Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 [80] 90 100 200 .. 213 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 63 post(s) |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
1348
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 15:24:00 -
[2371] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Seranova Farreach wrote:" Why are you nerfing the weapon system when the real problem is two ships? It is true that the use of heavy missiles is very strongly concentrated on the Drake and Tengu at this time. There are some problems with those ships that will need to be solved in time, and we also need to make ships like the Caracal, Cerb and Nighthawk more viable with Heavy Missiles"
your not makeing HM nighthawk more viable your killing it, the dps is already low on NH with HMs barely 500 with the proposed changes it will be barely 300-350 The Nighthawk died the day the Drake was introduced. Resurrecting it is definitely on the to-do list but first we need a relatively stable platform upon which to build its bonuses. While you're at it; could you resurrect Gallente please?
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |
Terik Deatharbingr
AirHogs Zulu People
7
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 15:26:00 -
[2372] - Quote
Grey Azorria wrote: I know that in a real situation the actual max range of missiles will be a fair chunk less that than EFT numbers, but the fact remains that at ranges comparable to those of other weapons missiles will often do much higher damage, and combined with the fact that you can't fly 'under the guns' of a missile boat (meaning they are also viable at close range), heavy missiles are the logical go to for a medium sized long range weapon platform - or in other words, over powered.
Yes they do higher damage and longer ranges....but if you get within the close range ammo of guns, you're argument drops big time. If a drake is within, say 10k of any LR gun, you switch to short range ammo and vastly improve your DPS.
Even at longer ranges, simply by fitting a 10 aft to each ship, the DPS of all those gun ships will be about 50 dps higher than that of the drake. Now if you take into account for tracking, therefore that real situation DPS, it should equal out. Now if you drop the drake by 20% damage reduction...then you're looking at 80-90 dps higher...with your weaker, long range ammo....since the Drake is the slowest...you can close the gap and switch to short range ammo and just obliterate the drake. Bottom line is that in solo PVP....the drake's only chance is to warp off. |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Against ALL Authorities
187
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 15:27:00 -
[2373] - Quote
Bloutok wrote:Onictus wrote:HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:Well.
I guess I'm going to start ignoring this thread because the conversation is going in CCP's left ear and out the right.
These nerfs will not change by release.
So, I guess I'lll just start training WINMATAR. Seems to be the best route at this rate anyway. This is a case where going FOTM may be a bad idea, you may note the cane getting nerfed as well. Cane nerf ? It's still faster and whatever you put on it, it's stil gonna DPS you to death or GTFO... because it's faster....... Speed anyone ?
Lets see shall we. 1) I try to break your point. That is going to be easy considering I'm three times as fast as you....while webbed. 2) I notice you don't light a MWD and chase me down 3) Laugh histerically 4) Set range to 20km, keep at range and giggle because I've got all day, while you aren't going fast enough to take a notch off a TORP and kill you. 5) Look wreck and link killmail in Alliance, and maybe make the shitfits post on the forums.
|
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Against ALL Authorities
187
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 15:30:00 -
[2374] - Quote
Dersen Lowery wrote:Dr Sheng-Ji Yang wrote:Okay you guys realized that HM were to good. When you then start to realize that Minmatar medium turrets are too good? Example: Myrmidon. AC Myrmidon makes more sense than Blaster Myrmidon due to damage type choosing and capacitor consumption.
Is that because medium ACs are too good, or because active armor tanking is so broken that the Myrm needs to devote all its capacitor to running three armor repairers, or because medium rails struggle to scuff the paint on their targets?
Cap cap cap.
On a multi-repper myrm you cap boosters are your life, since there is NO turret bonus regardless you use ACs generally. You can easily use electrons, but it gets dicey on weather or not you have the cap duration to survive to kill a drake, you can tank it, but you don't have all day to break his shields. |
Unit757
North Point Cannabis Legionis
25
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 15:33:00 -
[2375] - Quote
I'm still not convinced on how a tracking disruptor can affect an unguided missile.
Or how a tracking enhancer can make a missile suddenly have more fuel inside it.
If this was a temporary change, then I'd understand, but honestly, when you guys hit the module rebalanced, missiles should get their own modules/counter-modules for this, chaffs, point defense, larger fuel tanks. Just not a radar that shoots a beam at a ship and causes a missile to say "**** it" halfway through its flight time. |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Against ALL Authorities
187
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 15:33:00 -
[2376] - Quote
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
I supposed I could train for a Machariel... Do we armor or shield tank those?
Either or.
...and there is nothing in this game more fun then an AC mach hotdrop. |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
1348
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 15:36:00 -
[2377] - Quote
Dersen Lowery wrote:Dr Sheng-Ji Yang wrote:Okay you guys realized that HM were to good. When you then start to realize that Minmatar medium turrets are too good? Example: Myrmidon. AC Myrmidon makes more sense than Blaster Myrmidon due to damage type choosing and capacitor consumption.
Is that because medium ACs are too good, or because active armor tanking is so broken that the Myrm needs to devote all its capacitor to running three armor repairers, or because medium rails struggle to scuff the paint on their targets? Also please note that the Myrmidon does not have any bonuses to hybrid turrets, or any turrets or missile launchers at all. But yes, due to the low fitting costs and no cap usage of auto cannons, it normally goes with auto cannons.
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |
Bouh Revetoile
Barricade.
65
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 15:41:00 -
[2378] - Quote
Noisrevbus wrote:https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1948211#post1948211 This post is wise and mostly true, and definitly worth the time to read it, though I don't think the HML changes are driven by your point 2 ou 3 (player perception or game direction). The drake is not only seen in blobs, but everywhere, from solo pvp to large scale, as is the tengu.
So yes, these changes won't change the HML proficiency to large scale combat and shouldn't, nor they should affect the caldari proficiency to large scale combat in your so called projection-buffer perspective, though there is evidence of HML having a balance issue IMO and some of the numbers shown in this thread are one of them.
There is also the problem of all the rebalance pass in the history of the game and the game mecanics which evolved with expansions. So there clearly is some balance issues.
But indeed, there is also the problem of incentive to fly in small gang, though factional warfare seem pretty good for this. |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
1348
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 15:43:00 -
[2379] - Quote
Also I would like people to realize the Hurricane has two high slots that are unbonused, with the ability to fit missile launchers. It is just the fact that it has so much power grid that fitting neuts instead of missile launchers is a no brainer. So before you chime in with the close range damage of a Hurricane being sub par, how about you drop the neuts and put on some launchers. Also people keep ignoring the fact that the Drake has a utility high slot. Although it can not put on a turret, it does gain the benefit of putting on a neut without having to worry about capacitor due to an amazing buffer tank and cap less weapons.
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |
Bloutok
Murientor Tribe Defiant Legacy
16
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 15:43:00 -
[2380] - Quote
Terik Deatharbingr wrote:Grey Azorria wrote: I know that in a real situation the actual max range of missiles will be a fair chunk less that than EFT numbers, but the fact remains that at ranges comparable to those of other weapons missiles will often do much higher damage, and combined with the fact that you can't fly 'under the guns' of a missile boat (meaning they are also viable at close range), heavy missiles are the logical go to for a medium sized long range weapon platform - or in other words, over powered.
Yes they do higher damage and longer ranges....but if you get within the close range ammo of guns, you're argument drops big time. If a drake is within, say 10k of any LR gun, you switch to short range ammo and vastly improve your DPS. Even at longer ranges, simply by fitting a 10 aft to each ship, the DPS of all those gun ships will be about 50 dps higher than that of the drake. Now if you take into account for tracking, therefore that real situation DPS, it should equal out. Now if you drop the drake by 20% damage reduction...then you're looking at 80-90 dps higher...with your weaker, long range ammo....since the Drake is the slowest...you can close the gap and switch to short range ammo and just obliterate the drake. Bottom line is that in solo PVP....the drake's only chance is to warp off.
Not only solo. Like go with 1 vs 1 picture. Most Caldari missile boats i flew had to warp off upon having the enemy close in, else die. Otherwise, my dual nano was faster... :)
Then, let's say, 5 vs 5. I am 110% sure speed still is a big factor.
20 vs 20...... Well, i do not know for sure. I'd take a ham drake and try to be close i guess. |
|
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
1348
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 15:44:00 -
[2381] - Quote
Unit757 wrote:I'm still not convinced on how a tracking disruptor can affect an unguided missile.
Or how a tracking enhancer can make a missile suddenly have more fuel inside it.
If this was a temporary change, then I'd understand, but honestly, when you guys hit the module rebalanced, missiles should get their own modules/counter-modules for this, chaffs, point defense, larger fuel tanks. Just not a radar that shoots a beam at a ship and causes a missile to say "**** it" halfway through its flight time. I would much rather them work on balancing stuff and be concerned about the lolore later.
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |
Syzygium
Friends Of Harassment
9
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 15:47:00 -
[2382] - Quote
I can only repeat what I have written on the german forums (eveger.de) already:
Switch Explosion Velocity and Explosion Signature for HMs and HAMs and you will automatically buff HAMs slightly while nerfing HMs slightly.
All short-range weapon systems are better at hitting smaller and faster targets than their long-range counterparts. That is also logical, since ships that have a lower combat range, often have to deal with smaller opponents coming close to them while ships with long range weapons can often destroy opponents before they are close or at least force them to withdraw. Just for HMs and HAMs (and CMs / Torps... Hint to the Devs: that is one reason nobody who can do the math uses CMs any more) its quite the opposite: HMs hit at long range and with a crash booster and a rig they hit everything from battleship to frigate quite hard. If you have seen PvP movies of some drake/tengu kiting-gangs, they shred assault frigs and even ceptors in seconds.
Almost noone uses HAM-Drakes atm, because HMs are just better at *everything*, considered the fact that they can keep firing and firing and firing even while burning away, they deal - over time - a LOT more damage than any HAM setup which is only better on paper. Making HAMs the short-range system that has more punch and deals better with tacklers and HMs the long-range system against slower and bigger targets is the way to go. You have gone that way for turret based systems and it works well. Just repeat success instead of trying to doctor around with bandaid solutions. |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
1348
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 15:47:00 -
[2383] - Quote
Bloutok wrote:Not only solo. Like go with 1 vs 1 picture. Most Caldari missile boats i flew had to warp off upon having the enemy close in, else die. Otherwise, my dual nano was faster... :)
Then, let's say, 5 vs 5. I am 110% sure speed still is a big factor.
20 vs 20...... Well, i do not know for sure. I'd take a ham drake and try to be close i guess. I find it funny you think 1v1's, 5v5's and 20v20's happen in this game or something.
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |
Lord Cath
Red Mercury Pyrotechnics Ayn Sof Aur
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 15:53:00 -
[2384] - Quote
I have to admit this is a whole lot of "solution looking for a problem" tbh... |
TriadSte
IronPig Sev3rance
111
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 15:54:00 -
[2385] - Quote
Id like to know just what they smoke over in Iceland because of all the stuff they need to fix...they choose to mess about with this stuff.
That PI CCP fixed - still broken The Hybrid buff - was ok but railguns are still poor Wardec mechanic - big corps/alliances are almost impossible to wardec.
Morale of this rant is this:
CCP stop trying to fix things, your like a normal man who tries to fix everything but fails then his wife rings a professional to get it done properly..
Your priorities are just.......1000AU away from what they should be..
You are doing it wrong and its guaranteed that you will lose subs by doing this nerf because its so dumb and uncalled for.
I'd bet 20 plex on it.
|
Bloutok
Murientor Tribe Defiant Legacy
16
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 15:58:00 -
[2386] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:Bloutok wrote:Not only solo. Like go with 1 vs 1 picture. Most Caldari missile boats i flew had to warp off upon having the enemy close in, else die. Otherwise, my dual nano was faster... :)
Then, let's say, 5 vs 5. I am 110% sure speed still is a big factor.
20 vs 20...... Well, i do not know for sure. I'd take a ham drake and try to be close i guess. I find it funny you think 1v1's, 5v5's and 20v20's happen in this game or something.
I am in FW, it happens :)
I will agree that it's mostly the exception. But if it's about balance, how else can you go at it ? Or are you suggesting that some BC's should be able to take on 2 other BCs ? |
Terik Deatharbingr
AirHogs Zulu People
7
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 15:58:00 -
[2387] - Quote
Bloutok wrote:Terik Deatharbingr wrote:Grey Azorria wrote: I know that in a real situation the actual max range of missiles will be a fair chunk less that than EFT numbers, but the fact remains that at ranges comparable to those of other weapons missiles will often do much higher damage, and combined with the fact that you can't fly 'under the guns' of a missile boat (meaning they are also viable at close range), heavy missiles are the logical go to for a medium sized long range weapon platform - or in other words, over powered.
Yes they do higher damage and longer ranges....but if you get within the close range ammo of guns, you're argument drops big time. If a drake is within, say 10k of any LR gun, you switch to short range ammo and vastly improve your DPS. Even at longer ranges, simply by fitting a 10 aft to each ship, the DPS of all those gun ships will be about 50 dps higher than that of the drake. Now if you take into account for tracking, therefore that real situation DPS, it should equal out. Now if you drop the drake by 20% damage reduction...then you're looking at 80-90 dps higher...with your weaker, long range ammo....since the Drake is the slowest...you can close the gap and switch to short range ammo and just obliterate the drake. Bottom line is that in solo PVP....the drake's only chance is to warp off. Not only solo. Like go with 1 vs 1 picture. Most Caldari missile boats i flew had to warp off upon having the enemy close in, else die. Otherwise, my dual nano was faster... :) Then, let's say, 5 vs 5. I am 110% sure speed still is a big factor. 20 vs 20...... Well, i do not know for sure. I'd take a ham drake and try to be close i guess.
Well, it also doesn't help that a certain coalition has a drake fleet doctrine, but if you look at their numbers, they are losing the ship vs ship battles....but winning on pure size of fleets. Now, they are smart in the fact that it makes a logical choice as I can get bigger blobs because many people fly the drake for their mission runners. Which in turn just further grows the popularity. But if the main fleets don't include drakes or missile boats for that matter....most are actually gun fleets
as far as that other dude's response....I've seen a buffer Cane pop a vexor and almost get a drake that were on it....but missiles are over-powered?? |
HELLBOUNDMAN
The Proletarii
72
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 16:03:00 -
[2388] - Quote
Onictus wrote:HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
I supposed I could train for a Machariel... Do we armor or shield tank those?
Either or. ...and there is nothing in this game more fun then an AC mach hotdrop. I suppose its armor tank if you want more tank but shield if you want more gank?
|
Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
371
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 16:10:00 -
[2389] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Signal11th wrote: Although I for one appeciate you reading through this thread (more patience than I have) I do feel you're/CCP is going at this from the wrong angle, You should have just nerfed the two ships whihc cause the majority of the problems not the modules.
I spend all of my time in 0.0 and the only two times I use HM's are Ratting in my "Tengu" and PVP'ing in a "Drake BloB" never use them otherwise. kinda tells you where the problem lies.
I addressed that in my earlier response post, but it comes down to the fact that heavy missiles are so powerful that they don't provide a stable baseline from which to balance ship bonuses. Heavy missiles are so good that they'd be worth using on an unbonused ship in many cases. So we're getting them into better shape, then we can build upon that with the bonuses for HM using ships.
frankly, i do not agree with you there fozzie. not only do most 'unbonused' ships have no launcher hardpoints in the first place, there is also hardly any reason to go for heavies, unless you explicitly need to project damage to stupid ranges. I agree that the range of HMLs is over the top but the applied damage in any situation aside from 0.0 blobbing is just about where it should be to make them viable but not overpowered. many people keep comparing HMLs to medium rails but why would you use this argument to nerf HMLs when clearly, after the nerf both weapon systems would be equally outclassed by their close combat counterparts as well as larger guns (T3 BCs in particular).
I also understand the broader picture; you want a solid base balance of weapon systems so you can THEN balance the ships around them. The idea is good; the execution not so much imho and here is why: - turret and missile ships have different fitting philosophies right now: for turrets the damage application mods go either in low or mid slots (depending on the tank) and for missile ships they are either mid slots or rig slots. this is a very important distinction between missiles and guns and has deep implications on ship roles, fleet comps etc. removing it would take away game depth and make the distinction between missiles and projectiles more cosmetic than functional. - the whole balancing process is long and convoluted and while i understand that it has to be this way to produce decent results, it is still pretty unfair to those players who prefer caldari ships that they get their missile nerf several months (years?) before they get the corresponding ship hull changes (i'm talking nighthawk mostly, the poor poor thing).
please think about the proposed changes such as staggering the missile ranges similarly to turret ammo and switching fitting requirements before you punish caldari with a flat 20% dps nerf and a tracking homogenization.
"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings" -MXZF |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
2260
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 16:10:00 -
[2390] - Quote
Syzygium wrote: Switch Explosion Velocity and Explosion Signature for HMs and HAMs and you will automatically buff HAMs slightly while nerfing HMs slightly.
This operates on the assumption that HML needs only a slight nerf. This is false. Furthermore, HAMs are getting a buff by way of the TE/TC changes.
There's been 60 pages posted since last time I perused this thread. Are there any specifics released about that BTW?
-Liang Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
|
I'm Down
Macabre Votum Against ALL Authorities
93
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 16:21:00 -
[2391] - Quote
Quote:stable platform for missiles...
You mean like damage rection with sig reduction, damage reduction with speed increase, damage reduction with firewalling, delayed damage, very specific damage bonus, etc.
man, all those sound like great ideas... oh wait, they're already being used.
nerf the range, leave the damage. |
Karmu Ivanostrov
4U Services Inc. Talocan United
3
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 16:23:00 -
[2392] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:Syzygium wrote: Switch Explosion Velocity and Explosion Signature for HMs and HAMs and you will automatically buff HAMs slightly while nerfing HMs slightly.
This operates on the assumption that HML needs only a slight nerf. This is false. Furthermore, HAMs are getting a buff by way of the TE/TC changes. There's been 60 pages posted since last time I perused this thread. Are there any specifics released about that BTW? -Liang
I think the same, however if explosion velocity and radius are mechanics intended to hamper damage application (such as tracking does) then its odd the longest ranged ordinance has a better damage application than the short ranged one. |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Against ALL Authorities
187
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 16:23:00 -
[2393] - Quote
Syzygium wrote:
Switch Explosion Velocity and Explosion Signature for HMs and HAMs and you will automatically buff HAMs slightly while nerfing HMs slightly. .
That I'd be down with.
whoosh pew
|
Avila Cracko
378
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 16:24:00 -
[2394] - Quote
bornaa wrote:@ CCP Fozzie
-> Why are you nerfing the range of caldari main weapon system when the caldari race are the slowest and don't have any means to dictate range??? Range on weapons were the only thing that made balance because caldari ships are too slow. Please, include speed of ship in your balancing math!!!
-> Have you thought about increasing the speed of all missiles? I dont think it would make any major difference and missile users would love it.
-> Have you thought about making some diversity in gunnery weapons line?... like... make projectiles to do damage on the end of the cycle? and hybrids on one half of the cycle? It would be logical because "bullet" in the space have flight time...
-> How can TD affect unguided missiles when they are stupid and skills that affect the same things don't have affect???
-> Please make new E-war for missiles... dont use the same as the turrets use... make some diversity in this game... dont make some systems OP, again!!!
-> Please think about all things that affect missiles and theirs real applied damage (flight time, smart bombs, exp speed, exp radius, defenders, ect...) before nerfing them!!!
-> Will you look into Cruise missiles and Torps? They are ****** you know... like... how can Torps have the same range as HAMs... and are next (bigger) class of weapons... and all other large weapons have bigger range.
@ CCP Listen to this man and many many more that are writing here before you kill one more system in EVE!!! What we see is that you don't even consider to change something. Missiles need buff and or balancing, depending what class of missiles you look at the moment, and not nerf. Balance it, don't nerf it!!!
Look at the big picture and not only numbers of paper, look at real usage cases and real values that are only seen in usage and they are lower then that numbers of paper.
Its like you are trying to produce next gen of engines in labs, and they are superior in labs and you put it on the street and they are like any other engine in real usage... and then you decide to decrease its performance because its too good on paper. You should tweak it, not ruin it.
And look at other weapons systems too, give it a little diversity, don't try to make missiles more like all others, make others less like all others!!! Make EVE so that its feel real!!! truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. |
Beckie DeLey
Living From Scraps
101
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 16:27:00 -
[2395] - Quote
Just popping in to say that this thread is hilarious. I follow the forums for quite some time now and i haven't seen such amounts of whining and tears yet :) This is even more entertaining than the titan nerf.
Thanks guys :) It's The Legendary Extraordinary Me |
Terik Deatharbingr
AirHogs Zulu People
7
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 16:29:00 -
[2396] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:Syzygium wrote: Switch Explosion Velocity and Explosion Signature for HMs and HAMs and you will automatically buff HAMs slightly while nerfing HMs slightly.
This operates on the assumption that HML needs only a slight nerf. This is false. Furthermore, HAMs are getting a buff by way of the TE/TC changes. There's been 60 pages posted since last time I perused this thread. Are there any specifics released about that BTW? -Liang
I guess I don't understand why gun people believe that HML's are in need of a HUGE nerf because of their longer range capabilities.....if you nerf HM damage for longer range and then ADD a higher damage short range missile, then you've got a valid argument...but as the DPS of guns increase as you get closer and dwarfs that of HML's, I fail to see your logic as anything but flawed in the worst possible way.
And in response to Fozzie's "unbalanced ships using HM's because they are so premier....then why do ships like the Myrm go with AC's or Arty's...oh, because
a) don't use cap b) most unbonused ships DON'T HAVE LAUNCHER SLOTS....
It all boils down to PVE applications....the drake is superior to most because of their higher damage *notice higher, not high* at range....but I would argue that a Domi with drones is a much better option because of the substantially higher DPS as well as the ability to switch out drone sizes for smaller targets, or just leavig out sentries and watching a movie as you don't need to switch targets. The downside is the training time....which is what CCP fails to realize as the reason for the popular usage of ships....quicker training time for noobies. So yet again...screw PVE and screw the noobies.... |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Against ALL Authorities
187
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 16:31:00 -
[2397] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:Syzygium wrote: Switch Explosion Velocity and Explosion Signature for HMs and HAMs and you will automatically buff HAMs slightly while nerfing HMs slightly.
This operates on the assumption that HML needs only a slight nerf. This is false. Furthermore, HAMs are getting a buff by way of the TE/TC changes. There's been 60 pages posted since last time I perused this thread. Are there any specifics released about that BTW? -Liang
LOL no, a whole lot of butthurt and 3+ year old characters that never progressed past a drake it seems
|
Terik Deatharbingr
AirHogs Zulu People
7
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 16:40:00 -
[2398] - Quote
Onictus wrote:Liang Nuren wrote:Syzygium wrote: Switch Explosion Velocity and Explosion Signature for HMs and HAMs and you will automatically buff HAMs slightly while nerfing HMs slightly.
This operates on the assumption that HML needs only a slight nerf. This is false. Furthermore, HAMs are getting a buff by way of the TE/TC changes. There's been 60 pages posted since last time I perused this thread. Are there any specifics released about that BTW? -Liang LOL no, a whole lot of butthurt and 3+ year old characters that never progressed past a drake it seems
No, it's more like a whole lot of people ticked that their mission runner that they use to make the money they need to PVP in other ships is getting smacked down. which, in turn....will make people PVP less.
Riddle me this, all you elitest, intelligent people who are quick to say people are bad.
If someone is struggling to make money, are they not likely to hoard it and be more risk averse, aka...not PVP?
If someone has funds coming out of their butt, are they not more likely to hop in a ship to go on a PVP roam looking for a fight.
so what does this nerf really translate to? People buying plex to fund the way they want to play. Can't make the money, so I have to buy it now....think CCP isn't interested in RMT's? Try again.
Nerf Drone goo..... Nerf Tech 1 drops.... Nerf Techtanium.... Nerf Mission Runners.... Boost mining ships to drive mineral prices down.... |
Drako Fontain
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 16:48:00 -
[2399] - Quote
Here is a point I would like to make.
Do not let the age of my account fool you I have only like 3 months worth of training and play time (it was kind of hard for me to get into this game I love it now).
I have 3.5 mill sp 1 mill of it in missiles. If the proposed changes GÇ£breakGÇ¥ missiles I am screwed. So I ask for smaller changes or implementation of changes in steps to ensure that these changes do not break missiles. Furthermore I have read many threads when deciding what weapons system I wanted to train first that said the Missiles are not great but they are good for newbs. If this is really the case why nerf missiles when lots of people in the community think they suck already?
I am a newbe so I know that I have little knowledge about the game in general so I could be just way wrong but please be careful when making changes. A 20% damage reduction = 4 levels of skill training, that is a lot of training time that is used just to overcome a nerf. So with that line of thinking would a tech 1 launcher and missile setup at level 5 before the nerf do the same about of damage as the same setup with a level 1 version of this skill after the nerf? |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
1349
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 16:49:00 -
[2400] - Quote
Well yeah but,... three years of ratting and they still don't have enough ISK to get that pvp ship? lol
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 [80] 90 100 200 .. 213 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |