Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 34 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 28 post(s) |
Dhaaran
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:00:00 -
[241] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Dhaaran wrote:the main problem i see with gang link changes are as follows:
1. in a big fleet fight, command ships are way too easy to kill. say you got 200 people in fleet, then killing that one on-grid commandship that specialized in EHP links takes 30% EHP off the other 199. as you promote specialization, there will be no redundancy for this. the consequence of this fact is: if you want commandships on the grid, they need to have insane amounts of resists, say 500k+ EHP with a total cost for the ship of below 500m. otherwise they just instantly get killed and then everything else dies way faster than it atm, which is already too fast due to alpha.
2. the other thing OGB T3s have going for them that Commandships can not provide is Interdiction Nullification & Covert Ops Cloaks. this makes them extremely well suited for not getting tackled and killed when jumping in and allows them to cloak up while not fighting if there is not a friendly pos in system.
3. the reduction in overall EHP for proper fleets needs to be counterbalanced by either a reduction in the dps of all ships or a general increase to all ships EHP. in a day and age where you get fights with 1200+ people there is sufficient alpha around to instapop everything, which is neither skillful nor interesting gameplay and voids the role of logistics. higher resists allow logistics to be successful at what they are doing. Your talking about the problems of blob warfare you can't ask for ridiclous EHP buffs to solve your problem
i am aware of that, the least i expect CCP to do is not encourage blobing even more via ship changes |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
1804
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:01:00 -
[242] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:I like all the proposed changes except the Hurricane.
The ship is full of awesomeness even if it's not a "monster" like a Drake.
It's awesomeness comes exactly from its versatility (not for inner super-powers) and seeing it taken away really makes me sad. I literally have fun at experimenting zillions and zillions of new setups with it, it's really that great. What good is going to do, to make it less great? If it got overpowered stats then nerf those, not the ship fun.
The Typhoon imo should not become a full missile boat. It's sig radius and speed would not really be valuable as they are now. Imo it should become a big Hurricane brother, that is versatile and in the middle between Mael and Tempest. The reason for the for the Hurricane nerf is because it can fit anything without even batting an eye at fitting costs.
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |
Callic Veratar
Power of the Phoenix
272
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:01:00 -
[243] - Quote
I really like the idea of a ganglink sphere. It encourages having multiple command ships in the fleet to get coverage and variety to all fleet members. There could even be an analogous heavy command ship that launches fixed spheres (or targeted super bonuses?). |
Reverend Mak
Abh Empire Intrepid Crossing
2
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:01:00 -
[244] - Quote
Quote:Changing skill requirements for capital ships from Racial Battleships 5 to 4, but introducing or increasing other skills to keep the same overall training time requirements
Can we have more detail on what new requirements aspiring cap pilots will be facing?
Or if not that, some ballpark of the timeframe for this change?
Currently, I have an alt that is 78 days out from racial Carrier 1. Racial Battleship is already at 4 and I'm wondering whether to go racial Battleship 5 ASAP, or make it the last skill in the plan. The alt will not be flying battleships, so this is just about the path to capitals.
Reverend Mak Vice Admiril, Navy Division, Abh Empire ABH EMPIRE IS RECRUITING: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=140087 |
Dhaaran
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:01:00 -
[245] - Quote
Moraguth wrote: Nobody will know which one is giving the bonuses unless you have spies in your fleet feeding the enemies intel.
welcome to eve |
Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
98
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:03:00 -
[246] - Quote
Callic Veratar wrote:I really like the idea of a ganglink sphere. It encourages having multiple command ships in the fleet to get coverage and variety to all fleet members. There could even be an analogous heavy command ship that launches fixed spheres (or targeted super bonuses?).
Now don't be crazy the point is too keep it ongrid but also short ranged as its giving significant bonus and should have a big drawback |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
1804
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:03:00 -
[247] - Quote
As far as boosters hiding behind a POS shield, just make it impossible to turn on the module within 5km of a POS shield. It is not a fix for off grid boosters, but a step in the right direction till a more complete fix is done.
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |
Julius Foederatus
Hyper-Nova
141
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:04:00 -
[248] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Julius Foederatus wrote:Leave my Astarte alone you bastards, it doesn't need any link bonuses. Why on earth would you need to mess with the Field/Fleet dichotomy when no one has complained about it? Are you sure about that? Fanfest springs to mind why does Fleet CS do virtually no dps?
That's a complaint about Fleet CS, and I'm fairly sure no one who complained about it had the solution of nerfing Field Command ships' combat role. I'm not saying don't buff the Eos, just leave my damn Astarte alone. |
Callic Veratar
Power of the Phoenix
272
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:04:00 -
[249] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Callic Veratar wrote:I really like the idea of a ganglink sphere. It encourages having multiple command ships in the fleet to get coverage and variety to all fleet members. There could even be an analogous heavy command ship that launches fixed spheres (or targeted super bonuses?). Now don't be crazy the point is too keep it ongrid but also short ranged as its giving significant bonus and should have a big drawback
The drawback is that I'm sitting in a command ship with 4 medium guns instead of a battleship with 8 large. |
Qaidan Alenko
State War Academy Caldari State
597
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:05:00 -
[250] - Quote
I asked this earlier...
Quote:Drake: once again, blame the modules, not the hull GÇô while missiles are being looked into by CCP Fozzie, shield tanking is the root of the problem here. Can any light be shed on this area? What is being bandied about with mods and shield tanking?
Just what is the "Issue" with shield tanking here? If the problem isn't in the hull, just what is it? Will we be looking at stacking penalties for Shield Extenders? Or perhaps limiting what size Extender can be fitted to certain ships (a-la Lg = BS, Med = Cruise/BC, etc)? Go ahead,,,, Get your Wham on!!!
|
|
Michal Jita
Lords Of The Universe
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:07:00 -
[251] - Quote
Quote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: With the bulk of our work out of the way though, this begs the question, what are we going to do now with all that precious free time?
New POS anyone?
When this will get some love? |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
1805
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:08:00 -
[252] - Quote
Turning on a gang link module should equate to using a remote module on a war target with associated aggression.
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |
Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
100
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:09:00 -
[253] - Quote
Callic Veratar wrote:Harvey James wrote:Callic Veratar wrote:I really like the idea of a ganglink sphere. It encourages having multiple command ships in the fleet to get coverage and variety to all fleet members. There could even be an analogous heavy command ship that launches fixed spheres (or targeted super bonuses?). Now don't be crazy the point is too keep it ongrid but also short ranged as its giving significant bonus and should have a big drawback The drawback is that I'm sitting in a command ship with 4 medium guns instead of a battleship with 8 large.
No thats the drawback of using a CS instead of a bs and it would be 5 guns. i'm saying a module always has drawbacks relative to its bonus so a high bonus to a mod means a high drawback.
|
Marcel Devereux
Aideron Robotics
170
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:10:00 -
[254] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:Harvey James wrote:Lors Dornick wrote:Jennifer A wrote:Would be cool if you fixed the HORRIBLE drone UI before you made half of the ships DRONEboats. You're sure that you want the game designers monitoring this thread getting involved in a long outstanding UI issue? There are better targets for that (5 y celebrating Karkur, Puncturis and "don't touch that button" Tuxford seems likely) and they appear to be well aware of it. Let's focus our balancing wrath on Ytterbium and his game designer minions ;) designer minions lol Technically they're my minions
Let me tell you something about one of your minion's then. Your minion Fozzie, he completely ROCKS! You should have the mayor of Reykjavik give me the keys to the city (or the Icelandic equivalent)! |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
811
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:13:00 -
[255] - Quote
Quote:Dhaaran wrote:Harvey James wrote: 3. the reduction in overall EHP for proper fleets needs to be counterbalanced by either a reduction in the dps of all ships or a general increase to all ships EHP. in a day and age where you get fights with 1200+ people there is sufficient alpha around to instapop everything, which is neither skillful nor interesting gameplay and voids the role of logistics. higher resists allow logistics to be successful at what they are doing.
Your talking about the problems of blob warfare you can't ask for ridiclous EHP buffs to solve your problem i am aware of that, the least i expect CCP to do is not encourage blobing even more via ship changes Yeah, this never ceases to amaze: - omg-omg, we've blobbed up an entity of 40 ships, now everything pops way too fast! *CCP boosts HP* - omg-omg, now there are 200 of us, ships still pop too fast! *CCP boosts HP once again*.
And so on ad infinum.
Noticed how pretty much all the ships CCP has overhauled over last months got HP buffs? 14 |
MinefieldS
1 Sick Duck Standss on something
160
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:14:00 -
[256] - Quote
Most of these changes are complete bullshit. I'll just leave this here:
The Prophecy is built on an ancient Amarrian warship design dating back to the earliest days of starship combat. Originally intended as a full-fledged battleship, it was determined after mixed fleet engagements with early prototypes that the Prophecy would be more effective as a slightly smaller, more mobile form of artillery support.
Now it's a drone boat? Perhaps CCP shouldn't let drones make changes to the ships. |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
434
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:14:00 -
[257] - Quote
Julius Priscus wrote:off grid boosting will not take a huge hit in high sec..
fleets if you call them that will use out of corp boosters on grid.
INCURSION runner here telling your you are off your rockers if you think: "off grid boosting will not take a huge hit in high sec.." Assault & HQ fleets make much use of them & when Sansha incuelence is over 50% red bar peeps getskidish w/o them
Meta-gaming for NULL SECCers: Whine on the forums like a little ***** until CCP gets sick of you and hands you everything you ask for just to shut you up.-á Typical NULL seccer whine: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6u299-o66wo&feature=related |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
435
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:17:00 -
[258] - Quote
Iam Widdershins wrote:I'm really surprised at the way you arranged the double bonuses on the command ships. Why does Amarr get skirmish while Gallente gets information? That seems incredibly outdated. Amarr have no remarkably fast ships, very few ships that rely on fighting particularly up close, and no ships that have any bonuses to tackle. Meanwhile Gallente, who was given the information warfare instead of skirmish, are known for having fast in-your-face skirmishing brawlers, but they have the recon ships with bonuses specifically for tackle range.
Amarr should be Armor and Info. Gallente should be Armor and Skirmish. Doing it otherwise makes no sense to me.
NOOOOOOOO Amarr want the skirmish bonus the INFO sucks!!!! Meta-gaming for NULL SECCers: Whine on the forums like a little ***** until CCP gets sick of you and hands you everything you ask for just to shut you up.-á Typical NULL seccer whine: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6u299-o66wo&feature=related |
David Zahavi
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:17:00 -
[259] - Quote
Redacted. |
Ryuce
31
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:19:00 -
[260] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Callic Veratar wrote:Harvey James wrote:Callic Veratar wrote:I really like the idea of a ganglink sphere. It encourages having multiple command ships in the fleet to get coverage and variety to all fleet members. There could even be an analogous heavy command ship that launches fixed spheres (or targeted super bonuses?). Now don't be crazy the point is too keep it ongrid but also short ranged as its giving significant bonus and should have a big drawback The drawback is that I'm sitting in a command ship with 4 medium guns instead of a battleship with 8 large. No thats the drawback of using a CS instead of a bs and it would be 5 guns. i'm saying a module always has drawbacks relative to its bonus so a high bonus to a mod means a high drawback. Unless you run the links on an offgrid alt while having your main on grid in a BS (or whatever is needed), like soo many people currently do.
When the links are on grid, you need to pay a lot more attention to them. |
|
Ethan Revenant
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
19
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:22:00 -
[261] - Quote
Let's have a moment of silence for our sweet, sweet 5% links.
Moving on!
CCP Fozzie wrote:However, let's throw a brainstorming concept out here just for fun: What if gang links worked a lot like warp disruption spheres?
They would have to be awfully big spheres to work well in a fleet that is skirmish boosted so they can zoom freely around the battlefield. Having boosts to your speed but having to hug another ship in order to get them is counterproductive. Likewise, all the ewar ships would have to cluster around your info command ship. That wouldn't be very much fun.
In general, how do you feel about the state of information warfare links? Are they part of the ewar problem and are wrong and bad? Are they terribad and underused? Is it just that no one loves the Eos, but one day, its prince will come? |
Bobo Cindekela
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
29
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:24:00 -
[262] - Quote
CCP should get used to the idea of losing alot of alt-subs when they nerf offgrid boosting
just sayin... You are about to engage in an arguement with a forum alt,-á this is your final warning. |
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
308
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:26:00 -
[263] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote: Tbh, the whole concept that one race is capable of skirmishing and the other one is mostly blobtastic is utterly stupid. I want to use Amarr for hit-and-run stuff just like I want to use Matari, Caldari and Gallente for it.
I would have thought you'd sincerely appreciate that different races are more or less capable at things in EVE it seems like the sort of thing you'd like. Technetium Lord |
fukier
Flatline.
114
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:26:00 -
[264] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:I'm very concerned on command ships - namely those under current field badge. Will they retain their full 4 combat bonuses and get another one on top of it to have gang-links as a true option or they gonna get hit (once again) and get something removed for that purpose?
i think that the role bonus is going to get longer tbh... and then have former skills be raplaced with usefull combat skills. At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box. |
JessiJames
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:29:00 -
[265] - Quote
Could you give some details what is currently planned for the Eos as an "effective" drone ship - such as if the current idea revolves around giving it 100-125 bandwith or more like just keeping the 75 bandwith. I assume if you say "effective drone boat" that means the standard 10% bonus to drone damage is the plan.
Thanks |
Destoya
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
9
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:30:00 -
[266] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Iam Widdershins wrote:I'm really surprised at the way you arranged the double bonuses on the command ships. Why does Amarr get skirmish while Gallente gets information? That seems incredibly outdated. Amarr have no remarkably fast ships, very few ships that rely on fighting particularly up close, and no ships that have any bonuses to tackle. Meanwhile Gallente, who was given the information warfare instead of skirmish, are known for having fast in-your-face skirmishing brawlers, but they have the recon ships with bonuses specifically for tackle range.
Amarr should be Armor and Info. Gallente should be Armor and Skirmish. Doing it otherwise makes no sense to me. NOOOOOOOO Amarr want the skirmish bonus the INFO sucks!!!!
Expanding info links to affect energy neutralizers and capacitor amount/recharge as well as the other EW bonuses could be an interesting change, and would make info links more desirable for general use than before. |
Lili Lu
575
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:32:00 -
[267] - Quote
Usually I read a whole thread before I post. But this being election day in the US I'm pressed for time, so I'll go ahead and post berfore reading the thread.
The things that leap out at me on a quick read of the op is that I'm concerned about the lack of reexamination on the BSs. But of course this far out and without any specific proposals no big deal.
With BCs, thank you for normalizing them all essentially at the tier 1 level for slots. Cruisers cannot continue to be obsoleted by BCs. Prior to the tier 2 BCs I, maybe nostalgically, remember cruisers as being worth more. People still desired to train for the tier 1 BCs, but cruisers weren't overlookied in doing so. Hopefully that can return.
With the Commands, and speaking as someone that has all 4 maxed out, I approve for the most part with the framework proposed.
However, with the Amarr commands (and to a lesser extent the Gallente tech III ships), I don't know if you are aware of the inherent conflict with the armor and skirmish bonuses. Conceptually it makes sense, but we currently have armor and mobility rigs and modules that directly conflict, nerf each other. So I'm wondering if any rig or plate penalty changes are contemplated.
So, things look ok for the most part, but skirmish and armor links on the same ship present some further module rebalancing problems that I hope are addressed contemporaneously to the BC rebalancing. |
xHxHxAOD
Southern Cross Trilogy Flying Dangerous
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:34:00 -
[268] - Quote
who snipes with a ferox |
Varesk
Origin. Black Legion.
193
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:34:00 -
[269] - Quote
When you redo the bonuses from command ships and t3s, please include industrial links in this. If command ships and t3s will be forced on grid, Mining bonuses should also be on grid. |
Gibbo5771
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
35
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:35:00 -
[270] - Quote
Really wish you would move away from this stupid "Attack" and "support" naming scheme.
This is a sandbox, stop telling us what is supposed to do what.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 34 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |