gets 150 m3?


Get your facts straight. Its 75mb BANDWIDTH not dronespace. Vexor keeps its ability to field max dmg drone combo (i.e.2 x heavy, 2 x med, 1 x light) and gets a bigger dronebay for spares. Not as big as the arbis dronebay, but arbi has only 50mb bandwidth so its pretty balanced.

Vexor has always been more the dmg ship. Its not a tank and its not an ewar boat, so this pretty much hits the nail on the head.

Sosik
Native Freshfood
Posted - 2007.11.21 22:15:00 - [195]
 

Edited by: Sosik on 21/11/2007 22:16:04
I for one would like to thank CCP for having the brilliant idea to nerf tracking disruptors. They were clearly overpowered and being abused so much that even gallente recons were fitting them because they were heaps better than the useless sensor boosters. I mean, you can get a best named tracking disruptor for under 4 million isk in empire. Compare that to the sensor booster which is 10mil? Yeah, nobody would want to buy a module thats 10mil. Supply and demand would have nothing to do with that.

Thanks to CCP for another amarr nerf. I see you cleverly managed to avoid nerfing caldari ECM too, because lets face it, caldari are already too underpowered as it is, right? You can see theyre rarely used by the fact that only ~40% of the population flys them. Compared to the much flown (~15%) amarr ships, its obvious that by nerfing tracking disruptors, more people will flock to the now superior amarr electronic warfare ships and start flying them in the masses.

Yet another nail in the coffin for amarr recons.

I wonder if anyone will ever bother to fly these new ewar frigates?
Oh of course they will. The caldari one hasnt been pre-nerfed!Rolling Eyes

Tsanse Kinske
WeMeanYouKnowHarm
Posted - 2007.11.22 01:38:00 - [196]
 

Originally by: me
The (maybe) bad news: An empire-legal, 30k, infinite strength warp disruptor on a cruiser sized ship with a BC-sized tank affects a lot more than capital ships. It doesn't take a lot of foresight to predict that these ships will gradually become common at losec camps, especially supported by -the New & Improved- Remote Sensor Boosters. I've never been a person to want to nerf camps, because I love that losec is dangerous. But I'm concerned that this will be another nail in the coffin of an area that's already overshadowed by 0.0's empire building, hisec's relative safety, and the vast riches available in both.

It sounds as if this is final for now, but I also predict that Hactors and/or this script are Future Nerf Victims in the making. Guess we'll see. Smile


People may have already pointed this out, but there's one big inaccuracy in what I wrote. I thought that the WD module just prevented remote repping effects, but it actually prevents all remote friendly effects. So Remote Sensor Boosting these ships isn't going to happen.

Anyway, I have the same general concerns, but it's not nearly as bad as I thought.

Hoshi
Hedron Industries
Red Dwarf Racketeering Division
Posted - 2007.11.22 01:55:00 - [197]
 

Originally by: Tsanse Kinske

People may have already pointed this out, but there's one big inaccuracy in what I wrote. I thought that the WD module just prevented remote repping effects, but it actually prevents all remote friendly effects. So Remote Sensor Boosting these ships isn't going to happen.

Anyway, I have the same general concerns, but it's not nearly as bad as I thought.

No inaccuracy, the remote boosting prevention is only active while the mod is active. You can remote sensor boost it up until the point where it locks the target and activate the mod on it, then the target is already locked the boosting turns off. So for all practical purposes remote sensor boosting is still possible.

Tsanse Kinske
WeMeanYouKnowHarm
Posted - 2007.11.22 03:48:00 - [198]
 

Originally by: Hoshi
Originally by: Tsanse Kinske

People may have already pointed this out, but there's one big inaccuracy in what I wrote. I thought that the WD module just prevented remote repping effects, but it actually prevents all remote friendly effects. So Remote Sensor Boosting these ships isn't going to happen.

Anyway, I have the same general concerns, but it's not nearly as bad as I thought.

No inaccuracy, the remote boosting prevention is only active while the mod is active. You can remote sensor boost it up until the point where it locks the target and activate the mod on it, then the target is already locked the boosting turns off. So for all practical purposes remote sensor boosting is still possible.


Le sigh. Ok, thanks for the correction of the correction, Hoshi.


Cyan Nuevo
Dudes In Crazy Killing Ships
Posted - 2007.11.22 07:17:00 - [199]
 

Drone bandwidth is all good.

I like the concept of scripts, but have a few issues with the affected modules. For example, you're totally killing tracking computers. If they're only going to affect one attribute, can that bonus at least be a little better? Or can the modifier be maybe +100% on one and just -50% on the other so we get some bonus? And don't have to fit double the amount of modules just to get the same effects?

Vergil 577
Gallente
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2007.11.22 07:43:00 - [200]
 

Edited by: Vergil 577 on 22/11/2007 07:45:30

I have a suggestion about the Ishkur (Gallente Assault Ship)...
With the fact it is a drone boat why does it have a useless gun bonus such as lets say... "Assault Ships Skill Bonus: 10% bonus to Small Hybrid Turret optimal range" What if that were replaced for a something like uhh "Assault Ships Skill Bonus: 10% bonus to drone hitpoints and damage per skill level." So there isn't a completely useless bonus in it's boni with skills.

Mathias Zealot
MAIDS
Posted - 2007.11.22 09:59:00 - [201]
 

Quote:
The ARM script focuses the Warp Disruption Field on a single ship which becomes unable to warp or jump regardless of its warp core strength. The ARM script removes the afterburner and micro warp drive speed penalty, the signature radius penalty as well as the effective agility bonus, but the module still prevents friendly remote effects.


Target Single Ship That's a penalty, if you had more than one target
Infinite Strength That's a major bonus, no mount of WCS can stop it
Removes AB/MWD speed penalty Again, a bonus.
Removes Signature Radius Penalty Bonus
Removes Agility Penalty Bonus
Still no remote effects No change
Can now be used in empire massive bonus

Just so I have this straight: It converts it from a super bubble with a plethora of drawbacks to compensate, into a scrambler with all the advantages but almost none of the drawbacks? This seems a tiny bit overpowered to me. ugh

Loli Killjoy
Posted - 2007.11.22 11:21:00 - [202]
 

good job writing a blog and then ignoring all feedback, Hurray!


Mnengli Noiliffe
Posted - 2007.11.22 12:58:00 - [203]
 

worst blog ever, just a statement of things people know already, absolutely no info on the reasons for the changes, which are basically nerfs.

first they told they want to boost some ships that have too little drone bays, so they introduce bandwidth to increase their drone bays.
the result? they nerfed most of the drone ships while giving small boost to two of three other ships, no reasons for the nerfs are specified in blog. failure and lie.

now the scripts.
they say hey we like current EW but let's split the effects so that we don't have universal mods that do 2 ew functions at a time.
result? they indeded split functions, but unlike what they promised, they nerf the effects to about 50% so even 2 mods now are not as good as 1 pre-nerf mod was.

and again - lies and lack of intent or reasons specified anywhere - absolutely utter fail!

now on to hactors. out of the blue now comes along the new mod that obsoletes the whole game system, consisting of two, no three, module types - wcs, disruptors and scramblers. these modules were nerfed to uselessnes without any consultations or explanations, justifications, ramifications, adjustments, anything. could just remove them from the game with the same effect. because now you have a hactor that ignores any wcs you have, thus no one now needs those useless disruptors. very good job, keep it up! next remove scan strength attribute by introducing the ship that 100% scrambles anything it can target, remove need for tank by introducing a ship that 100% destroys any ship it can target with one shot. this will be really fun ship I proimise! I hope we don't have to wait too much for this great new invention of mr fendahl and his buddies!

gb im outta here already as it's not fun when devs don't know what and why are they doing nowadays.

Quinter Servarosius
The Flying Dutchmen
The World of Friends Alliance
Posted - 2007.11.22 14:37:00 - [204]
 

Are there gooing to be rig's to increase your drone bandwidth??

Apertotes
Posted - 2007.11.22 15:56:00 - [205]
 

Edited by: Apertotes on 22/11/2007 15:57:23
i have already posted this concern, but if i understand correctly how bonus works, scripts bonus means that we wont be able to boost both atributtes on any way. lets take tracking computers. i fit 2 of them because i want to boost both tracking and optimal range. so i load different scripts on either module.

and then, what happens?

------------------ FIRST SCRIPT ----------- SECOND SCRIPT -------- FINAL BONUS ------
tracking bonus: 0.3 + 100% = 0.6 -------> 0.6 - 100% = 0 --------> 0%
optimal bonus: 0.3 - 100% = 0 -------> 0 + 100% = 0 --------> 0%

so, if i have understood how bonus stack on EVE, we well never be able to boost both stats again (or screw both atributes with EW)

tell me that my math is wrong, please

Cyan Nuevo
Dudes In Crazy Killing Ships
Posted - 2007.11.22 16:55:00 - [206]
 

@Apertotes: I don't quite understand your math, but this is how tracking computers work now. Their base bonuses have been halved, which can independently be brought back to their pre-nerf level with the appropriate script. This means that one TC w/ optimal range script and one TC w/ tracking script will have the same effect as one pre-nerf TC. Or, two TCs w/ optimal range scripts will have the effects of two pre-nerf TCs, but only for optimal range and will have no effect on tracking.

Wu Jiun
State War Academy
Posted - 2007.11.22 17:32:00 - [207]
 

Isn't it funny how they buried this blog under 2 pretty irrelevant (i.e. not game balance) ones? The last fendahl blog didn't get one dev response either as far as i remember. Obviously they want to forget about it asap. I am not sure if the playerbase will grant this wish.


Apertotes
Posted - 2007.11.22 17:57:00 - [208]
 

Originally by: Cyan Nuevo
@Apertotes: I don't quite understand your math, but this is how tracking computers work now. Their base bonuses have been halved, which can independently be brought back to their pre-nerf level with the appropriate script. This means that one TC w/ optimal range script and one TC w/ tracking script will have the same effect as one pre-nerf TC. Or, two TCs w/ optimal range scripts will have the effects of two pre-nerf TCs, but only for optimal range and will have no effect on tracking.


what i was trying to say is:

scripts give bonuses to one atribute bonus. in fact, what it does is to double the bonus. so, if after the changes, one tracking computer gives a 30% bonus to tracking, with a tracking script the bonus would be double, it is, 60%.

but what happens to the other attribute? it gets nulified by a -100%. so when a tracking script is loaded, the tracking computer gives a 0% bonus to optimal range.

so, with one tracking comp + 1 tracking script we have a 60% bonus to tracking a 0% bonus to optimal range.

new, if we fit another tracking comp., but this time we load an optimal script, what happens is, first, the optimal bonus gets doubled. but since the optimal bonus is 0% (because of the tracking script), the double is still 0%. and what is worse, the tracking bonus we had achieved with the previus tracking comp + tracking script gets nullified by the -100% penalty of the optimal script.

i am sorry, but English is not my native language, so i cant explain it any other way. i hope you understand why i was trying to say.

Michael McNeil
Posted - 2007.11.22 19:26:00 - [209]
 

Originally by: Apertotes
Originally by: Cyan Nuevo
@Apertotes: I don't quite understand your math, but this is how tracking computers work now. Their base bonuses have been halved, which can independently be brought back to their pre-nerf level with the appropriate script. This means that one TC w/ optimal range script and one TC w/ tracking script will have the same effect as one pre-nerf TC. Or, two TCs w/ optimal range scripts will have the effects of two pre-nerf TCs, but only for optimal range and will have no effect on tracking.


what i was trying to say is:

scripts give bonuses to one atribute bonus. in fact, what it does is to double the bonus. so, if after the changes, one tracking computer gives a 30% bonus to tracking, with a tracking script the bonus would be double, it is, 60%.

but what happens to the other attribute? it gets nulified by a -100%. so when a tracking script is loaded, the tracking computer gives a 0% bonus to optimal range.

so, with one tracking comp + 1 tracking script we have a 60% bonus to tracking a 0% bonus to optimal range.

new, if we fit another tracking comp., but this time we load an optimal script, what happens is, first, the optimal bonus gets doubled. but since the optimal bonus is 0% (because of the tracking script), the double is still 0%. and what is worse, the tracking bonus we had achieved with the previus tracking comp + tracking script gets nullified by the -100% penalty of the optimal script.

i am sorry, but English is not my native language, so i cant explain it any other way. i hope you understand why i was trying to say.


If i read your post right, your saying that if you load two of the same mods, then load one script that boost a diffent attrabut to each mod, that you have a result of complet canclation?

sounds like the two 50k ton freight train collieding math problem, (i never really got those) where both trains traveling at the same volocity cancel each other out.

Matalino
Posted - 2007.11.22 20:48:00 - [210]
 

Originally by: Apertotes
what i was trying to say is:

scripts give bonuses to one atribute bonus. in fact, what it does is to double the bonus. so, if after the changes, one tracking computer gives a 30% bonus to tracking, with a tracking script the bonus would be double, it is, 60%.

but what happens to the other attribute? it gets nulified by a -100%. so when a tracking script is loaded, the tracking computer gives a 0% bonus to optimal range.

so, with one tracking comp + 1 tracking script we have a 60% bonus to tracking a 0% bonus to optimal range.

new, if we fit another tracking comp., but this time we load an optimal script, what happens is, first, the optimal bonus gets doubled. but since the optimal bonus is 0% (because of the tracking script), the double is still 0%. and what is worse, the tracking bonus we had achieved with the previus tracking comp + tracking script gets nullified by the -100% penalty of the optimal script.

i am sorry, but English is not my native language, so i cant explain it any other way. i hope you understand why i was trying to say.
Not quite.

The script only affects the module that it is load into.

So with 2 tracking computers, one with tracking script, one with optimal script you would get +60% to each attribute.

This still a nerf in that you need two modules to do what you used to do with just one, but you can still get the bonus you want to each attribute.


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 https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only