Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Pattern Clarc
Queens of the Stone Age
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 20:03:00 -
[1]
After reading Tuxfords blog on speed and the implied MWD nerf-age, I feel extremely sad.
Not only does it seem like a knee-gerk reaction to a problem, which frankly has been an issuse caused by EvE's rubbish grading of speed between the class sizes, it's also the wrong reaction, to the wrong problem.
nano battleships arn't powerful because there nannoed it's because of eve's silly game mechanics or 'vision' into how ship classes should compare.
Problem one.. binary effects/modules. Such as Nos, Warp scram, Webifers.
They have either an On or a Off They have zero or negiable fall off. They work/don't work irrespective of ship size, speed, range(within there 'area of infuence') Battleships have more grid/more slots/there for can fit more these binary modules
Problem Two Nos!?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111111?!1?@@0213one2!!!
Large Diminishing = 2 Medium diminishing = 4 small diminishing. When battleships, within 24km, can fit 4 or more Large diminishing nos, and fly at 5kms, what chance does a ceptor have of taclking it?? Simply reudcing the speed of the battleship isn't the answer when Nos can hit you for WTF11"! damage 100% irrespective of signature radius, speed, relative range or transveral. AF's also suffer a great deal because of this, unless stupid amounts of NOS.
Problem Three The role of battleships Basically, you buy a battleship for a bigger, more damaging battlecruiser, a battlecruiser which you bought because you needed a better cruiser. This progression, very smart as it may have seemed when eve tarted, as actually not so smart. Mindlessly raising the anti results in Node crashes, Titan mobs, and the More = More mentality which wrechs EvE for the have nots. CCP have finaly begun to recognise this with there additions to warefare (outpost addons etc) but you guys really need to start from the basics first.
And my solutions?
I am but a humble man, I daily look around seeing if any games have better graphics, better gameplay and better ideas knowing that I would happly jump ship if that game came around. The CCP should know this, and should know that I am not alone in this regard and that simply resting on the lorrels of rave reviews and 50% user satisfaction will not be enough if EvE plans to last into the next decade.
As a humble man, my suggestions come, not merly in as my own words and own ideas and own obserations, but as an amalgum of ideas and suggestions over the year and a quarter i've been playing the game.
Solution One make binary effects behave like turrets
Well almost. For Propultion jamming and Nos. I would do this, reduce optimal range by 50% and add a +25% of optimal range worth of falloff.
Within the falloff, the module has a reduced effect (IE not lower chance of working), EG, your webs will web for 50% strength at falloff range. heavy nos would have 50% effectivness 15 km.... and warp core scramblers....
warp scramblers are a little more complex, as you either warp or don't warp.... How about if warp scramblers, outside of optimal range delayed the about of time it takes for your ship to turn and warp?? Yes, a crow orbiting at 30km should not be as effective as a claw at 5km - risk reward, isn't that what EvE is based around!!??????? The same kind of logic can be used to fix ECM (again), in which instead of being jammed for an entire cycle, or not, how about modifing the jam times depending on targeting array strength/range/and falloff...........
Solution Two WFTFF!?"!NERF NOS to kingdom come!?!!!ONE!?!
CCP seems happy with the fact that the only thing that makes a battleship more powerful than a battlecruiser, or a commandship is the amount of cap one can drain from each other. This is dumb and short sighted and has resulted in the problems we see today. Nos should be used to drain energy for your own use, to power your tank and your weapons, it should not be an alternative............. Sig removed lacks EVE content, email [email protected] if you have any questions - Xorus |
Pattern Clarc
Queens of the Stone Age
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 20:18:00 -
[2]
First Nos Nerf Stacking penalise the ******* who use more than 1-2
It's bad enough that 5 battleships with 1 nos can wipe your cap away in a single cycle, but atleast it was 5 ships. When a Nos boat (eg, the dreaded NOS domi of unmidigated doom) could one shot a battlecruisers cap with an alsorted collection of nos and nuetralisers and use its colection of drones to rule the day, people cried Nerf to ECM... WTF!?!?!! Idiots. Stacking penalise the mother******* pieces of crap.
Second Nos Nerf Make Nos signature radius dependant - eg, give it a signiature resultion and if your sig = 10% of it's resultion, it'll Nos for for 10% of it's maxium amount. This gives interceptors a chance to.... INTERCEPT and actually means battleship pilots would need to think more carefully about dealing with ships smaler than it.
Third Nos Nerf Make an anti Nos module, (or repurpose the cap batteries) a module like ECCM which would reduce the rate at which you energy drains, or give you a small (10%) cap reserve in which you could run hardeners and stuff.
Forth Nos Nerf Actually, this is a boost. A 200% general energy drain increase for all nos modules, but a 180% reudction in the modules rate of fire. If you going to use nos, it should be inplace of injectors etc, a sharp injection of cap should be the efect, followed by a longer cool down time. Combined with the overall reudction of Nos effectiveness it should improve EvE tactically (not just 'balance' it) Sig removed lacks EVE content, email [email protected] if you have any questions - Xorus |
Pattern Clarc
Queens of the Stone Age
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 20:35:00 -
[3]
Solution Three Battleships....
In a game in which relative base speeds account for **** all, I can see why the CCP wants to nerf MWD's. With the millions of ways speed bonuses can be stacked, it only takes a battleship a little effort to fly at +3kms, the base speed of a MWD'ing ceptor. My solution to battleships is extensive, and relys more on CCP's misty vision of new forms of warfare (which do not exist in the game at the moment)
Firstly a potencially game breaking concept. The relative base speeds of all ships must mean more. How would you do this? If you multiplied the base speed of all ships by a factor of 3-6, you'd get a more realisitic account of how fast ships in EvE actually fly at (through experiance), why not just do this, keep after burners at 200% boost and remove or repurpose MWD's entirly. You would abviously need to adjust weapon effectivness to compensate but you would remove a **** load of the stacking problems if the relative speeds between the classes were more defined.
Then Boost Battleships. Make them more powerful, more dps, 200%-300% more cap regen, 10-20% more resits more low slots. As By now, battleships would be only effective at killing other battleships - this would enhance the other roles, either as tank +support, +ewar provider, heavy firepower to take out structure installations, anti capital ship-ships. Yes you would see less of them in general combat use to there epensive and vunrublity without support, but to be honest, thats a good thing.
.......................... Sig removed lacks EVE content, email [email protected] if you have any questions - Xorus |
Drunk Driver
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 20:40:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Drunk Driver on 27/02/2007 20:36:55
I approve of everything in the OP post.
However I haven't read it and am drunk.
|
Saskia Elko
Independant Union of Rangers
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 20:47:00 -
[5]
No
BoD Note:
Originally by: Dianabolic That's what I'm saying, yes. If you fly with people that make you look bad, guess what? You look bad.
|
Daelana
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 20:47:00 -
[6]
Drastic but loveable.
|
Kery Syander
Vengeance of the Fallen Curse Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 20:52:00 -
[7]
I think EVE would be more fun if it were more like this. Good work, Pattern. I'm not so sure about changing slot layouts on battleships, however. ----- *snip* please keep sigs EVE-related. Contact [email protected] if you have any further questions - Karass Sayfo |
penguinofparadise
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 20:55:00 -
[8]
Edited by: penguinofparadise on 27/02/2007 20:51:50 I really agree with the OP on this. We will surely be downed by the "OMG dont twitch up mah game" crowd, but /signed This change would rock eve to a new dimension.
EDIT: damn altpost
|
Caztra Tor
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 20:56:00 -
[9]
I disagree with the negativity in the post. But as to the content:
/SIGNED
|
Blue Rider
Coonass Cajun an dem Crawdad Capsewl Combatuns Soldiers of the Forgotten Abyss
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 20:59:00 -
[10]
For the most part, YES!
Anything that adds more tactics and less brainless advantage to 'bigger' ships is the right way to go.
Battleships and up should be escorted ships, not a solopwnmobile. If the BS pilot doesn't want to be taken out by tacklers (frigs/ceptors) then he can fly a smaller class ship that can handle them or bring his own support/backup.
Otherwise, other than just another toy, what would be the point of any of the smaller class ships?
|
|
Lovmi Tiend'r
Kudzu Collective
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 21:02:00 -
[11]
/sign
I wholly support the OP.
We need ships that fit more, different, roles. That has been started with many of the T2 smaller ships (interceptors, Interdictors, Recon, Cov-ops. AF need some looking at though) but the progression of Frigate/cruiser/BC/BS just seems to be trying to get a better version of the previous ship.
Also, the binary modules (love the name there) definitely need some help. In many ways they are the "I Win" button, especially NOS. If you fly a ship that doesn't have nos, there is almost no way to win a fight these days. And if you are flying a NOS boat (NOS DOMI's being some of the worst) you hardly have to fit a WEB or Scram, as the person isn't getting away from you, they aren't able to maintain their tank, and in most cases, can't even fire back.
As for MWD's... I would love to see a complete re-vamp on those. I would like to see them as a quick infusion of speed that will let you "Micro Jump" (as the name implies) at about the speed they allow now, but only for a few seconds (5, 10 maybe with skills)and then have either a long cool down (30 seconds to a minute). This would allow either a ship to scoot away and escape, or to jump into range and start blasting.
As it stands now, small ships (the ones that need speed to survive) with implants, bonuses, skills, etc can already move fast enough to avoid BS tracking with just an Afterburner. In group fights and larger, with the proposed BS changes above, this would make tackling ships with interceptors other than the one or two used now viable. And give cruisers a viable role, anti-interceptor defense. It is a start at actual role defined combat.
Right now in Group / Fleet combat there seems to be 4 roles, DPS (bring a BS with the biggest guns), Tackling / Bubbling (T1 Frig, Interceptor, or Interdictor), EW (Blackbird or EW BS), Scout (Cov-Ops). That seems to be it, short of the Cap Ships. I have seen some CSÆs and HACÆs but they are the exception, not the rule, and they just fill one of the above roles.
By differentiating the ships so that one class is not just a ôBigger Gunsö version of the previous class and remove the ôI Winö button versus anything smaller than you we can move into much more interesting combat.
|
mazzilliu
Caldari Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 21:20:00 -
[12]
consider this thread supported by me
not because i read it, but because i like his portrait ______________________ go away |
Pattern Clarc
Queens of the Stone Age
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 21:32:00 -
[13]
thanks for the support.
As for the tone, this is a direct challege to tuxfords blog.
EvE game mechanics arn't that great, the longer this game develops the more appearent the faults will become.
nano battleships are just the first symptom of this.
EvE just needs a better model, and the sooner the CCP can fix this, the sooner EvE can come out of beta. Sig removed lacks EVE content, email [email protected] if you have any questions - Xorus |
Arian Snow
The Nest Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 21:42:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Arian Snow on 27/02/2007 21:39:40
/signed ... the spirit of it. I will not go into specifics but you are on the right track with your ideas, so thumbs up!
I dont remember I dont recall I dont have memory of anything at all! |
hotgirl933
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 21:51:00 -
[15]
signed his on the right track some of hte specifics are a bit off but generally good direction
|
Nir
The Doldrums
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 21:54:00 -
[16]
The big problem with Heavy Nosferatu is their range. I think balancing the range on all 3 sizes would be the best solution.
Small Nosferatu I - 7.5km Medium Nosferatu I - 12.5km Heavy Nosferatu I - 15km
Looks good to me
|
Trem Sinval
Sinval Enterprises
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 22:01:00 -
[17]
This man speaks the truth.
Although Tux's plan for MWD's isn't really a nerf. In fact, if the cap usage becomes dependant on current velocity, it'll make using the damned things much easier, since it won't suck 1/3 of my cap off for the first jolt.
Bang on with the NOS changes.
- Trem |
Dred'Pirate Jesus
Amarr Imperial Warehousing Industries
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 22:15:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Dred''Pirate Jesus on 27/02/2007 22:13:01 If Warp Disruptor II had a 25km range noone would be complaining about heavy NOS.. Why FFS give a T2 modual designed to counter most short range tackler killers like heavy NOS the bloody same 24km range as a T1 heavy NOS? So if you wanted to beat a warp dis II then you should have pony up the cash for a faction NOS of greater range like eveyone else does to counter other T2 mods.. C'mon CCP add just 1 measly km to the warp dis II..
And as far as the MWD 'nerf' I'm reserving judgment until I can see the ingame resuslts.. But so far it looks ok.. Sorta..
Originally by: David Hackworth ò If you find yourself in a fair fight, you didn't plan your mission properly.
|
Rab
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 22:20:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Pattern Clarc
Second Nos Nerf Make Nos signature radius dependant - eg, give it a signiature resultion and if your sig = 10% of it's resultion, it'll Nos for for 10% of it's maxium amount. This gives interceptors a chance to.... INTERCEPT and actually means battleship pilots would need to think more carefully about dealing with ships smaler than it.
I think NOS sig rad is a stroke of genius, the rest was ok in a rant sort of way. - In an infinite universe, everything is definite. - - BDB - Ban Dev Brothers - |
MassonA
Caldari coracao ardente Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 22:26:00 -
[20]
Edited by: MassonA on 27/02/2007 22:24:37 Edited by: MassonA on 27/02/2007 22:23:15 see below seems to have double-posted ___________________________
|
|
Godar Marak
Amarr Return Of Red Dawn
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 22:26:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Pattern Clarc
warp scramblers are a little more complex, as you either warp or don't warp.... How about if warp scramblers, outside of optimal range delayed the about of time it takes for your ship to turn and warp??
So basically you want to kill the only defense a bs have against tacklers? -------------------- '\0/\0/\0/\0/\0/' Cant we all just get along?
|
MassonA
Caldari coracao ardente Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 22:26:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Pattern Clarc First Nos Nerf Stacking penalise the ******* who use more than 1-2
It's bad enough that 5 battleships with 1 nos can wipe your cap away in a single cycle, but atleast it was 5 ships. When a Nos boat (eg, the dreaded NOS domi of unmidigated doom) could one shot a battlecruisers cap with an alsorted collection of nos and nuetralisers and use its colection of drones to rule the day, people cried Nerf to ECM... WTF!?!?!! Idiots. Stacking penalise the mother******* pieces of crap.
Second Nos Nerf Make Nos signature radius dependant - eg, give it a signiature resultion and if your sig = 10% of it's resultion, it'll Nos for for 10% of it's maxium amount. This gives interceptors a chance to.... INTERCEPT and actually means battleship pilots would need to think more carefully about dealing with ships smaler than it.
Third Nos Nerf Make an anti Nos module, (or repurpose the cap batteries) a module like ECCM which would reduce the rate at which you energy drains, or give you a small (10%) cap reserve in which you could run hardeners and stuff.
Forth Nos Nerf Actually, this is a boost. A 200% general energy drain increase for all nos modules, but a 180% reudction in the modules rate of fire. If you going to use nos, it should be inplace of injectors etc, a sharp injection of cap should be the efect, followed by a longer cool down time. Combined with the overall reudction of Nos effectiveness it should improve EvE tactically (not just 'balance' it)
YES!
the anti-nos module could be a capacitor reserver, helping to protect cap at max cap/recharge rate or something similar ___________________________
|
Godar Marak
Amarr Return Of Red Dawn
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 22:28:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Pattern Clarc
CCP seems happy with the fact that the only thing that makes a battleship more powerful than a battlecruiser, or a commandship is the amount of cap one can drain from each other. This is dumb and short sighted and has resulted in the problems we see today.
Why is it dumb that a big ass spaceship will drain the **** out of a smaller ship?
Dont bring a knife to a nuke fight.
-------------------- '\0/\0/\0/\0/\0/' Cant we all just get along?
|
Pang Grohl
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 22:34:00 -
[24]
I think that the right answer for NOS/Neuts is to tracking/signature penalize them, increase the fitting cost for them, and add some loss to the energy transfer effect. Energy transfer arrays don't have a 1:1 effect, and neither should NOS and neutralizers.
I don't think that stacking penalties as they stand in EVE today are going to have the affect you desire. 4 Heavy NOS, and 2 Neuts will still wtfpwn your capacitor, even if that 4th NOS is only adding 10% of it's affect to the mix.
Si non adjuvas, noces (If you're not helping, you're hurting) |
Pattern Clarc
Queens of the Stone Age
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 22:39:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Godar Marak
Originally by: Pattern Clarc
CCP seems happy with the fact that the only thing that makes a battleship more powerful than a battlecruiser, or a commandship is the amount of cap one can drain from each other. This is dumb and short sighted and has resulted in the problems we see today.
Why is it dumb that a big ass spaceship will drain the **** out of a smaller ship?
Dont bring a knife to a nuke fight.
It's that same mentality which causes nuclear proliferation...
If the EvE model was suppost to be all about biggest ==best, we'd all be training for dreads/titans right now.
please get a clue. Sig removed lacks EVE content, email [email protected] if you have any questions - Xorus |
Godar Marak
Amarr Return Of Red Dawn
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 22:41:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Godar Marak on 27/02/2007 22:39:12 Edited by: Godar Marak on 27/02/2007 22:38:38
Originally by: Pattern Clarc
It's that same mentality which causes nuclear proliferation...
WOW you sure shut me up with that one!
Quote:
If the EvE model was suppost to be all about biggest ==best, we'd all be training for dreads/titans right now.
please get a clue.
EVE model? And you know about the EVE model because you work for CCP? If your puny little inty gets owned by nos bs then stay out of nos range.
If your bc/bs/cruiser whatever gets owned by nos then stay out of nos range.
If you dont want to be scrambled then stay out of scramble range or get counter measures. -------------------- '\0/\0/\0/\0/\0/' Cant we all just get along?
|
Jarjar
Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 22:48:00 -
[27]
Quote: Second Nos Nerf Make Nos signature radius dependant - eg, give it a signiature resultion and if your sig = 10% of it's resultion, it'll Nos for for 10% of it's maxium amount. This gives interceptors a chance to.... INTERCEPT and actually means battleship pilots would need to think more carefully about dealing with ships smaler than it.
I like this one a lot. Unfortunately, it doesn't solve the Nosdomi of doom.
"In Communist China ISK buys YOU!!" - random bio |
Tobias Sjodin
Caldari Ore Mongers R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 22:56:00 -
[28]
Or just do what they did to ECM, make some NOS-specific ships, and make NOS a lot less useful on non-specific NOS-boats.
Eg. dominix/typhoon has no innate NOS-bonus, hence, NOS gets far less effective on it, whereas ships with NOS-bonus stay as-is.
|
Pattern Clarc
Queens of the Stone Age
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 22:58:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Godar Marak If your bc/bs/cruiser whatever gets owned by nos then stay out of nos range.
ingenious. Sig removed lacks EVE content, email [email protected] if you have any questions - Xorus |
Pattern Clarc
Queens of the Stone Age
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 23:02:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Tobias Sjodin Or just do what they did to ECM, make some NOS-specific ships, and make NOS a lot less useful on non-specific NOS-boats.
Eg. dominix/typhoon has no innate NOS-bonus, hence, NOS gets far less effective on it, whereas ships with NOS-bonus stay as-is.
Like the curse and the pilgrim? Sig removed lacks EVE content, email [email protected] if you have any questions - Xorus |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |