open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked CCP (hamerhead), PLEASE clarify this stealth nerf?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7

Author Topic

NeoTheo
M'8'S
Posted - 2008.03.15 00:49:00 - [31]
 

bump , please take inital question asking for honest answer. ( no crap or flames at least from me, just want the thinking behind it).

Lorna Loot
Caldari
NibbleTek
Posted - 2008.03.15 01:43:00 - [32]
 

Edited by: Lorna Loot on 15/03/2008 01:46:03
Originally by: Siigari Kitawa
Edited by: Siigari Kitawa on 14/03/2008 20:01:55
Originally by: Back Again
Originally by: Siigari Kitawa
...harassment...


You already said you hate all this posts as you call whines.

You said I post trash.

Please, if you don't have any arguments to counter or to try to explain what happened, don't come to the forum to harass other ppl.

There's no harassment here. Simply stating the fact that you have to submit tags before you can get faction gear from Navy corporations which is incredibly difficult.

In response to the OP, yes it's been nerfed and I gladly support shield nerfs because right Gallente armor tanks need all the help they can get.


Lol Troll, Go back and play with your GTC Moros K?

Tanking is all most caldari ships have and whether you support it or not means sweet **** all to anyone. As per usual CCP adds (or in this case removes) stuff secretly then maybe acknowledges it a few months down the line either as an intended nerf or an error which they will never get round to fixing.

DogSlime
Caldari
Wilde Cards
Posted - 2008.03.15 02:00:00 - [33]
 

My bet is that they have stealth nerfed it deliberately (or, in new CCP speak: "Reverse Boosted" everything else), and that it will stay nerfed.

Naomi Wildfire
Amarr
Spricer
Raiden.
Posted - 2008.03.15 02:06:00 - [34]
 

I bet there was a "nerf patch" applied at the same time ;)

Trotski II
Rasta Tropical Club
Posted - 2008.03.15 02:06:00 - [35]
 

Originally by: Siigari Kitawa


Don't get smart with me. You have more outlets to get Caldari Navy amplifiers than we do.

Additionally, ALL of the Navy Membranes are very difficult to acquire.




* Amarr Navy Energized Magnetic Membrane
Loyalty Points: 9,000
Required Items:
o Energized Magnetic Membrane I - 1
o Credits - 3,600,000
o Republic Fleet Captain Insignia I - 23
o Republic Fleet High Captain Insignia I - 40


* Caldari Navy Magnetic Scattering Amplifier
Loyalty Points: 9,000
Required Items:
o Magnetic Scattering Amplifier I - 1
o Credits - 3,600,000
o Gallente Navy Fleet Captain Insignia I - 23
o Gallente Navy Fleet Major Insignia I - 40


Unless there is an huge diference between the availablity of major tags and high captain tags how come navy membranes are hard to get and navy amplifiers easy?

NeoTheo
M'8'S
Posted - 2008.03.15 12:52:00 - [36]
 

Originally by: Siigari Kitawa

In response to the OP, yes it's been nerfed and I gladly support shield nerfs because right Gallente armor tanks need all the help they can get.


Please dont derail the topic, i am tring to get a offical answer as to why, i am not disscussing if this is right or wrong, i am asking WHY when the patch stated "no nerfs".

Mind you, as a side comment, i am duel speced, caldari and galente anyhow, nothign wrong with my galente tank, or dps.

/Theo.


Bloody Slave
Posted - 2008.03.15 17:50:00 - [37]
 

Forget about it. There will be no Dev response to this topic. CCP is the owner of the game, your ships, your Char and everything else in this virtual world. Once more, after patching and launching the game you and everyone else here accepted their terms, you had to click that "accept" button to play the game. Every last patch have that EULA and is for a reason.

I would advise to adapt, but you already are dual specialized, better if quad speced cuz some nerf on drones could come ahead... who knows?

Next step, easily guessable, would be the necessary balancing to the armor modules, that was what we got hearing from the Devs in almost all blogs and replies so, training compensation skills would not be advisable ATM.

In the last MMORPG interview with CCP CEO, Hilmar Petursson, in GD8 is here if someone want to know about the future of the company and the game. Just to pick your interest in that interview:

Quote:
Once again, the company has recognized the potential threat that adding PvE content can have on a sandbox and is taking steps to prevent it.


Cool

NeoTheo
M'8'S
Posted - 2008.03.16 10:03:00 - [38]
 

ive already addapted mate, more upset about the massive cash loss on my LP's. :)


NeoTheo
M'8'S
Posted - 2008.03.16 13:17:00 - [39]
 


Back Again
Caldari
Hazardous Situations Club
Posted - 2008.03.17 04:29:00 - [40]
 

Still, no words from CCP staff. Officer modules were nerfed even more, Vepa's turned into mere 40.6% base...

NeoTheo
M'8'S
Posted - 2008.03.17 06:16:00 - [41]
 

Edited by: NeoTheo on 17/03/2008 06:16:16
another topic about this, HERE

From a forum poster that talks less poop than me.

Caligulus
Legion of Lost Souls
Posted - 2008.03.17 06:28:00 - [42]
 

The devs will ignore this until the cows come home because some newb developer wanted to release a patch without nerfs (HAHA). I find it humorous how they could even begin to think this was possible when the primary goal of the patch was a "balance" issue. In a balance issue something must go up and something must come down which means something is getting reduced (nerfed).

It boggles and frustrates me that the developers would try to play these word games. Developers are not politicians and should stay the hell out of the "spin" dept. They fooled no one with that statement at the top of the patch page.

The icing on the cake for CCP's hypocracy and lies is this little gem right here. A clear and unstated nerf. Congrats to whichever Dev had it in their head that they could release a patch without nerfs...you've failed miserably as usual.

CCP Zulu

Posted - 2008.03.17 09:35:00 - [43]
 

This change was made by CCP Nozh. I've linked this thread to him and he should answer shortly.

Zaerlorth Maelkor
The Maverick Navy
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2008.03.17 09:57:00 - [44]
 

Originally by: Twin blade

Stuff.


Dude... your sig... it's almost impossible to understand what it says. Fix the sentence please.

Kuvek
Posted - 2008.03.17 10:14:00 - [45]
 

Edited by: Kuvek on 17/03/2008 10:18:32
Not in the patch notes? Not good enough.

Why exactly did CCP state this was a no nerf patch??? If they had been honest sure there would have been complaints but nowhere near as many as there are now that they have been caught bs'ing.

Undo time...

Hectaire Glade
Forum Jockey
Posted - 2008.03.17 10:19:00 - [46]
 

Originally by: CCP Zulupark
This change was made by CCP Nozh. I've linked this thread to him and he should answer shortly.


Thanks Zulu :)

I'm betting along the lines of 'a boost to everyone shooting at someone who fitted a passive shield hardner' or some such

Alyth
Gallente
Posted - 2008.03.17 10:27:00 - [47]
 

Originally by: Hectaire Glade
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
This change was made by CCP Nozh. I've linked this thread to him and he should answer shortly.


Thanks Zulu :)

I'm betting along the lines of 'a boost to everyone shooting at someone who fitted a passive shield hardner' or some such


Have the 40% resist passive armour modules been nerfed too?

Hectaire Glade
Forum Jockey
Posted - 2008.03.17 10:31:00 - [48]
 

Originally by: Alyth


Have the 40% resist passive armour modules been nerfed too?


No, only the passive shield resistance amps faction level and up were downgraded. Passive armor modules are currently unchanged. Go figure.

consider telos
Rionnag Alba
Triumvirate.
Posted - 2008.03.17 10:39:00 - [49]
 

Nice stealth inverted boost. ugh Did they think no one would notice and there wouldn't be any threads about it? Rolling Eyes

Alyth
Gallente
Posted - 2008.03.17 11:05:00 - [50]
 

Originally by: Hectaire Glade
Originally by: Alyth


Have the 40% resist passive armour modules been nerfed too?


No, only the passive shield resistance amps faction level and up were downgraded. Passive armor modules are currently unchanged. Go figure.


One would think that they factored in shield recharge to the equation. Armour doesn't recharge over time on a buffer tank while shield does. Maybe it balances the equation out somewhere in there....

NeoTheo
M'8'S
Posted - 2008.03.17 11:10:00 - [51]
 

Originally by: CCP Zulupark
This change was made by CCP Nozh. I've linked this thread to him and he should answer shortly.


Thanks Zulu, i think most of us have tried to keep this topic flame free, but we are all eager to know the reason for this nerf (i think its pretty acurate and not really a "flame" to say that) - especially in the light of the claim of no nerfs.

I will also update Akita's topic on the same subject.

looking forward to a CCP answer.


DrAtomic
Atomic Heroes
Chain of Chaos
Posted - 2008.03.17 11:21:00 - [52]
 

It's not a nerf, it's a boost to use active shield tanking instead...

Adriana Electra
Posted - 2008.03.17 11:21:00 - [53]
 

I would also like to add my name to the list of people unhappy about this nerf.

To spend isk on faction goodies for them to turn over to T2 stats due to a patch is not great.

People use these because of the extra resists - now what is the point of them even existing if they are the same as T2?

Adriana


Mitchman
Omniscient Order
Posted - 2008.03.17 11:32:00 - [54]
 

Originally by: CCP Zulupark
This change was made by CCP Nozh. I've linked this thread to him and he should answer shortly.


Important to have someone to blame :)


CCP Zulu

Posted - 2008.03.17 11:37:00 - [55]
 

Originally by: Mitchman
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
This change was made by CCP Nozh. I've linked this thread to him and he should answer shortly.


Important to have someone to blame :)




I see what you did there.

Hachun K'ar
Posted - 2008.03.17 12:01:00 - [56]
 

Originally by: Adriana Electra
I would also like to add my name to the list of people unhappy about this nerf.

To spend isk on faction goodies for them to turn over to T2 stats due to a patch is not great.

People use these because of the extra resists - now what is the point of them even existing if they are the same as T2?

Adriana



Fitting I guess?

Originally by: Mitchman
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
This change was made by CCP Nozh. I've linked this thread to him and he should answer shortly.


Important to have someone to blame :)



Stupid fickdace like the rest of them. Just because your throwing your toys out of the pram because Zulupark suggests changes.

Alyth
Gallente
Posted - 2008.03.17 12:22:00 - [57]
 

Originally by: Mitchman
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
This change was made by CCP Nozh. I've linked this thread to him and he should answer shortly.


Important to have someone to blame :)




So basically a 900 passive DPS tanking battlecruiser with zero cap use can now tank 6% less DPS. The pain of it all.

Jolliejoe
Caldari
Stellar Implosions
Posted - 2008.03.17 12:43:00 - [58]
 

The reason why so many threads here who start serious, end up being a flamefest is because CCP refuses to answer good questions... Nice going CCP.

Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
Posted - 2008.03.17 13:02:00 - [59]
 

“So basically a 900 passive DPS tanking battlecruiser with zero cap use can now tank 6% less DPS. The pain of it all.”
But the battleships and other passive tanks which where just good enough to use now risk becoming unusable. Not everyone fly’s battlecrusiers.

Alyth
Gallente
Posted - 2008.03.17 14:09:00 - [60]
 

Originally by: Pottsey
“So basically a 900 passive DPS tanking battlecruiser with zero cap use can now tank 6% less DPS. The pain of it all.”
But the battleships and other passive tanks which where just good enough to use now risk becoming unusable. Not everyone fly’s battlecrusiers.



Thats true in that it hurts them a little more but to be honest a even battleship with Tech 2 gear, as I pointed out beforehand, only loses a little from it's tank too. For example (I'm going to use EFT but ONLY to illustrate my point) a Rokh with 8 Neutron Blaster IIs, 3 Large Shield Extender IIs, one each of a DG EM, Kinetic and Thermic amplifiers and 5 Shield Power Relay IIs Tanks 771 paper DPS with perfect shield and battleship skills. Now swap them for T2, which is what the DG amps are equal to now and it drops to 736 DPS which is approximately a 4.6% total loss. Hardly unusable. I'd like to see a passive armour tanked ship do that because even if it DID tank that much passively, it would still die when they got done chewing through the armour because it doesn't regenerate passively.

To be honest it looks like they have just brought the DG passive mods inline with the active ones, all of which barring the DG invuln field, are as good as T2 modules with the fitting costs of T1 modules exactly like Shadow Serpentis modules are for armour. In fact, looking at Shadow Serpentis energised reactive membranes they are only 37.5% resist too. Looks like a fair change to me.


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7

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