open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: Speed Rebalanced by Nozh
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 133 134 135 136 [137] 138 139 140 141 ... : last (144)

Author Topic

Amarr Holymight
Ultrapolite Socialites
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.08.06 16:30:00 - [4081]
 

Edited by: Amarr Holymight on 06/08/2008 16:30:00
Originally by: Jakzin
Originally by: Stab Wounds
[Ishtar, shield]
Shield Power Relay II
Shield Power Relay II
Shield Power Relay II
Shield Power Relay II
Shield Power Relay II

Large Shield Extender II
Large Shield Extender II
Large Shield Extender II
Caldari Navy Photon Scattering Field
Caldari Navy Invulnerability Field

Heavy Electron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
Heavy Electron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
Heavy Electron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
Dark Blood Small Nosferatu
[empty high slot]

Core Defence Field Purger II
Core Defence Field Purger II

Ogre II x5

DPS: 634

Defense: 904

Rolling Eyes

HACs look fine to me after speed nerf. you have to use unconventional pvp fits.


This is almost as funny as the guy who said that armor tanking the vaga is a viable alternative and will become the new standard fast.


I tried this fit on SISI last week ur basically just flying an expensive Drake with a DPS/Tank tradeoff, whats the point?

Trader Jjoe
Posted - 2008.08.06 16:35:00 - [4082]
 

Originally by: Amarr Holymight
Edited by: Amarr Holymight on 06/08/2008 16:30:00
Originally by: Jakzin
Originally by: Stab Wounds
[Ishtar, shield]
Shield Power Relay II
Shield Power Relay II
Shield Power Relay II
Shield Power Relay II
Shield Power Relay II

Large Shield Extender II
Large Shield Extender II
Large Shield Extender II
Caldari Navy Photon Scattering Field
Caldari Navy Invulnerability Field

Heavy Electron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
Heavy Electron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
Heavy Electron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
Dark Blood Small Nosferatu
[empty high slot]

Core Defence Field Purger II
Core Defence Field Purger II

Ogre II x5

DPS: 634

Defense: 904

Rolling Eyes

HACs look fine to me after speed nerf. you have to use unconventional pvp fits.


This is almost as funny as the guy who said that armor tanking the vaga is a viable alternative and will become the new standard fast.


I tried this fit on SISI last week ur basically just flying an expensive Drake with a DPS/Tank tradeoff, whats the point?


He makes an excellent point. HAC's offer little to no value over Battle Cruisers with this proposed nerf. Including insurance differances about 75mil more for . . . . what exactly?

Hoshino Rika
Caldari
Shocky Industries Ltd.
The Alternative 4
Posted - 2008.08.07 03:44:00 - [4083]
 

well even tanked HAC is faster and more agile than a BC, which can m,ake a difference also haced have better bonuses and resistances which in fact makes them superior to BCs

somanco
Posted - 2008.08.07 06:47:00 - [4084]
 

THE ONLY WAY TO STOP THIS THINGS IS GOING TO ANOTHER GAME ...

IF CCP GOT COMPETITION MAYBE AND THEN MAYBE CCP HEAR US THE CLIENTS ...
TILL THEN CCP DO WATHEVER THEY WANT BUT REMEMBER BEFORE TRINITI PATCH WE USE TO BE 20 K OF PPL NOW WE ARE 30.. WEN THE PATCH COME CLEAR.. DUN NO... MAYBE 40 MAYBE 20 AGAIN BUT CCP COMPETITION IS NEAR.. MAKE SOME REAL CHANGES TO THE GAME NOT THIS CRAPY ONES CCP PPL CAN CHANGE GAMES YOU NOW AND GET BORED OF THINGS LIKE THIS THIS IS NOT WOW HERE YOU ONLI TAKE ONE YEAR OF PAYD GAME ONLY IF YOU SCREW THIS UP AND SOME GOOD PLAYERS GONA LEAVE THE GAME I HOPE YOU NOW WATH YOU ARE DOING XD.

Sophia Esperanza
Caldari
Posted - 2008.08.07 07:10:00 - [4085]
 

CCP could care less, they still own everyone who plays EVE lol.

Ethidium Bromide
Amarr
ZEALOT WARRIORS AGAINST TERRORISTS
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2008.08.07 08:54:00 - [4086]
 

page 137....
this thread is too fast and needs serious rebalanceLaughing


Pesadel0
the muppets
RED.OverLord
Posted - 2008.08.07 11:46:00 - [4087]
 

Originally by: Hoshino Rika
well even tanked HAC is faster and more agile than a BC, which can m,ake a difference also haced have better bonuses and resistances which in fact makes them superior to BCs


LOl, you can bring your sisi vaga against my sisi drake and we will see how fast or how my BS t1 will kill your t2 vaga.

Andnowthenews
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2008.08.07 14:55:00 - [4088]
 

Originally by: Hoshino Rika
well even tanked HAC is faster and more agile than a BC, which can m,ake a difference also hac's have better bonuses and resistances which in fact makes them superior to BCs


Your kinda living in your own little world there aint ya buddy?.

Joey Meow
MURAKAMI INDUSTRIES
Posted - 2008.08.07 18:38:00 - [4089]
 

LOL CCP decided to unsticky the topic, I think too much whinage has occurred...

Amarr Citizen 15948891
Posted - 2008.08.07 22:15:00 - [4090]
 

instead of worring about current ships and forcing more blob warfare junk. FIX THE SERVER SO YOU CAN FIGHT IN A BLOB. appears once again you have decided to ruin eve and force more boring gameplay. are you actually trying to lose subscribers? another sad day for wrongly placed efforts in the r and d department.

Cobra Raider
Posted - 2008.08.08 00:46:00 - [4091]
 

Hull: Stabber Class
Role: Heavy Assault Ship

The fastest cruiser invented to date, this vessel is ideal for hit-and-run ops where both speed and firepower are required. Its on-board power core may not be strong enough to handle some of the larger weapons out there, but when it comes to guerilla work, the Vagabond can't be beat.
so tell me the point of this ship now i for one only like small gangs that move fast hit hard and can have ***** drive active we needed but now no point in play this game or maybe you should give my time and money i spent training for another useless ship

Develon Hitaki
Posted - 2008.08.08 02:02:00 - [4092]
 

Edited by: Develon Hitaki on 08/08/2008 02:04:04
Edited by: Develon Hitaki on 08/08/2008 02:02:34
all I can say is this proposed change is ridiculous in so many ways.

first of all instead of changing one or two things that affect speed your solution takes 12 to many approaches that are completely un-nessesary.

secondly, By doing this your going to make people bring larger fleets in thus causing the small gang warfare to be non existant.

third, Instead of just changing the bonus poly carbs, and aux thurster rig's to a lower percanetage.

fourth, I can over heat a warp scram thus giving me the ability to disable a astarte or a mega from getting within opt range while i happily melt his armour down from my range. while he cant get any good hits on me.

fifth, the role of the huggin is now null and void.

sixth, gives unfair advantage to ships that can dictate range based on effective op ranges. (amarr, arty's, missles, rails).

rethink this plan it has more changes then neccesary.

I would put more emphisis on stacking penelties on all things that dictate speed as opposed to changing the base items properties. ie polycarb's actually get stack nerfed tied with nano's and aux thrusters get stack nerfed with overdrivers yadda yadda yadda.

I will say this again, by doing this you are going to boost caladri, rail boats, and amarr.

Kery Syander
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2008.08.08 02:32:00 - [4093]
 

moronic changes that make it clear that CCP does not understand or care about small gangs or any sort of 'balance' outside of their bank account numbers. I would appreciate it if there was some sort of dev blog about how if 'non-pvpers' generally don't like game mechanic X it will be changed within a few months, that way I could save some subscription money. Let me know when you go back to being the company that cares about providing your customers with a fun and unique game rather than pandering to the masses like all the other MMO creators.

Haptic Roach
Posted - 2008.08.08 07:50:00 - [4094]
 

These changes are going to make the game more boring.

It will be bad for small gang pvp.
It is bad for new players because they don't see a clear exciting end-game.

Sitting around in cap ship lag fests is not an exciting end-game.

Buzzing around in a small well coordinated team and taking on larger gangs is a great end-game. I was usually on the receiving end - but the nano gangs inspired me to train up and to come up with tactics that will beat them.

It inspired some people to run to the forums and whine.

CCP - stop reading the forums and play the game - what changes to game mechanics do you think will make the game more exciting to play?

Why is the responsibility for balancing handed around so much - why cant we have one senior developer responsible for setting the pvp philosophy for eve. At least then we can have some confidence in the long term direction pvp is moving in.

After the proposed carrier changes and this silly suggestion i am wondering how serious CCP is about keeping the game exciting for older players.

Iloni Atoriandra
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2008.08.08 11:39:00 - [4095]
 

There is more money in catering to new players and CCP is a business.

Theres been 2 patches on Sisi but no patch notes saying whats been changed.

At least Jumpgate Evolution and Black Prophecy should be out soon so that should give CCP some competition in the spaceship MMO market.

Darklin Eldaris
Total Mayhem.
Posted - 2008.08.08 20:05:00 - [4096]
 

So, basically what you're saying is:

F*ck minmatar.

Seriously, without "ludicrous" speed what are minmatar ships. The vagabond, anyone?

The tanks, and damage output of minmatar need to be SERIOUSLY reconsidered if this nerf is going to be patched in. It is simply unfair to nerf an entire race, if this nerf goes in unchanged it is likely that I will play my caldari account, and you can take the $15 a month you used to get for this one and shove it up your entire ^&*. It is similarly as likely that I will just get fed up and quit the game entirely.


Simply because people found away around the norm in your game does not mean that you need to completely change it. This is not a "balance," it is a RADICAL change in the way your game will be played.

Tread lightly ccp, you've made enough mistakes as it is.

How bout some new servers instead of fail programmers/project managers coming up with this garbage?

Darklin Eldaris
Total Mayhem.
Posted - 2008.08.08 20:08:00 - [4097]
 

Edited by: Darklin Eldaris on 08/08/2008 20:08:47
Originally by: Haptic Roach
These changes are going to make the game more boring.

It will be bad for small gang pvp.
It is bad for new players because they don't see a clear exciting end-game.

Sitting around in cap ship lag fests is not an exciting end-game.

Buzzing around in a small well coordinated team and taking on larger gangs is a great end-game. I was usually on the receiving end - but the nano gangs inspired me to train up and to come up with tactics that will beat them.

It inspired some people to run to the forums and whine.

CCP - stop reading the forums and play the game - what changes to game mechanics do you think will make the game more exciting to play?

Why is the responsibility for balancing handed around so much - why cant we have one senior developer responsible for setting the pvp philosophy for eve. At least then we can have some confidence in the long term direction pvp is moving in.

After the proposed carrier changes and this silly suggestion i am wondering how serious CCP is about keeping the game exciting for older players.


this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this this

Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Gunship Diplomacy
Posted - 2008.08.08 22:34:00 - [4098]
 

These changes are great. End of story. Eat that nano-phags and ADAPT.

Doctor Mabuse
Posted - 2008.08.08 23:14:00 - [4099]
 

Edited by: Doctor Mabuse on 08/08/2008 23:16:38
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
These changes are great. End of story. Eat that nano-phags and ADAPT.


This.
Times infinity.

For those, ahem, 'younger' posters, who feel they can influence CCP's balancing by typing 'this' over and over and over again...Rolling Eyes

Edit: And those peeps who keep copying the Vagabond ship description? Well that's like saying MS Windows is a fantastic OS because, well, Microsoft say so

Develon Hitaki
Posted - 2008.08.09 00:08:00 - [4100]
 

Originally by: Doctor Mabuse
Edited by: Doctor Mabuse on 08/08/2008 23:16:38
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
These changes are great. End of story. Eat that nano-phags and ADAPT.


This.
Times infinity.

For those, ahem, 'younger' posters, who feel they can influence CCP's balancing by typing 'this' over and over and over again...Rolling Eyes

Edit: And those peeps who keep copying the Vagabond ship description? Well that's like saying MS Windows is a fantastic OS because, well, Microsoft say so


So what is your suggestion on how to prevent the blasterboats from becoming totally obselete? And what about the huggin's role?

Mogren
SniggWaffe
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.08.09 00:32:00 - [4101]
 

Originally by: Haptic Roach
These changes are going to make the game more boring.

It will be bad for small gang pvp.
It is bad for new players because they don't see a clear exciting end-game.

Sitting around in cap ship lag fests is not an exciting end-game.

Buzzing around in a small well coordinated team and taking on larger gangs is a great end-game. I was usually on the receiving end - but the nano gangs inspired me to train up and to come up with tactics that will beat them.

It inspired some people to run to the forums and whine.

CCP - stop reading the forums and play the game - what changes to game mechanics do you think will make the game more exciting to play?

Why is the responsibility for balancing handed around so much - why cant we have one senior developer responsible for setting the pvp philosophy for eve. At least then we can have some confidence in the long term direction pvp is moving in.

After the proposed carrier changes and this silly suggestion i am wondering how serious CCP is about keeping the game exciting for older players.


Well said.

Melwitax
Posted - 2008.08.09 05:25:00 - [4102]
 

I don't make many posts in forum, but when I have I think I've been fairly consistent in theme. In a game like Eve where every player enjoys access to all the technologies available, it is NEVER necessary to nerf the capabilities of ships or modules. Such actions are win-lose for players and lose-lose for the company as inevitably someone is so aggrevated by the change that he or she opts to cancel. The course that should be taken, one that is both fair to non-nano ships and speed-demons alike is to introduce new items capable of combating these ships. By adding hypervelocity drones and missiles to the game you give people who fly slower ships, the ability to take on this threat while still allowing those who fly ultra-fast ships to get the most speed for the buck. This is a logical and natural progression of the game's technology whereas a nerf to all the speeds of the ships in the game represents a very unnatural change to the game's physics.

Find ways to give people choices instead of taking them away. In the end it makes everyone happier.

P.S. It's worth noting that most ships in Eve, including most interceptors, are already slower than the Space Shuttles. Kind of funny considering that there's supposed to be a 21,000 year difference between the world of New Eden and the present.

Zooooooom
Posted - 2008.08.09 12:16:00 - [4103]
 

So....the Deimos will be worthless then. Wonderful...It gives a great bonus to the mwd, but hey! It gets shut off by scramblers! And I have to be within 3-4k range to even shoot them. So if they have an AB then the Deimos can't keep up, even if it uses a web now that they only do -50%.

But if the Deimos puts on an AB, that's one wasted bonus the Deimos has. Then if I fit a scrambler, gate camping or solo engagements are nearly impossible since I can't get to them in time before they warp off.

I suppose I could do a dual web setup, but I'd have to lose an MWD or point, which is unacceptable. Seems like a dual webbing phobos is going to be a valued ship these days.

Let's not forget the tracking of blasters...now since we can't slow down our targets, we won't be able to hit them! Even if they're in a BC. All they have to do is use an AB and hitting them is a pain (still possible, but won't hit as much..)

Selnix
Gallente
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2008.08.09 16:58:00 - [4104]
 

Sorry to tell you guys, but you are likely just wasting your time by making all of these posts. When Interdictor speeds were nerfed in late 2007, there was a thread that was kept alive for 6 months with suggestions and comments regarding why the nerf was wrong and how it had utterly destroyed a style of play along with an entire class of ships as well as with requests for GM/Dev response.

Response thread to the Dev's first time making this mistake.

Granted, not all of the posts were well-reasoned and not all of them were even remotely logical. The crux of the situation is that despite 6 months of their players asking for help to make what they had once flown (some to the point of exclusivity) viable once more, the thread received exactly 0 replies from the Devs and GMs. If they can completely ignore the player base for 6 months it seems quite unlikely that they will listen to you guys after just a couple of weeks, despite the higher post count given this change is planned to destroy more than just one small specialty ship class.

It would be nice if CCP would choose to learn from and rectify their earlier mistake instead of implementing a larger and more far-reaching version of it.

Doctor Mabuse
Posted - 2008.08.09 18:30:00 - [4105]
 

Originally by: Develon Hitaki

So what is your suggestion on how to prevent the blasterboats from becoming totally obselete? And what about the huggin's role?


Oh I don't know, perhaps you could bring something small and tanked to turn off your targets MWD and web him, and AF or two maybe, and then close to deal some major DPS. You know, brings some friends.

Its kinda like the nanosaurs telling us we had to bring a rapier, or had to use neuts or had to fit all our ships specifically and have a certain gang composition to take them on with one of the many 'apparent' counters.

At last we have some different options, you could possibly try some...



marakor
Gallente
Anti Lag Forum Smackers
Posted - 2008.08.09 18:40:00 - [4106]
 

Originally by: Doctor Mabuse
Originally by: Develon Hitaki

So what is your suggestion on how to prevent the blasterboats from becoming totally obselete? And what about the huggin's role?


Oh I don't know, perhaps you could bring something small and tanked to turn off your targets MWD and web him, and AF or two maybe, and then close to deal some major DPS. You know, brings some friends.

Its kinda like the nanosaurs telling us we had to bring a rapier, or had to use neuts or had to fit all our ships specifically and have a certain gang composition to take them on with one of the many 'apparent' counters.

At last we have some different options, you could possibly try some...





You have obviously put some thought into this and its nice to see somebody who is pro this nerf thinking instead of spouting the usual "i love your nano tears " crap.

Unfortunately any ship approaching a hostile gang with or without a afterburner or even a mwd will be dust long before it gets into range to be able to turn off a mwd.

Vrinimous
Posted - 2008.08.09 20:25:00 - [4107]
 

Originally by: marakor
....

Unfortunately any ship approaching a hostile gang with or without a afterburner or even a mwd will be dust long before it gets into range to be able to turn off a mwd.


Perhaps fit both an ab and an mwd? Multiple fitting options for midslots are now available. Roll up, roll up, get your new and exciting variations here!

Alternatively, get someone in your fleet to web and disrupt them, and then warp to your mate, and splinter 'em.

Finally, the best option, stay docked.

marakor
Gallente
Anti Lag Forum Smackers
Posted - 2008.08.09 21:58:00 - [4108]
 

Edited by: marakor on 09/08/2008 23:58:10

Originally by: Vrinimous
Originally by: marakor
....

Unfortunately any ship approaching a hostile gang with or without a afterburner or even a mwd will be dust long before it gets into range to be able to turn off a mwd.


Perhaps fit both an ab and an mwd? Multiple fitting options for midslots are now available. Roll up, roll up, get your new and exciting variations here!

Alternatively, get someone in your fleet to web and disrupt them, and then warp to your mate, and splinter 'em.

Finally, the best option, stay docked.


Those are great suggestions thank you, now say its a moderately sized gang of say 20-30 not a big fleet but a good sized gang. Now id be interested to know if you had say a similar gang how you would web, disrupt and so on each or most of those ships all at the same time so they cannot shoot your tacklers?. And how does having both a mwd and a afterburner fitted help?.

I mean no disrespect at all but i have some experience at pvp and i have never seen any gang able to disrupt, web whatever 30 ships simultaneously with 60+ ships let alone the same number. Do not get me wrong your ideas may seem good to you or look good on paper but the reality is that they are impractical and rely on the opposing gang not shooting back, moving or doing anything but letting you shoot them tbh. And with a 30 vs 30 gang or even less all you need is good alpha and dps to pop stuff tackle is not needed.

As ppl have already said this speed nerf allows ppl to kill without tackling as long as they have dps and numbers while nano forced ppl to work as a team and tackle to kill even if ppl had a blob.

BtodaC
24th Imperial Crusade
Posted - 2008.08.10 01:18:00 - [4109]
 

"The course that should be taken, one that is both fair to non-nano ships and speed-demons alike is to introduce new items capable of combating these ships."

This statement makes sense. Nerfing is a very lazy way of balancing a game. Think of it as an arms race; people win by going fast so add more ability to combat their speed.
These changes look like a blob boost and a very serious nerf for small gangs and i for one loathe laggy blob fights. I concede that doing over 6km/s is excessive but if these changes result in the nano tactic being unviable then the only tactic that remains is ever larger bs fleets. How will this make fights more 'unpredictable'?

Vrinimous
Posted - 2008.08.10 07:01:00 - [4110]
 

Edited by: Vrinimous on 10/08/2008 07:08:03
Originally by: marakor


Those are great suggestions thank you, now say its a moderately sized gang of say 20-30 not a big fleet but a good sized gang. Now id be interested to know if you had say a similar gang how you would web, disrupt and so on each or most of those ships all at the same time so they cannot shoot your tacklers?.


I am guilty of a certain light-heartedness - we will all survive the changes, and new methodologies will appear. The important thing to remember is that it is the playing field that will change. All players have the ability to be affected to the same degree - it's just that some players have specialised more than others, and so will feel the changes more. That's evolution in action, for you. Some tacklers will always die in an engagement, that's the way it should be, no-one should be able to attack with impunity.

Originally by: marakor


And how does having both a mwd and a afterburner fitted help?.


The mwd gets you close (as now), the ab helps you continue some speed after an mwd shutdown, maintains your transversal (if you like) and helps keep your tackler (or whatever) alive. It only helps, mind you. My comment was just a thought on how else, perhaps, to fit mid-slots.

Originally by: marakor


.... And with a 30 vs 30 gang or even less all you need is good alpha and dps to pop stuff tackle is not needed.


That has always been the case. A gang with their preferred range, and with sufficient alpha, can pop members of a gang who are not at their preferred range now. I don't really see any change there.

Originally by: marakor


As ppl have already said this speed nerf allows ppl to kill without tackling as long as they have dps and numbers while nano forced ppl to work as a team and tackle to kill even if ppl had a blob.


The same applies here, as in my previous comment. It's just a change of paradigm, that's all. If you want to work together, work together. A game mechanic, such as nano, should not be the only reason people fly together.


Pages: first : previous : ... 133 134 135 136 [137] 138 139 140 141 ... : last (144)

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