Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 108 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 25 post(s) |
Ashlar Vellum
Esquire Armaments
17
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 11:23:00 -
[1051] - Quote
CCP Rise are there any plans to add new disruption ships to battleship lineup in due time of course?
And if there are, will amarr battleship lineup have not 1, but 2 drone boats then. New GedDomi and New disruption battleship. |
Shingorash
S T R A T C O M THORN Alliance
37
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 11:25:00 -
[1052] - Quote
It would be good to see the Geddon get a Tracking Disruptor bonus. That would kick ass. |
|
CCP Rise
C C P C C P Alliance
417
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 11:25:00 -
[1053] - Quote
Quote:They'd be much happier about getting that drone/neut boat in a new hull instead of changing what they know and love.
Yeah I mean I would love if we could have new art for every rebalance so that "legacy" ships like the Armageddon could stay the way they always have been. Its easy to see why this would be impossible though, right? Resource drain on art teams here would be immense, but more importantly, the game would quickly become an impossible maze of ships. If we want to be serious about refining the quality of balance in Eve, we would quickly have tens of ships in each class as we iterated through them.
Fun for some I'm sure, but probably not good for the game overall =P |
|
Meduza13
Silver Octopus Infernal Octopus
11
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 11:26:00 -
[1054] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote: We really have looked at them.
I think you will find its not a very painful shift - but again, public testing will give us a better idea.
Despite answers (finally) from CCP Rise im still not impressed. gallente with 8 slots and amarr with 7 becouse its "healthiest" ? And unless im mistaken CCP Rise said they have already" looked at changes", and not they ' going to look further at changes"
I dont mind changing Armageddon into something different personally - go for it CCP, something different is cool.
Im totally against not changing abadon for better, and I totally hate idea of nerfing it "becouse its too powerfull" and also hate not having 8 lows on any amarr battleship, when gallente has, becouse they cry a lot.
And to people who say logistics its too strong compared to local tank - ofc it is strong, becouse you have dedicated ships repping other ships, not just 1-2 local reppers. Thats the whole idea of logistics, isnt it?
|
Rynnik
In Exile. Imperial Outlaws.
87
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 11:27:00 -
[1055] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Quote:Can you comment on Amarr slot homogenization and why you don't feel the need to break out of 4 mids 7 lows or or make a single one of the platforms have 8 lows? This is actually the thing I'm personally most unsatisfied with. Part of my goals through the rebalance was to create more slot variation overall in battleships, and one of the best previous examples of this was the 8/3/8 Geddon. We had some versions of the Apoc with 8 lows, but in the end this layout seemed to fit best with the bonuses we wanted to go with. I'm convinced that the current lineup looks the healthiest of all the options we considered, and I expect the Navy BS to fill some of the gaps that still exist.
Dude, I am seriously sorry to be pushing this so hard, but did you read: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2871743#post2871743
Are you totally unwilling to pull a domi on your desired bonuses for this hull and leave some room for the damage bonus required to bring it back to nearly (or exactly) 8 turrets effective overall? I think the 8 lows is achievable on this hull in an interesting and not overly complex way. And I also think it is the only way I would ever pick one up in the face of the 8 low monstrosity you turned the Mega into. The other two attack BS are impossible to scope until the missile changes happen, but pound for pound you have left the Apoc way behind the Mega as a attack gun BS and I think both things can be addressed pretty easily. |
Gordon Esil
Lambda Initiative
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 11:28:00 -
[1056] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Quote:They'd be much happier about getting that drone/neut boat in a new hull instead of changing what they know and love. Yeah I mean I would love if we could have new art for every rebalance so that "legacy" ships like the Armageddon could stay the way they always have been. Its easy to see why this would be impossible though, right? Resource drain on art teams here would be immense, but more importantly, the game would quickly become an impossible maze of ships. If we want to be serious about refining the quality of balance in Eve, we would quickly have tens of ships in each class as we iterated through them. Fun for some I'm sure, but probably not good for the game overall =P If we end up getting "fed" these new "not good" changes, you still have a chance... DO NOT even dare to come any close near the Navy Armageddon and Navy Apocalypse... |
|
CCP Rise
C C P C C P Alliance
417
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 11:29:00 -
[1057] - Quote
Quote:CCP Rise are there any plans to add new disruption ships to battleship lineup in due time of course?
I think its likely that somewhere down the line there will be a battleship sized disruption option for each race. We've talked about this a little in relation to these changes, but I think its possible that it will be part of a different pass later on. Whether that means new t1 hulls, new t2 hulls, or using something that already exists, I have no idea.
Its on our minds though! |
|
|
CCP Rise
C C P C C P Alliance
417
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 11:30:00 -
[1058] - Quote
Quote:DO NOT even dare to come any close near the Navy Armageddon and Navy Apocalypse...
Oh I'll be coming near them pretty soon alright =)
I think you'll be happy though. |
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
181
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 11:31:00 -
[1059] - Quote
Where are my beam lasers CCP? They have better visuals than pulses by far. |
Arline Kley
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
134
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 11:32:00 -
[1060] - Quote
CCP Rise - can you stop relying so much on the much vaunted "metrics" for ship balancing? By claiming of their accuracy, you are claiming the impossible. Data is only accurate at point of capture, after which regardless of how often it is looked at, it starts becoming more and more inaccurate - especially in a game like EVE.
And please pray tell, how many players here have actually said they like the changes wholehartedly? I have been checking this thread daily, and I have seen very few accept the changes as are, and a few that have gone "I like the changes you've made, however XXX needs to be altered"
Using the voice of the silent majority as an indicator of acceptance is dangerous - I know I'm starting to sound like a broken record, but I am absolutely and utterly PETRIFIED at what is happening to EVE's most iconic race.
I am utterly utterly hoping that you re-consider the changes you are wishing to implement on the Armageddon. They are completely at odds with the race as a whole, inconsiderate to the background of the ship itsself, and utterly ruining two other ships.
I admit I am no game developer, and that you don't have it easy, especially with the Odyssey deadline looming somewhat close - but even I can see the Armageddon, released now, with its stats as is, would be MASSIVELY overpowering, confusing to the pilots flying them, and generally getting underused in PvE as it would have no physical use in it.
Blessed are those that carry the Empress' Light; with it they destroy the shadows |
|
Jonas Sukarala
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
80
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 11:32:00 -
[1061] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Quote:CCP Rise are there any plans to add new disruption ships to battleship lineup in due time of course? I think its likely that somewhere down the line there will be a battleship sized disruption option for each race. We've talked about this a little in relation to these changes, but I think its possible that it will be part of a different pass later on. Whether that means new t1 hulls, new t2 hulls, or using something that already exists, I have no idea. Its on our minds though!
disruption battleships i don't think people really want them we want battleships with more tank than navy bc's though how about doing that instead? 'Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line' CCP Ytterbium Nerf missile range into place..... where is the TD missile change?-á ,...projectiles should use capacitor. |
|
CCP Rise
C C P C C P Alliance
417
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 11:33:00 -
[1062] - Quote
Been nice talking to you guys this morning, but its time for me to go to some meetings and eat some food.
One more time - we'll be watching these (along with the other race's battleships) closely all the way through to deployment. I hope you stay with us the whole way and continue helping us with developing them.
Have a good day! |
|
Seishi Maru
doMAL S.A.
65
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 11:34:00 -
[1063] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Quote:DO NOT even dare to come any close near the Navy Armageddon and Navy Apocalypse... Oh I'll be coming near them pretty soon alright =) I think you'll be happy though.
You can make the extremists happy by makign the typhoon to have huge drone bay 3 turrets 3 laucnhers 8 highs. Gets a bonus to all weapons ROF IF you are fitting a lasers, a projectile gun, a hybrid gun, a siege lanucher a cruise launcher, a and a smartbomb. |
Gordon Esil
Lambda Initiative
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 11:36:00 -
[1064] - Quote
@CCP Rise Also you did not give us clear stuff about the 8th low slot on the Abaddon? we need that!!
CCP Rise wrote:Quote:DO NOT even dare to come any close near the Navy Armageddon and Navy Apocalypse... Oh I'll be coming near them pretty soon alright =) I think you'll be happy though. I really do hope I'll get happy at that time |
Meduza13
Silver Octopus Infernal Octopus
11
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 11:37:00 -
[1065] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Quote:DO NOT even dare to come any close near the Navy Armageddon and Navy Apocalypse... Oh I'll be coming near them pretty soon alright =) I think you'll be happy though.
On the day when you go into same directions with navy apoc as you went with abaddon - trying to ruin best armor tank in Eve, it will be a very sad day.
|
Arline Kley
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
134
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 11:40:00 -
[1066] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Quote:DO NOT even dare to come any close near the Navy Armageddon and Navy Apocalypse... Oh I'll be coming near them pretty soon alright =) I think you'll be happy though.
Try me. Blessed are those that carry the Empress' Light; with it they destroy the shadows |
Ashlar Vellum
Esquire Armaments
17
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 11:41:00 -
[1067] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Being called Gallentean right after Gallente were saying we hate Gallente is pretty awesome. You're right about the primary racial roles, but Amarr has been establishing a stronger drone representation throughout tiericide. Tormentor -> Dragoon -> Arbitrator -> Prophecy. And Khanid has always existed as a missile focused division of Amarr. I don't think we are straying far at all from Amarr offensive system organization with this battleship line.
What about old consistency?
Punisher > Maller>Abaddon
Executioner (yeah that is a bit far-fetched) > Omen > Armageddon
Crucifier > Dragoon > Arbitrator > New disruption battleship?
|
Nalha Saldana
Sickology
708
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 11:44:00 -
[1068] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Quote:I do hope you take another (deep) look at the cap issues though. There are a lot of ways to solve them. We really have looked at them. Fozzie was running level 4s yesterday easily in a pulse Apoc without sacrificing many slots. Not only can you run them, but you gain a lot of offensive capability because of the tracking bonus and the increased speed and agility. I think you will find its not a very painful shift - but again, public testing will give us a better idea.
Will it be even remotely possible for newer players with not-maxed cap/gun skills to run pve in a Amarr BS? It's always been hard for them and you're not making it any easier here. |
Nalha Saldana
Sickology
708
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 11:48:00 -
[1069] - Quote
Ashlar Vellum wrote:CCP Rise wrote:Being called Gallentean right after Gallente were saying we hate Gallente is pretty awesome. You're right about the primary racial roles, but Amarr has been establishing a stronger drone representation throughout tiericide. Tormentor -> Dragoon -> Arbitrator -> Prophecy. And Khanid has always existed as a missile focused division of Amarr. I don't think we are straying far at all from Amarr offensive system organization with this battleship line. What about old consistency? Punisher > Maller>Abaddon Executioner (yeah that is a bit far-fetched) > Omen > Armageddon Crucifier > Dragoon > Arbitrator > New disruption battleship?
Punisher > Maller > Abaddon
Executioner > Omen > Apocalypse
Crucifier/Tormentor > Arbitrator > Armageddon
I don't see the problem here, it works fine. |
Serith Ellecon
Internet Spaceships Initiates Tribal Band
17
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 11:50:00 -
[1070] - Quote
Like others, I believe there needs to be a bit of a bone thrown towards players newly into battleships. Perhaps a small cap use reduction in some of the mid range battleship lasers would be that answer? Inappropriate signature added.-á CCP Notarealdev. |
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
181
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 11:53:00 -
[1071] - Quote
Nalha Saldana wrote:CCP Rise wrote:Quote:I do hope you take another (deep) look at the cap issues though. There are a lot of ways to solve them. We really have looked at them. Fozzie was running level 4s yesterday easily in a pulse Apoc without sacrificing many slots. Not only can you run them, but you gain a lot of offensive capability because of the tracking bonus and the increased speed and agility. I think you will find its not a very painful shift - but again, public testing will give us a better idea. Will it be even remotely possible for newer players with not-maxed cap/gun skills to run pve in a Amarr BS? It's always been hard for them and you're not making it any easier here.
Fitting a cap booster is always better than fitting 3 cap rigs and a bunch of cap rechargers or relays. Cap boosters are also kind of why abaddons are overpowered - because it negates its cap weakness entirely. This cap weakness was supposed to justify it having such powerful bonuses when it was introduced. |
Hulasikaly Wada
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
22
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 12:03:00 -
[1072] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Quote:DO NOT even dare to come any close near the Navy Armageddon and Navy Apocalypse... Oh I'll be coming near them pretty soon alright =) I think you'll be happy though.
Ahah, have already in mind what a Repubblic Fleet Hurricare is
Hula |
Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
117
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 12:06:00 -
[1073] - Quote
Veshta Yoshida wrote:The Marauderification (low count, high bonus) of normal hulls is not really viable unless it is done for all, as it would mean new artwork and trying to explain to a newcomer that the -3 total slot count really doesn't mean anything. Then you have differences in ammo consumption and fitting cost which you just know will be wailed about by nitpickers ..
I have gotten to terms with the drone line (Dragoon-Prophecy-Armageddon), although I would like the Omen to be included there since the NOmen is being taken in a completely different direction .. and well the explanation that it gives a clear progression for new pilots falls flat when you jump from Dessie to BC.
Three problems remaining for me is cap issues which are currently only solved by forced fitting of an injector (mandatory mods = bad!) and the rather more serious transgression of Amarr no longer having the most lows .. Mega can of course keep its god config, but if so then one of the golden ones must be retooled to have the equal number. Last issue for me is active tanking with +4% falls behind the rep amount bonus (quite quickly on smaller hulls) considering the general slot layouts on hulls involved, which pigeon holes Amarr resist hulls into buffer fits .. forcing decisions is bad (same complaint I have with the NOmen revamp).
All but the low-slot transgression can be solved by introducing racial distinction through bonuses on all ships (needed since they are removed everywhere else!), examples: Amarr could get double benefit from batteries. Minmatar could get added effect of everything projected (they do like to swarm after all). Caldari a cap/range/fitting bonus to all eWar. Not effect/power, that will hopefully remain racially determined but they are the electronics savvy so anything else goes as far as I am concerned. Gallente can have a static bonus to drones (auto-repair in space perhaps) or a cap/fitting bonus to armour reps as they are now by design apparently to be the sole inhabitants of that niche.
Or CCP can just increase cap on Apoc/Abad to useful levels. Geddon is good as is, should require assis or injector if neuting and has capless weapon option so a non issue for it.
In short: A few kinks to iron out, cap (addresses active option as well) and low-slot primarily, otherwise they look good. Do want something to be done to set the races apart, one should not be able to find the best tool for a job without having to stray outside a given line-up. The Arbitrator has always been Amarr's cruiser drone hull. |
Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
117
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 12:12:00 -
[1074] - Quote
Gabriel Karade wrote:Hi Rise, With the upsurge in neuts this is going to bring are you guys planning on releasing XL cap batteries anytime soon? http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online/item.php?type_id=3472Been hidden away in the background for years (as long as I can remember in fact) but never made it into game. O.O XL Cap Batteries? Does that mean 1600 and maybe even a 2400 sized charges too? |
Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
117
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 12:15:00 -
[1075] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Quote:Thank you for your work CCP Rise! May I know what do you think of the 6 turret + 7.5/level damage plan, for Abaddon or Apoc? I think the problem with it is that the Abaddon is strong enough already (as proven on TQ) that giving it extra turrets right now would be difficult to justify, and the Apoc doesn't have a damage bonus to use - so doing this for the Apoc would mean reworking it completely around a new damage bonus. But what I proposed for the changes on the Abaddon does NOT give it "extra" turrets... it actually slightly lowers it's effective base turret count (while allowing the option for adding an extra heat sink to balance that back up!) 8 turrets x 25% = 10, 6 turrets x 50% = 9. |
Gabriel Karade
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
82
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 12:17:00 -
[1076] - Quote
Constructive criticism:
For the 'new' Armageddon, the combination of Neutralizer bonus, the DominixGÇÖs drone bonus and the slot layout provide too much synergy GÇô it will be too powerful and steps too much on the DominixGÇÖs role.
Instead:
Quote:Amarr Battleship Skill Bonuses: +5% large energy turret and battleship launcher rate of fire +10% Energy Neutralizer and Energy Vampire range (replaced large energy turret cap use)
Slot layout: 7H(-1), 4M(+1), 7L(-1); 5 turrets(-2) , 5 launchers(+5) Fittings: 13500 PWG(-3000), 550 CPU(+65) Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 6800(+1331) / 8500(+1859) / 8000(+1789) Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap per second) : 6200(+887.5) / 1087s / 5.7 Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 100(-5) / .13(+.002) / 105200000 / 18.96s (+.29) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 125 / 250(+125) Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 65km / 110 / 7 Sensor strength: 21 Radar Sensor Strength (+4) Signature radius: 450 (+80) My changes emphasised. Having a GÇÿdual-hattedGÇÖ bonus is not without precedent and having three bonuses is not without precendent (Scorpion).
What this does is keep clearer separation between the Armageddon and Dominx.
It has a larger drone bay, allowing a flight of heavyGÇÖs, flight of mediums and 3 flights of lights but not the drone damage bonus. It retains enough of its laser focus to keep the GÇÿloyalistsGÇÖ happy, but also has that Khanid gleam to its eye, without going all the way (i.e. without the bonuses to missile damage projection, like the Raven and Typhoon). It is flexible, but forces genuine compromise rather than the straight 7 neut + drones ship the current iteration is going to become.
Thoughts?
Gallente MkII: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1227770 War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293 |
Ryan Easte
Kangaroo Ate my baby Orchestrated Alliance
6
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 12:17:00 -
[1077] - Quote
deleted |
Gabriel Karade
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
82
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 12:18:00 -
[1078] - Quote
Pelea Ming wrote:Gabriel Karade wrote:Hi Rise, With the upsurge in neuts this is going to bring are you guys planning on releasing XL cap batteries anytime soon? http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online/item.php?type_id=3472Been hidden away in the background for years (as long as I can remember in fact) but never made it into game. O.O XL Cap Batteries? Does that mean 1600 and maybe even a 2400 sized charges too? Did you actually look at the stats? It's a Battleship sized module, been floating around in the background since 2004, but never released.
Gallente MkII: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1227770 War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293 |
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
556
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 12:19:00 -
[1079] - Quote
Have you taken a look at how difficult the geddon will be to tackle in small gang situations? |
Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
117
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 12:21:00 -
[1080] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Quote:I do hope you take another (deep) look at the cap issues though. There are a lot of ways to solve them. We really have looked at them. Fozzie was running level 4s yesterday easily in a pulse Apoc without sacrificing many slots. Not only can you run them, but you gain a lot of offensive capability because of the tracking bonus and the increased speed and agility. I think you will find its not a very painful shift - but again, public testing will give us a better idea. Fozzie, like me, has pretty much max skills... what about making it so that new players now have to pretty much get those skills to max to do the same? My proposed changes to the 'baddon (or even other's proposed changes to the Apoc along a similar vein) would make these hulls a viable option for them while allowing us better skilled pilots abit more fitting flexibility, and has been pointed out, dropping the actual effective turret count from 10 down to 9. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 108 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |