|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Captain Awkward
Republic University Minmatar Republic
135
|
Posted - 2017.03.01 12:25:49 -
[1] - Quote
Well I use a carrier to rat in null. I find it very inconsistent how NPCs agress fighters. In Rock Havens they agress my fighters, in cloud havens they dont.
But I am very concernd that more agression to fighters pared with the increased Sig radius will lead to a lot more fighter losses in PvE. That beeing said, even a single lost T2 fighter can ruin your ratting tick. So if it turns out that losing a fighter is inevitable, then T2 fighters are totally useless in PvE.
In order to compensate, I suggest that the ressist profiles of T2 fighters are switched so they match the dmg type of the NPCs they are used against.
So a Templar II for example would get a 30% EM / 15% Thermal resist bonus instead of the 30% Explosion / 15% Kinetic resist it currently has. |
Captain Awkward
Republic University Minmatar Republic
135
|
Posted - 2017.03.02 13:19:16 -
[2] - Quote
Problem Addict wrote:People actually lose fighters in PvE?
I've never lost a fighter. I just like. . . . pay attention and like. . . . . . think.
Do you alt tab and watch an entire episode on netflix then alt tab back and freak out because you lost 2 fighters?
What's going on here?
Get real.
Losing a figher is acutally quite rare atm. But currently, only a fiew NPCs actually bother to shoot at the fighters at all. The concern is that with the proposed changes the combination of increased sig radius and increased NPC agression to fighters, losing some will be inevetable. A single T2 fighter currently costs about 10m isk. So loosing even a single one srews your ratting income to a point where afk VNI ratting is more profitable and less risk.
Pulling them back isnt going to help ether. You may prevent fighter losses, but pulling them back all the time will screw your effective DPS and you are again back to below VNI income. |
Captain Awkward
Republic University Minmatar Republic
135
|
Posted - 2017.03.02 18:40:27 -
[3] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Changes are up on SiSi. Instead of posting about how concerned people are about these changes how about going out and actually testing it for an hour and then posting results?
Id love to. However, I cant find any Combat Anomalys on SiSi to actually test the carrier against a Sanctum or Haven.
|
Captain Awkward
Republic University Minmatar Republic
136
|
Posted - 2017.03.05 11:17:16 -
[4] - Quote
Smugest Sniper wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:
If you want to make an argument post a log of your wallet ticks and fighter losses before and after the change.
Maybe CCP decides that's acceptable, maybe they don't, but it's got a better chance of doing something than going off and nuking High Sec does.
If I had to guess, based on what you posted, the sig radius changes have pushed Fighters into the realm where Battleships start shooting them, and that's what's causing the problems here. If possible I'd like to see the agro mechanics around fighters changed a bit so they don't take BS aggro the way Heavy Drones sometimes do.
Once I find a more stable place to chain sites, I can give you a better estimate of tick changes. Once the battle ships start to agress it becomes much harder to keep them alive, they will sit around 60-70% until you clear most of the smaller ****, but after you clear a few battleships it seems that they start trying to blap your fighters. If you aren't running 3-4 FSU's though they will die if you get the same squad targeted, or you'll have to pull them if you see them start to go lower than 50% if the battle ships aren't targeting you. This also means you have to be alot more sparing with your missle attacks, as it not at all, or you can't relaunch fast enough to cycle fighters through their switch time. Will post more soon
Can you please tell me how you managed to find / spawn Havens / Sanctums? I cant find a single system that as any combat anomaly. I was told to upgrade a system so the sites spawn, but I nether have a ship that is able to transport sov upgrades, nor do I have any idea how to use them. Its seems that CCP is making it incredible hard to actually test these changes. |
Captain Awkward
Republic University Minmatar Republic
136
|
Posted - 2017.03.07 13:22:18 -
[5] - Quote
Marcus Tedric wrote:If it hasn't been obvious before - this is why! From the Economic ReportThe massive increase is almost entirely due to Carrier/Super-ratting.
If carriers need to be nerfed then they need to be nerfed. But making NPCs volly 10m fighers of the field is a realy stupid way to nerf carrier income. There are so many ways they could have nerfed carrier ratting without making it feel so dumb and punishing. |
Captain Awkward
Republic University Minmatar Republic
136
|
Posted - 2017.03.07 16:10:04 -
[6] - Quote
Juvir wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Shkiki wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote: These changes bring Fighters closer in-line with the signature of Heavy Drones.
I've seen this "Bring stuff in-line" a 100 dozen times so far. What I think it fails to mention is that fighters were in-line to begin with, you just want to make the line narrower. How can you say they were "in line" when they were not even 50% of a heavy drone sig size? Because drones get resistances, and 3 layers of HP. Fighters have shields only, and no resists.
Well T2 fighters have resists. Its only that they have resists that are completely the oposite of what the NPC you use them against are fireing at it.
|
|
|
|