Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 20 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12144
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 18:50:15 -
[1] - Quote
Hey everyone. Hope you've all had a great holiday season. Most of us are back at the office now, and we're putting the final preparations in place for the Proteus release next week.
One of the tweaks we are making in Proteus is to the scan resolution of Fighters and Fighter Bombers, both of which are being reduced quite significantly.
The primary goal of this change is to ensure that rapidly scooping and relaunching fighters and fighter bombers never gives a dps advantage. This practice has not been widespread thus far, but any possible advantage gained this way would both provide imbalanced DPS and cause significant server load so we want to nip it in the bud.
The changes will also have the effect of delaying the initial alpha strike of fighters and fighter bombers, especially against subcaps. Although it is not the primary purpose of the change we are not displeased by this effect, and we do not believe that it will make fighters or fighter bombers underpowered.
I know that some people who are hoping for a major nerf to assigned fighters will be unhappy that this change will only have a small-moderate effect on that activity. We have been keeping a close eye on the way fighters are used ever since our recent rounds of drone rebalancing and we aren't ruling out any potential future changes at this time. However we are not going to rush into any larger changes to fighter mechanics.
The new numbers are: Type - Old Scan Res GÇô New Scan Res Dragonfly - 200 - 100 Einherji - 350 - 175 Firbolg - 250 - 125 Templar - 300 - 150 Cyclops GÇô 250 - 27 Malleus - 300 - 29 Mantis - 200 - 25 Shadow GÇô 225 - 30 Tyrfing - 350 - 31
Thanks everyone, and happy New Year!
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
3224
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 18:53:36 -
[2] - Quote
First!
Anything to make carriers less effective against subcaps is a good move IMO. Can you take away Carriers' sentry drones too, please? |
Mr Omniblivion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
301
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 18:57:59 -
[3] - Quote
Carriers are fine with sentries, Ishtars need to have sentries nerfed :)
+1 on the changes. |
TheMercenaryKing
StarFleet Enterprises Almost Awesome.
346
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 18:59:01 -
[4] - Quote
Can you explain more about this scoop and deploy tactic? I know of people having the drones return then attack again so that there is lower transversal, but I am unaware of this tactic. |
Oscae
State War Academy Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 18:59:57 -
[5] - Quote
Damn those bombers are getting hit hard, but if it stops them blapping frigs I'm all for it.
NERF ALL THE CAPS! |
Bl1SkR1N
Euphoria Released Triumvirate.
55
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 19:01:12 -
[6] - Quote
just nerf ishtars and tengus finally :P |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12146
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 19:01:46 -
[7] - Quote
TheMercenaryKing wrote:Can you explain more about this scoop and deploy tactic? I know of people having the drones return then attack again so that there is lower transversal, but I am unaware of this tactic.
Since I'd rather you not try it, I'll decline.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1532
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 19:04:16 -
[8] - Quote
Well that's a first step. And its a good one of course, I find it actually brilliant to "nerf" fighters and fighter bombers this way!
We understand that you don't want to rush things too much, sometimes its for the best, sometimes its for the worst, but that's completely acceptable from a game design perspective imo.
Now the real question is... Will you, at some point, dare to step up and do the groundbreaking changes supers desperately need?
Game design revolving around "trololol nobody will build them, lets make them OP" is a tad counterproductive if you ask me. A change is needed!
Signature Tanking - Best Tanking
|
Lord Sevenkey Blueblood
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
14
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 19:06:21 -
[9] - Quote
Bl1SkR1N wrote:just nerf ishtars and tengus finally :P
Hands off Ishtars! |
Bl1SkR1N
Euphoria Released Triumvirate.
56
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 19:08:36 -
[10] - Quote
Lord Sevenkey Blueblood wrote:Bl1SkR1N wrote:just nerf ishtars and tengus finally :P Hands off Ishtars!
The dmg projection those ships got is just ridiculous...killed most of the fun with other doctrines :P But honestly i dont care about that as much as i do about tengus. |
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
1704
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 19:12:52 -
[11] - Quote
Can you please give us an update on how Ishtar use has gone after the slightlnerf several releases ago?
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Klarion Sythis
Lazerhawks
323
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 19:15:18 -
[12] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:I know that some people who are hoping for a major nerf to assigned fighters will be unhappy that this change will only have a small-moderate effect on that activity. We have been keeping a close eye on the way fighters are used ever since our recent rounds of drone rebalancing and we aren't ruling out any potential future changes at this time. However we are not going to rush into any larger changes to fighter mechanics. Are there any further comments you can provide on this? For example, do you consider the edge case of assigned fighters from a POS hugging super undesirable as it relates to small gang pvp, or simply something to watch?
Do you think this change will actually change that situation or are you actively considering further changes once the effects of this settle out?
Not looking for commitments, but so far I haven't seen any direct acknowledgement that these very powerful edge cases are something CCP consider, well, undesirable.
Thanks. |
Mostlyharmlesss
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
143
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 19:20:38 -
[13] - Quote
Since everyone is asking. Pulling your drones in resets their cycle timer.
ie:
Carrier getting tackled by a ship orbiting at 5 km. Release ECM drones and their first ECM cycle fails to ECM the target. Recall and relaunch ECM drones will now cycle again, ignoring that they just did it
This is a bandaid fix for this, on a larger scale and just for fighters and fighter bombers. This has been used by all of the heavy usage of super carrier alliances in the game for ages.
Follow me on Twitter for the latest regarding GoonSwarm Federation and our recruitment drives!
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
9293
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 19:27:32 -
[14] - Quote
This will sharply impact fighter use for null PVE, and not just assigned fighters. If this causes those carriers isk/hour (and isk/site) rates to drop too much (omg fighters already have delays killing npc frigs, this lowering of their lock speed will make that worse) people will move away from carrier and super carrier ratting and back to sub caps. Sub caps escape traps even better than carriers do (sure a carrier can rat aligned but sometimes a misclick will screw than and let the carrier get caught before it can warp).
While this might have a momentary good affect on the economy (less liquid isk poured into the economy from ratting carriers and supers) it also has the knock on effect of fewer carrier and super carrier pvp targets. Some of the best carrier/S.cap kills comes when a ratter is caught.
We'll just have to wait and see i guess. |
Tikktokk Tokkzikk
The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos
190
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 19:32:14 -
[15] - Quote
Fighter assist is a problem right now because the meta hasn't adjusted to it yet. I myself just got a 100mn MWD Stratios which I'll use to bump carriers and possibly supers off POSes. The only nerf fighter assist should get is to make them scramable. |
Tikktokk Tokkzikk
The Imperial Fedaykin Amarrian Commandos
190
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 19:34:24 -
[16] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:This will sharply impact fighter use for null PVE, and not just assigned fighters. If this causes those carriers isk/hour (and isk/site) rates to drop too much (omg fighters already have delays killing npc frigs, this lowering of their lock speed will make that worse) people will move away from carrier and super carrier ratting and back to sub caps. Sub caps escape traps even better than carriers do (sure a carrier can rat aligned but sometimes a misclick will screw than and let the carrier get caught before it can warp).
While this might have a momentary good affect on the economy (less liquid isk poured into the economy from ratting carriers and supers) it also has the knock on effect of fewer carrier and super carrier pvp targets. Some of the best carrier/S.cap kills comes when a ratter is caught.
We'll just have to wait and see i guess.
Consider fitting target painters to your carrier/super if you're concerned about lock time. |
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
8298
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 19:34:36 -
[17] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:TheMercenaryKing wrote:Can you explain more about this scoop and deploy tactic? I know of people having the drones return then attack again so that there is lower transversal, but I am unaware of this tactic. Since I'd rather you not try it, I'll decline. After ye fix it, would ye tell us?
I would be thoroughly entertained be a "Ridiculously mad broken **** that used to be in the game" devblog.
"I'm also quite confident that you are laughing
and it's the kind of laugh that gives normal people shivers."
=]I[=
|
notaspaialt1
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 19:35:27 -
[18] - Quote
why the nerf on fighter bombers? they cant effectively do damage to subcaps. im disapointed about the fighter nerf, people will still complain about drones till they get nerfed to the ground. |
Daide Vondrichnov
SnaiLs aNd FroGs
18
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 19:38:06 -
[19] - Quote
I would have rather seen Fighters assist deleted...
If they wants to project the dps they have to come on the grid rather than hugging a pos forcefield.
I may not understand what this change will really impact on the fighters but there is something clear : they will be able to stay in a safe position, so even if their fighters need more times to apply their dps, they will at the end... |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
1906
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 19:38:45 -
[20] - Quote
poor caldari, dead before they finish lock |
|
Mario Putzo
Welping and Dunking.
1013
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 19:40:28 -
[21] - Quote
I don't get the significance of this change. Fighters and Fighter Bombers aren't really an issue in Cap v Subcap fights.
"These aren't the drones you are looking for"...somebody, probably.
Nerf sentries my good man, we all know they are out of balance, and we all know why there has been mostly drone boat meta since you tweaked Drones as a dedicated weapons platform over a year ago.
Its not bombers, its not fighter bombers, its not the Domi, it wasn't the Gila, it isn't the Prophecy, its not the Ishtar...
Its Sentry Drones. Quit kicking the can when anyone with a set of functioning eyeballs can see that Sentry Drones are not in line with other weapons, or other drones....god damn. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
9293
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 20:00:49 -
[22] - Quote
Tikktokk Tokkzikk wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:This will sharply impact fighter use for null PVE, and not just assigned fighters. If this causes those carriers isk/hour (and isk/site) rates to drop too much (omg fighters already have delays killing npc frigs, this lowering of their lock speed will make that worse) people will move away from carrier and super carrier ratting and back to sub caps. Sub caps escape traps even better than carriers do (sure a carrier can rat aligned but sometimes a misclick will screw than and let the carrier get caught before it can warp).
While this might have a momentary good affect on the economy (less liquid isk poured into the economy from ratting carriers and supers) it also has the knock on effect of fewer carrier and super carrier pvp targets. Some of the best carrier/S.cap kills comes when a ratter is caught.
We'll just have to wait and see i guess. Consider fitting target painters to your carrier/super if you're concerned about lock time.
More than the 3 I already have?
Not a big deal for me (not nearly the end of the world), for ratting I'll just put the carrier guy in a FoF missile ship or a sub cap drone ship and keep on truckin. I'm more talking about the knock-on effects of a scan res nerf aimed at one thing (an abuse even CCP says isn't happening much) that ends up affecting a dozen other things unintentionally. Even then i don't know that it will be that bad, just puttin it out there.
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
9293
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 20:03:24 -
[23] - Quote
Tikktokk Tokkzikk wrote:Fighter assist is a problem right now because the meta hasn't adjusted to it yet. I myself just got a 100mn MWD Stratios which I'll use to bump carriers and possibly supers off POSes. The only nerf fighter assist should get is to make them scramable.
I wouldn't get rid fo fighter assist either, but like you say , i'd like to see a way to 'jam' them aka cut them off from their source carrier. The risk of assigning fighters would be losing connection with them.
Basically, all Carrier and Super Carrier pilots should be forced to sign up with Time Warner Cable, that is SURE to make them lose connection, it does for me. |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
3084
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 20:06:18 -
[24] - Quote
sounds reasonable. any changes planed to address skynet carriers?
eve style bounties (done)
dust boarding parties
imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW
|
Sugar Kyle
Snuff Box Snuffed Out
913
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 20:09:07 -
[25] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:sounds reasonable. any changes planed to address skynet carriers?
To quote Fozzie:
Quote:I know that some people who are hoping for a major nerf to assigned fighters will be unhappy that this change will only have a small-moderate effect on that activity. We have been keeping a close eye on the way fighters are used ever since our recent rounds of drone rebalancing and we aren't ruling out any potential future changes at this time. However we are not going to rush into any larger changes to fighter mechanics.
It is a topic that I have and several other members of the CSM have brought up with CCP as a problem. No solutions for you yet, sad to say.
Member of CSM9 - CSM9 Weekly Updates
Running for CSMX - ReElect Sugar Kyle
Low Sec Lifestyle - An Eve Blog
@Sugar_Kyle
|
Daide Vondrichnov
SnaiLs aNd FroGs
19
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 20:18:17 -
[26] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:sounds reasonable. any changes planed to address skynet carriers?
Many things have shown that this thing needed to be fix, wait n' see ! |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1072
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 20:49:28 -
[27] - Quote
remove warping from fighters/bombers
Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists.
ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic.
Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
|
Penna Bianca
High Flyers The Kadeshi
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 20:59:20 -
[28] - Quote
@CCP Fozzie You are trying to balance something but your balancing always results into making the subject in question useless. You should balance things to were they are still viable not into uselessnes so that 2 years from now you don't have to come back and revisit the subject.
I look forward to your Ishtar & Tengus balancing as well as not seeing any Ishtars and Tengus on field for the next say year or two ? You have taken after whoever nerfed the Drake : )) into a useless hull. |
Panther X
High Flyers The Kadeshi
28
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 21:05:53 -
[29] - Quote
I still believe that assigned fighters "Work As Intended (tm)" This is such a small and isolated issue that maybe there are other things that need to be addressed first? Like Ishtars Online. There's a higher chance that you will run into an ishtar fleet in nullsec than a tengu with assigned fighters. Ishtars and Rail-gus are a bigger problem. I fly them sure, but I don't like it. Fix the stuff that actually means something to a wider section of the consumer base. This is minor stuff really when it comes down to it. And really, leave capital ships alone for 5 freaking minutes willya???
My super smells of rich Corinthian Leather
|
Penna Bianca
High Flyers The Kadeshi
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 21:06:17 -
[30] - Quote
Sugar Kyle wrote:Bienator II wrote:sounds reasonable. any changes planed to address skynet carriers? To quote Fozzie: Quote:I know that some people who are hoping for a major nerf to assigned fighters will be unhappy that this change will only have a small-moderate effect on that activity. We have been keeping a close eye on the way fighters are used ever since our recent rounds of drone rebalancing and we aren't ruling out any potential future changes at this time. However we are not going to rush into any larger changes to fighter mechanics.
It is a topic that I have and several other members of the CSM have brought up with CCP as a problem. No solutions for you yet, sad to say.
How about you suggest that they simply remove effects of drone modules from assigned Fighters ? So assigned fighters only get host ships hull bonus and not bonus from DDA, Omnilinks, Tracking Enhancer.. Fighters with base stats are pretty weak, I mean this whole subject is pretty stupid since fighters are pretty weak already combined with this nerf it should be more than enough. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 20 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |