open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Balancing - Identifying problems
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.

Pages: first : previous : ... 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 ... : last (47)

Author Topic

Sleyn Peade
Twilight Fleet
Privateer Alliance
Posted - 2009.04.18 22:08:00 - [421]

Problems in eve, how sad that we're limited to three things

1: Highsec ice fields

Aside from being macroheavens, another issue: Iceproducts mainly end up as POS/cap-fuel, and in eve right now, quite a lot of blobbing is going on. Gamemechanics have a large part in this, but it's also fueled by the massive supply of cheap macroed capship fuel.
We have a system in eve, where the macrofarming plague is feeding the blobmentality of eve.

I'm not known for my lack of an imagination, but even I can't come up with an example to describe how dumb that is.

Also there's no reason for the icebelts to be in highsec, they mainly supply cap/POS fuel, things mostly from lowsec or 0.0.

The market-effect would be: Safetyfixated macroers would switch to oremining, so in the end that'll switch the macroplague from fueling blobwarfare, to them driving down mineralprices and thus supplying the PvP'ing lot of us with cheaper ships. T2 prices would go up due to POSfuel becoming more expensive, but T1 prices would plummet equally, and isn't T1 supposed to be cheap and T2 expensive??

I don't understand why icebelts remain in highsec, I can only speculate that it's some form of CCP scheme, due to being afraid to loose macroer subscribers.

-->Remove highsec icebelts

2: "Highsec" POSs

Deathstars in places without capitals makes no sense, it being possible isn't the overall problem, however it being easy is. It's not "that" hard to get the standing for it.
-->What's really needed is for it to be more expensive, like a 10- or 20-doubling of the number of faction-charters needed
Also, WTF is with charters being needed for 0.4. 0.4 already has a built-in penalty in the sense that one can't moonmine there.
-->Remove charter-requirements in 0.4

3: The secstatus-system

A good idea, implemented poorly.
The secstatus-system should be quite simple: *RP on* In areas in partial or complete control by CONCORD, killing civilians makes you loose secstatus, and killing (NPC)pirates makes you gain secstatus. *RP off*

Enter CCP, managing to fail at implementing that.

A problem these days is highsecganking, the indirect problem is not the secstatus-loss, or its size, it's the fact that many of the people doing it live in 0.0 and can just go home, rat a bit, and the secstatus is back.
You can't loose secstatus in 0.0, *RP on* it's outside concord control *RP off*, so why is it possible to gain secstatus there?
Highsec should be a concord area, unless you're sent by concord to kill (NPC)pirates, it shouldn't award secstatusgains at all. Being on a mission for a random faction is fullfilling that corporations interest, not concords.
Lowsec is where secstatus's lost, and it should also be where it's gained.

-->Remove secstatusgains from mission-NPCs and from 0.0, and perhaps increase it in lowsec.

That'll also drive some people from highsec into lowsec, as well as annoying highsecgankers

The penalty size: The recent twist in making it dependant on secstatuslevel was not severe enough. In lowsec pirates refrain from thoughtless murder at times, that really ruins the atmosphere.

-->Double the secstatuspenalty in highsec, halve it in lowsec

Once people decide to pirate, it should stick, to a point at least.

-->One can't gain any secstatus the first 72 hours after losing any

A problem in lowsec, with pirates using POSs to base out from: Antipirates, with their secstatus being important, don't go knocking on POSs because of this.

-->Remove the secstatus-penalty for agressing/destroying POSs, pos-equipment, stargates, stations, stationsentries/gatesentries/billboards

This will also allow people to flag themselves withno secstatusloss. Two people who are not blinky and care about their secstatuses won't engage eachother, something rather strange in a PvPgame

3 examples of things in eve that make less sense than a swimmingpool full of inflatable dartboards.

Arbiter Reformed
Garnet Resources
Posted - 2009.04.18 22:14:00 - [422]

what a hard question this is.

artilleries, nothing needs to be said here need help in almost everything

motherships, generally need help they have little role in 0.0 warefare now with the sixe of blobs that you see.

field, command ships are far too expensive and dont offer much advantage if any over a tier 1 bs or a tier 2 battlecruiser, not to mention the balancing issues between these ships, ie the nighthawks pg

Merina Taom
Posted - 2009.04.18 22:19:00 - [423]

Minmatar battleships, large AC, large artillery and Naglfar all suck in variying degrees.

Universal Exports
Cult of War
Posted - 2009.04.18 22:32:00 - [424]

Edited by: Zanquis on 18/04/2009 22:33:00
Originally by: cyonida
1) GTCs / buying isk. It is absolutely stupid that people can use their RL money to acquire isk. I know it is difficult to stop isk sellers, but I think the GTC trade should stop. It is a covert, CCP endorsed way to buy isk and it is ruining the economy IMO. People can lose ships with impunity as they simply sell another GTC. This gives an unfair advantage to people with a large disposable RL income.

2) Macro miners/missioners. Again, these ruin the economy.

3) Webs. Change them back to the way they were pre-nerf. This would solve a lot of the current problems regarding blasters/projectiles. Blasterboats are supposed to be able to MWD up to their target, grab them, and beat them to a pulp. Counter this by having a buddy set up to tank web the blasterboat and use a ship that has ranged weapons kill the blasterboat. This is balance. The changes to webs were completely unnecessary.

When you change something and it doesn't work, it is ok to go back to the way things were. Instead, we seem to change things and say "Well that didn't work. Oh well, what can we change next?"

For point 3 use Warp Scrams now. I've been doing that and nobody gets away. Its a bit tougher with a Mega where you will need support to use a ranged point first, but once the warp scram is on them with a web, they are going nowhere. AB speed mods still work to get away, but they will spend forever trying to get away and one burst of the MWD will catch you back up.

Changes to warp scrams are awesome now, I encourage you to try them because they have 2 points of scram and lock out MWD's from being used.

Captain Campion
Posted - 2009.04.18 22:38:00 - [425]

Edited by: Captain Campion on 18/04/2009 22:39:35
1. Faction Cruisers are useless
2. T2 Ammo has harsh penalties for little extra dps
3. Tier1 BC need a role
4. Make the Suitcase passive
5. Need an immunity to scramblers module for blaster ships

Kat's Discount Weapon Emporium
Posted - 2009.04.18 22:52:00 - [426]

1) Making ECM less of the final say in EWAR and more of an equal value along with the other 3 racial types. This would also involve making TP do something better.

2)Sorting out a lot of t2 models to use better t1 hulls. Springing to mind are things like Nighthawk using the Ferox hull when it should clearly use the Drake, Eos doing the same but with Brutix/Myrm wrong way round.

3)The majority of the new visual/sound FX are, to be brutally frank, annoying. Go through and make a list of preference for old/new and then sort them out accordingly.

E Vile
Posted - 2009.04.18 23:00:00 - [427]

Edited by: E Vile on 18/04/2009 23:04:55

1. Nighthawk- Can really use a 7th launcher and some Grid love so it actually can fit a gang mod.

2. Warp scrams/disrupts being med slots- Would be real nice if us shield tankers didn't have to gimp our tank to fit one. Can we get one moved to a high slot?

3. Damage bonus to Caldari missle boats being kinetic only- Ammar hac gets multi type damage bonus yet the missle king caldari never get more then kinetic.

My biggest annoyance- Character transfers. I really wish people all had to level their own characters and let those super old characters that keep changing players die.

The Miner's Paradise
Posted - 2009.04.18 23:13:00 - [428]

1/ destroyer, they're useless
2/ faction frigate, cost too much to be usefull
3/ T2 ammo

Tekashi Kovacs
Posted - 2009.04.18 23:28:00 - [429]

If you pvp without Warp scram you are an idiot - its truth, but its wrong, there shouldnt be any must have module. Also now they work as old scram + web, both in one mod, so its definitely ******ed design.

So simply:

1) balance Warp scrams
2) balance Warp scrams
3) balance Warp scrams

4) boost blasters!

Posted - 2009.04.18 23:41:00 - [430]

If you do nothing else, T2 ammo.

Other than that,


Mikael Izra'il
Posted - 2009.04.19 00:05:00 - [431]

1) High security risk/reward balance: Downgrade it and make low sec a viable option for... Well, anything.

2) Rockets: They are simply broken.

3) Ewar as a whole : Buff damps specifically

Jodie Amille
Knighthood of the Merciful Crown
Posted - 2009.04.19 00:10:00 - [432]

1. Artillery of all sizes - worst dps, worst tracking, small clip sizes

2. Rebalance racial weapons systems. AC's(esp large) do less close range AND long range dps than pulse lasers to the point where being able to do explosive damage doesn't make up the difference. Blasters barely do any more dps than pulse(generally) despite their much shorter range.

3. Rebalance the faction ships to the performance level of the Sansha ships

Alyna Stormwind
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2009.04.19 00:11:00 - [433]

T2 Ammo
Balance missions (make it so it much much rewarding doing them in low sec/null sec)

Merch Industrial
Posted - 2009.04.19 00:29:00 - [434]

1) Missiles - un-nerf them

2) Empire / Low Sec / 0.0 - risk/reward factor is broken, fix it.

3) EWAR other than ECM - make it worth something then maybe ECM wouldn't be so over-used.

Mnemonic Enterprises
Posted - 2009.04.19 01:00:00 - [435]

Edited by: rubico1337 on 19/04/2009 01:01:48
1. lvl 4 missions WAY to much reward for absolutely no risk, these need to be toned down

2. rockets need some extreme love, adding my support to others posting about it

3. nighthawk needs an extreme PG boost

4. buff damps! they are useless as of now

sorry could go with only 3 Sad but these are absolutely way out of line atm

Ben Booley
Posted - 2009.04.19 01:26:00 - [436]

I just saw some old screenshots with engine trails and, well, where the heck have they gone? Bring them back!

On a more serious note,

1) Arties are terrible. Worst range, dps, and tracking

2) The deimos / blasters should be looked at. I don't see any reason to ever fly a deimos over a zealot as things stand currently.

3) ECCM. Unlike all other ewar counters which give a bonus to your ship even if you aren't being hit by the ewar, ECCM does nothing unless someone is trying to jam you. And even then the effect of the ECCM is limited.

Izuru Hishido
Posted - 2009.04.19 01:26:00 - [437]

The bonuses on the Pilgrim Recon Ship, the engagement is far too easy to control with a single one of these. Ships that are supposed to be able to tank battleships can be solo-ganked by a single Pilgrim.

MicroWarpdrive II
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2009.04.19 01:35:00 - [438]

1. Large Projectiles...increase tracking/falloff + add much more alpha to artillery.

2. Make tracking computers and tracking enhancers BOOST FALLOFF. Tracking disruptors already effect falloff there is absolutely no reason why a module exists to subtract from an attribute if there isn't one to add to it.

3. NAGLFAR - fix this abomination already. Give it +100 cpu, the ability to fit a shield tank, AND GET RID OF THE SPLIT WEAPON SYSTEM. I like the idea of 3 high slots with a 100% bonus to either xlarge autocannons or citadel torps so you could have the equivalent of 4 guns/torps + siege module. ALSO FIX SPEED TANKING CITADEL TORPS, its ridiculous that a carrier moving 100% speed gets an 80% reduction from citadels.

Kou Rien
Einherjar Rising
Posted - 2009.04.19 01:38:00 - [439]

1) Drones- UI is sketchy and often you have to REPEAT orders multiple times for the bastards to actually work. ECM drones are far too strong. You never see sensor damp drones, target painting drones, and only occasionally do you see Web drones.

2)EWAR- Recent nerf is kinda cool, but making TP, TDs, and especially damps a little more usable would be nice.

3)Combat Command Ships- Whatever these ships can do, a T1 BS can do better. T1 BS have more damage, tank, and have that wonderful thing known as insurablity. Fleet Commands still have their uses; it's only the combat versions that need the help. Make them worth the extra money.

Federation of Freedom Fighters
Posted - 2009.04.19 01:57:00 - [440]

Edited by: swisher on 19/04/2009 06:04:48
editing to be less caldari-oriented.

1. Get people out of high sec. High security space should be viable to newer players to make their mark, get a few iskies, and learn the mechanics of the game.
I love eve's rpg elements, never tried them myself, but I hear good things about them. But I want ccp to free the many, many eve players from their self-induced torment of being a carebear, and make pvp more profitable, somehow. I want the droves people to leave mission hubs, go out on their own two feet, and try to kill something.
Part of the reason that people stay carebears is the complaint of blobs. And that's true; CCP has repeatedly nerfed, then nerfed again, the concept of solo/small gang pvp. Option: make more gates, remove bottlenecks, etc. Also, making more low sec agents, and/or give concord some budget problems and have them withdraw .1 from a couple of .5 systems... Overall, make the point of the game PVP, make everything else accessories to allow you to PVP.

2. CALDARI- every other race can do it all, the slepnir, abso, and astarte, all fit MWD and high dps easily. but not the nighthawk. We can't even dream of fitting our HAMLII, 10mn MWDII, medium cap booster II, and a tank. No other race's short-range, high damage offensive modules take more powergrid than their long range counterparts. moreover, the HAMLII with javelin t2 do less damage from 1/2 the distance than HMLII with fury. Unlike spike vs null. CCP needs to fix this gap (and probably the sac, it would be able to lose some powergrid, unless they just give powergrid to caldari). Fix rockets as well. Then fix explosion radius and velocity. Besides amarr, no other race is delegated to one specific weapon. (drones+hybrids)(projectiles, missiles, and drones)(lasers, and ?drones/energy neuts) (MISSILES!)

3. I hear alot about artilleries, rockets etc. do some of that fancy stuff :) It's not balance, but graphics need to be un-nerfed... Everyone hates the new sensor booster, eccm, and pos shield.

4. my wallet needs to be un-nerfed as well. give me some isk.

Anela Cistine
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.04.19 02:05:00 - [441]

Destroyers - Make them useful. Right now almost no one flies them except for salvaging, and I'm sure that wasn't their intended role. "I'm flying a garbage scow into battle, hooray!" Laughing They just aren't that useful against T2 frigates, and T1 frigates are rarely encountered in fleet situations.

Or, if garbage scow is their intended roll, give them bonuses related to salvaging rather than what they have now.

Ewar Ships - These ships are supposed to have superior electronic systems, but they are no better at non-racial ewar than "ordinary" ships. That doesn't make sense. Give them a bonus the type of ewar their race specializes in, and a smaller bonus to the other three types. This would make all 4 races ewar ships more useful and versatile, while still retaining their racial distinctiveness.

POS mechanics - Setting up and taking down a POS is pretty much the worst thing ever. Wrestling with the green box, zooming in and out so you can see where you are trying to go, then having to try to hit an arrow that is roughly two pixels high to drag it in the right direction. Then you finally push the button, wait 5 minutes, push another button, wait another 5 minutes, and start with the next horrible little green box. Mad After you've anchored 20 or so mods you become convinced that the only reasonable explanation for this mechanic is that CCP loathes their customers.

This is a balance issue, because the time it takes to drop and fully online a POS is the window that an opponent has to try to kill the tower before it can effectively defend itself. But there has to be a better way. The current mechanics are soul destroying. Terrible mechanics lead to burn out, which leads to people quitting the game.

Gas harvesting ships - they don't exist. No ship gets any bonus related to mining gas. Huh?

Atreus Tac
Blood Covenant
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2009.04.19 02:24:00 - [442]

1.) The general gameplay of 0.0.

* POSs are boring as hell in every way possible and bring very little to the game
* Moons, the high end moons are good but without the better moons its rather pointless as low-end = crap.
* tied in with POS, more shouldnt mean better. IE a 20 man gang should be able to effect, to some degree, the fortunes of an alliance.
* Make it easier for smaller allies to get into 0.0. tied in with pos mechanics.
* Make it easier for newer members to get in 0.0, if a month old char come to a old 0.0 corp/ally they will have almost no role, hic/dictor are the tackle there and the dps comes from Hacs battleships. Where does a cruier or frig beomce useful

2.) level out weapons

* Lazorz>than all at pretty much all ranges bar above 200km (rokh ftw)
* Series of nerfs have hit blasters hard
* large matar guns plain suck.

3.) I want to see more role for a battleship over a HAC recon

* first level out recons - amarr and caldari Pwn here everyone knows.
* give a more diverse role for battleships, scorp is the only ship that is not there just to dish out DPS, in fact make all battleship ranges more like caldari. Ewar-sniper-multipurpose. a good example os amarr, there BS ships are more alike than any other range of ships, gank/tank and one with a bit more range.

but 0.0 for me is a must

and also that is kinda more than 3, but hey.

Great Smirnov
Posted - 2009.04.19 03:11:00 - [443]

1 minmatar concept as total.
it doesn't satisfy the description "more raw firepower over everything else". dps of all projectiles suck badly.
autocanons can do some damage on paper calculations but that damage should be cut off by half because they forced to be used in falloff ranges. artillery horrible in all cases, both pvp and pve, tracking suck badly, damage suck, clip reload suck. seeing whole the time "barely scratched" hits around 300-500 from a ship that supposed to deliver 3500 with i blow isn't fun.
spike damage isn't really excuse, 1 battleship may have luck to kill a frigate with that spike. cruiser survive spikes with easy by outmaneuvering, bs ignore that laughable damage and dps. that isn't a spike at all, in all games where spikes are legit tactics balancing is always ensured that 3-4 players should be able to kill 1 enemy with single collective alpha. basically if 1 full strike of arty ship kills whole shield of the enemy in the same size then you can start to call it a spike.
all autocannons eat too much ammo which makes them useless in 0.0 space where ammo supply is a big problem and very costly to run missions in highsec. close range t2 ammo suck badly, cap and speed penalty makes them worthless. cmon, close range IS about speed and tank.
battleships are way underpowered or too situational to be multi purpose.
tempest concept is semi broken, full weapon load is impossible with armor tank because of the lack of powergrid and the tank still be weak, valuable shield tank is impossible due to lack of med slots. so its only role is fleet battles where the own regenerative tank doesn't matter.
maelstrom being a good tank can not deliver the damage because of the lethargic tracking of the artillery.
therefore its only useful role is primary tanker on lvl 5 missions or explorations.
typhoon only has 1 actual bonus, all other ships get 5% per level on total damage and additional bonuses for tracking or tank, but since typhoon forced to have mixed weapon system both bonuses only give that 5% for total damage and nothing else. also even if multiweapon ship sounds nice as concept it makes useless if you want increase your damage via gyrostabs or balcons or fitting tracking computers because it actually gives only half the earning.
despite that its the only ship that valuable to do lvl 4 missions, curious enough being designed as armor tanker it doing way better as passive shield tanker. and even then typhoon is far from being compared on the same level of efficiency to raven, dominix or abaddon/apocalypse.
my personal opinion is to rework the role of typhoon either as missile spammer with bonuses similar to caldari or drone boat similar to gallente/ammar. 3 weapon system ain't a bless, really.
1 med slot more would be also nice.

2. EW aside of jammer should have their value.
minmatar own EW kinda sucks, although it has some uses for missiles it is nearly pointless for all other weapon systems, especially for projectiles a single web will do way better than 3 target painter together. more signature is not enough, it should increase the damage factor like getting significantly more percentage for precise hits and wreckenings.
gallente dampener are nearly useless, even on arazu they are way less effective to be of use. either make them more effective by increasing the base value or rework them for example as little brothers of jammers so they cause the ship to loss its target locks, but without blocking the possibility to target anew, which will actually annoy other pilots and force them to lock the targets over and over again and again.

3. medium size drones were nerfed to death. make them back useful. garde sentries are pointless, they lack tracking to kill orbiting targets and lack range to kill incoming ships.
sentry drones tracking is also issue. t2 bouncer has tracking of 0.012, which is slightly more then arty without skills and way less then "all skills on 5". which makes them even worse than arty, that suck.

Posted - 2009.04.19 03:32:00 - [444]

3.lack of Ewar ships

Minmatar - we need refocusing, right now our racial strengths are kinda scattered not working properly.
For example jack of all trades yet we perform worst/poor in many areas often cause our ships are doing something aside from their main purpose: haulers (we tank/go fast), logistics (we go fast), ewar (we tackle), sniping, carriers, dreads.
Also lots of inconsistencies like the fastest cepter being amarr, the best alpha bs being amarr, sigil vs wreath, marauders got our ewar are kind of a problem.

Arty - We need alpha back or give them some sorta advantage over the other weapon systems. our alpha is our main advantage yet I get the feeling that you don't want arty to do alpha as ppl will complain that battles involve warp in blow up grab a new ship. I started thinking this after seeing alpha nerfed, hp buffed, mael get out alpha'd by abbadon and vargur unable to fit arty. If we aren't gonna have alpha then at least give arty something else unique that makes them a good weapon to fit.

lack of Ewar ships - This has nothing to do with recent falcon changes. Right now the problem I see is we have somewhere between 2-10 proper ewar ships in the game and most of them focused in one race. The problem is the current recons aren't actually ewar support but are more of a hybrid between an ewar ship and a hac. For example neither the gallente/min use their racial ewar (SD/TP) much and act as a sort of super tackler instead. The amarr recons are more of the hybrid using both of their ewar (only reason they do this is because TP/NOS use different slots). The falcons are what I would like to see in a true ewar ship, another good example is the logistics ships. When fitting a logistics ship you go for logistics first survivability 2nd, fitting weapons and ability to solo don't come in to the average logistics fit.

Ben Derindar
Dirty Deeds Corp.
Posted - 2009.04.19 03:50:00 - [445]

1. Revise low-sec security status mechanics somehow to make anti-piracy viable. I've stated my case on this for years now, so I won't bother repeating myself again here. Just do it.

2. Between jumpclones, the relative ease of large-scale logistics thanks to jump freighters and jump bridges, and an overabundance of capital ships in general, any single 0.0 alliance can wield influence over far too large an area of 0.0. Some suggestions:

(a) jumpclone cooldown time extended from 24h to at least 48h
(b) all capital ships made persistent in space when their pilots log off there, and/or cloaks cannot be fitted to capitals
(c) all jump-drive capable ships have their jump range halved
(d) moon minerals expire after an extended period of time, requiring new moons to be re-explored
(e) POSs revised into military and industrial types. Only military POSs can claim sov, a minimum of say sov 2 is required to place an industrial POS, and industrial POSs themselves have no reinforced mode and cannot be armed.

3. People are - in many cases - stupid and incapable of fixing themselves, so CCP has to do it for them:

(a) a minimum character length for forum posts, excluding quoted material
(b) harsher punishments for forum infringements, particularly trolling and inane spam; isk fines, in-game mutings, exposing of alts, more temp bans, more perma bans.
(c) block/ignore options for entire corps and alliances, both on forums and in-game


Daisy Blossom
Posted - 2009.04.19 04:13:00 - [446]

1. Risk VS Reward for lowsec

2. Make solo PVP viable

3. Make piracy viable (ie unconcensual pvp)

1. At present, the vast majority of EVE players live in high sec and with the amount of isk that can be made there with zero risk, why would they even travel to lowsec?

2. This may not be terribly constructive as I don't really have a solution to the issue, but the blobby warfare tactics that emphasize shear numbers over strategy mock this game's premise as a "thinking man's mmo".

3. See #1. Also, CCP has been nerfing unconsensual pvp little by little over time. I guess it makes sense, as the majority of people that pay for their game are carebears, however the reason many of us got into EVE in the first place was because of the dark, cold, make- your- own- way sort of atmosphere. Holding people's hands more and more just makes me wonder why we need more ex- WoW tweens in the subscriber base.

Posted - 2009.04.19 04:20:00 - [447]

Edited by: Haffrage on 19/04/2009 04:25:26
1. Large artillery. It has NO niche besides capless weapons. Its "alpha" advantage is entirely on paper and very much lost when fighting other ships of the same class. Effectively in any engagement the most cost effective minmatar sniper battleship, the tempest, has the least HP of any sniper BS, the least range, and best of all the least dps, but it sure can run its guns a long time! (until it reloads I mean)
A few resolutions to the large artillery situation I might suggest include:
5% optimal AND falloff bonus on the tempest, forcing a T1 ship towards only artillery or autocannons is a bad move IMO so the double bonus is necessary. More range means less range mods, means more options for buffers or reaching the extremes of other weapon platforms. If this results in a DPS loss combining it other suggestions to keep its DPS as it is would be ideal but really the 2 utility highs on the tempest are very very useful.
7th turret with grid to compensate on the tempest
Artillery damage increase (Net DPS & volley damage increase)
Artillery clip size doubling (More time between reloads and small increase in dps)
Artillery damage & rof increase (Ideally resulting in higher DPS and greatly increased alpha strike, as well as more time between reloads)

I specifically mention the tempest due to its price, but more specifically because the maelstrom without its rof bonus (Which I believe should be a damage bonus) leaves much to be desired. I tried to keep this issue focused, but frankly the tempest and large artillery issues go hand in hand and one can't be mentioned without the other.

2. Damp ships. My god you people gave the falcon 30% bonus per level with a cap reduction bonus while it could already sustain its ecm, it overflows with jam chance against half the ships in the game, and you left damp ships as they were? Cap use on damps and disruptors, combined with rails, is enough on any setup that it requires me to fit cap mods. People tried to justify not nerfing the falcon with its lack of a tank, those people never actually used arazus.

3. The hound could really use more CPU. I thought it was just balanced so it couldn't fit all its slots and fit a bomb launcher too, then I bought a manticore 2 hours ago and hey wow it can do all that and keep everything as tech 2. Not even remotely balanced.

daemix tetch
Posted - 2009.04.19 05:11:00 - [448]

Edited by: daemix tetch on 19/04/2009 05:11:26
1) Gallente EWAR ships. Damps use the most cap amoung the EWAR modules and are generally ineffective. Boost 'em.

2) Medium/Large Blasters and their respective ships. The difficulties of getting into range are exacerbated by tracking and damage issues.

3) Large Arties. Magazine capacity, Range, Alpha.... More More More.

Gaiscioch Nova
Posted - 2009.04.19 05:13:00 - [449]

1. Minmatar Weapons need a buff

2. Minmatar BS need a buff

3. Minmatar Caps need sorting out.

Princess Xenia
Scion Innovations
Posted - 2009.04.19 05:22:00 - [450]

1 - Moon mineral

Alchemy is too limited in reaction types... we rely too much on 0.0 giants for high end materials...

2 - Capital-supercapital-Titan-Online

Thanks to high end moons???

3 - Where is the INDUSTRY OVERHAUL????????

Pages: first : previous : ... 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 ... : last (47)

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