These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Rubicon 1.1] Capital Turret Tracking Changes in Conjunction with Heat Iteration

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#301 - 2014-01-18 01:14:25 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:
With this change, the upcoming T3 nerf and the the lack of any substantial content being added to the game, i see 2014 being the year i stop playing EVE.

It's not a massive nerf but frankly, i'm tired of training up for something only for it to be nerfed again and again. For what i use it for, the moros has gone from being a awesome endgame ship to a complete ******* joke.



Taht is a very whine approach to the game. No nerf to ANy ship shoudl amke anyoen leave. Only babaies would do that.

LEarn that you train to what is NOT flavor of the monht. so when you get there. it WILl be flavor of the monht. WOrked for me for 7 years.


Stop typing like a tard, you tard.

This game takes years of investment and when i finally reach my long term goals, CCP seem to drag me back down. And due to the lack of any substantial new content, it feels like an all "take and no give" relationship at this point.

So yeah, forgive me if i'm not enthusiastic about running in circles for the rest of my time in eve like you, you sad sack.

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Angrod Losshelin
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#302 - 2014-01-18 02:04:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Angrod Losshelin
Every single ship hull I have tried to train into has been nerfed right be for I get to it. Sadly CCP again fucks up. Also, not answering almost 16 pages of customers asking the all important question why? Why? Why?

I've lost faith in getting any type of response, they don't care that we hate it they just care that they can do it and we wont leave.

So lets look at specifics here, what types of numbers are they generating from dreads that would break the game? Why nerf something to make us use heat to get the same functionality out of it?

Thats like reducing a cars gas tank capacity simply to stop it from wearing down the new tires you put on it. the new tires don't effectively change anything, but you still want to screw the whole car over? Logic check please. I want numbers that explain the deadly dreads you foresee coming.

Long story short, capital nerfs kill the game, because the new user has nothing to look forward to when they get there. -1 CCP

Check out my Podcast! My Blog!
Meyr
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
OnlyFleets.
#303 - 2014-01-18 04:29:21 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:


Now, let's talk about this change in particular.
I can understand why some people feel this change is coming out of left field, especially if their particular playstyle happens to be in areas where dreadnaughts are not seen as often.
The initial trigger for thinking about making this change came from concerns raised about how the Tracking Computer buff would affect the area of the game where tracking fit Dreadnaughts are at their strongest, in wormhole PVP. This caused us to do some thinking about the specific interactions at play, and we determined that although the effect of the overheating change would be fairly minor, we could play it safe and make a fairly minor maintenance change to capital turrets at the same time.




Fozzie -

If I understand what you've posted, you're reducing Dread Turret Tracking by 5% EVERYWHERE because in very specific wormholes, where there are very specific bonus/nerf effects, you feel that Tracking Dreads, specifically, MIGHT by slightly OP.

If I'm misunderstanding what you have written, please clarify it.

That said, as opposed to an across-the-board reduction in the performance of Dreads (5% of the damage Dreads can deal is a very large amount over time, you must admit), why not alter those very specific circumstances?

Is there some additional justification behind this, is the coding of wormholes more difficult to modify, is this in line with future plans?

It just seems more than a bit backwards to approach your stated issue thusly.
Mr Hyde113
#304 - 2014-01-18 04:53:28 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:

Now, let's talk about this change in particular.
I can understand why some people feel this change is coming out of left field, especially if their particular playstyle happens to be in areas where dreadnaughts are not seen as often.
The initial trigger for thinking about making this change came from concerns raised about how the Tracking Computer buff would affect the area of the game where tracking fit Dreadnaughts are at their strongest, in wormhole PVP. This caused us to do some thinking about the specific interactions at play, and we determined that although the effect of the overheating change would be fairly minor, we could play it safe and make a fairly minor maintenance change to capital turrets at the same time.



Ok compromise time. How about instead, we go with All wormholes now give a system wide 5% reduction to capital turret tracking.

GG GF
Travasty Space
Pilots of Epic
#305 - 2014-01-18 08:12:52 UTC
Mr Hyde113 wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:

If you could blap webbed players with your Moros before, you'll still be able to do it.
If you could farm sleeper escalations using supported dreads before, you'll still be able to do it.
If you could burn down a bounced supercarrier with your dread hotdrop before you'll still be able to do it.
If you could alpha an orbiting Archon with your Omegafleet Nags before you'll still be able to do it.
If you could hit those Omegafleet Nags with your titan guns before you'll still be able to do it.
If you could mine veldspar with your Revelation before you'll still be able to do it.

I think you will all find that this change results in pretty much the same gameplay as before, and only serves as a very slight reduction in total effectiveness compared to the status quo. If you discover differently on SISI or potentially later on TQ, let us know in a calm and reasoned manner and we'll always be very open to reevaluating these kinds of attributes.



Then why bother at all? You're argument here counters itself. If a 5% nerf doesn't stop dreads from doing anything they currently do, then don't do it. I don't see any point in having even a 5% nerf to a ship that is expensive and puts itself at risk to fulfill its role


Or you can consider the argument that they are happy with the effort it takes to dread blap stuff in wormholes and thus are nerfing dread guns to BALANCE the buff to tracking computer. The your numbers show that the nerf doesn't harm dreads and it isn't hard to carry a stack of tracking computers and and a couple mobile depots for when you don't have a carrier right there to swap them and you can have BETTER tracking then before.

Your argument simply boils down to "OMG YOUR ARE NERFING MY THING! STOP IT!" instead of providing any good reason to not do so.
Black Garius
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#306 - 2014-01-18 09:39:34 UTC
Fozzie you are a NOOB, go and play Lego instead.

In the other hand I like to congratulate to you for successfully NERFING the subscriber numbers AGAIN.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#307 - 2014-01-18 09:56:32 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:
With this change, the upcoming T3 nerf and the the lack of any substantial content being added to the game, i see 2014 being the year i stop playing EVE.

It's not a massive nerf but frankly, i'm tired of training up for something only for it to be nerfed again and again. For what i use it for, the moros has gone from being a awesome endgame ship to a complete ******* joke.



Taht is a very whine approach to the game. No nerf to ANy ship shoudl amke anyoen leave. Only babaies would do that.

LEarn that you train to what is NOT flavor of the monht. so when you get there. it WILl be flavor of the monht. WOrked for me for 7 years.


Stop typing like a tard, you tard.

This game takes years of investment and when i finally reach my long term goals, CCP seem to drag me back down. And due to the lack of any substantial new content, it feels like an all "take and no give" relationship at this point.

So yeah, forgive me if i'm not enthusiastic about running in circles for the rest of my time in eve like you, you sad sack.



after 5 years you should have 90% of eve ships trained.... so do nto whine.

In time you get nerf proof.


And I cannto be made responsible for what I type in my 3rd language at 2 am after 13 hours at work

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#308 - 2014-01-18 09:57:35 UTC
Black Garius wrote:
Fozzie you are a NOOB, go and play Lego instead.

In the other hand I like to congratulate to you for successfully NERFING the subscriber numbers AGAIN.



Anyone that really LEAVES because of these TINY changes is really a coward or a baby.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
#309 - 2014-01-18 10:25:29 UTC  |  Edited by: gascanu
Quote:

This means tracking will be 5% down vs current TQ values when not overheating any TCs, about 2% down when overheating one T2 TC, and about 1.5% up when overheating two T2 TCs. Using higher meta TCs makes the crossover faster.



i don't get it:
You guys at CCP think so much about how this new heat bonus will afect dreads in wh that you want to nerf them all over eve just to prevent a possible slightly op dread game play in wh; i' impresed

In the same time there he sits THE PHOENIX ; yea i know, sry i mentioned him
how about instead on nerfing and nerfing and nerfing the other dreads you take a look at that poor piece of pixels?
how about instead of ruining all other dreads pilots game bit by bit you stop for 5 minutes and make the few phoenix pilots in the game a bit happy?
it's been in this poor state since years ago, and since years ago CCP promised to fix it, but hey, i guess new deployable crap that noone asked for is more important that keeping you word

ps. or maybe someone should check if the new developers even know this ship still exist in the game; maybe they don't. i've had to do a search to remember his name, lol
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
#310 - 2014-01-18 10:29:14 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Black Garius wrote:
Fozzie you are a NOOB, go and play Lego instead.

In the other hand I like to congratulate to you for successfully NERFING the subscriber numbers AGAIN.



Anyone that really LEAVES because of these TINY changes is really a coward or a baby.


i guess having a TINY mind will make someone come to same conclusion as you Blink
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
#311 - 2014-01-18 10:32:49 UTC  |  Edited by: gascanu
double post, sry
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#312 - 2014-01-18 10:58:03 UTC
All this whining over a piddling little 5% tracking cut? The tears when the Moros gets rebalanced are going to be amazing.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#313 - 2014-01-18 13:08:15 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Now, let's talk about this change in particular.
I can understand why some people feel this change is coming out of left field, especially if their particular playstyle happens to be in areas where dreadnaughts are not seen as often.
The initial trigger for thinking about making this change came from concerns raised about how the Tracking Computer buff would affect the area of the game where tracking fit Dreadnaughts are at their strongest, in wormhole PVP. This caused us to do some thinking about the specific interactions at play, and we determined that although the effect of the overheating change would be fairly minor, we could play it safe and make a fairly minor maintenance change to capital turrets at the same time.

That's exactly what this change is, a minor maintenance tweak. Making small, contained changes more rapidly is a very good method of balancing as you can fine tune attributes into the best possible state and watch the results without as many secondary effects. This change (as well as several of the other balance changes I announced yesterday) fall into that small contained iteration category.

It appears there are many people who seem to believe that this 5% will somehow crush Dreadnaughts or significantly decrease their use. I disagree, but I also welcome everyone to test these changes for themselves when SISI is next updated. As proven many times before, we are always open to adjusting or canceling proposed changes based on good solid feedback.
So you nerfed tracking, because of some one off situations that could occur in WH space? Nice. Roll

Let's face it, this 'minor maintenance' (lol) change will stick. I mean, you could have commented on the graphs and figures others have shown, but why bother? You have no intention of reversing it. Blink

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#314 - 2014-01-18 13:24:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Kenrailae
Can we get a 5% Reduction in Dread build mats too?

If we're getting 5% less damage application on a ship that only exists to do damage, might as well have to pay 5% Less for it too.

That sounds balanced to me.


EDIT:

Also, can we stop beating around the bush?


Carriers. THAT should be the absolute top of your ship rebalance list. And Drones for your modules. For a multitude of reasons.

Not least of which: Until those are fixed, fixing anything else is gonna have skewed results.

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal
Meyr
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
OnlyFleets.
#315 - 2014-01-18 14:05:57 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Black Garius wrote:
Fozzie you are a NOOB, go and play Lego instead.

In the other hand I like to congratulate to you for successfully NERFING the subscriber numbers AGAIN.



Anyone that really LEAVES because of these TINY changes is really a coward or a baby.


Rather that you are the frog placed into a pot of water, which is slowly heated, until it boils you to death.

Others realize that the pot is starting to boil, and jump out before it kills them.

The kind of thinking that observes a situational possibility, but responds with a global, and, using his own posts, 'unnecessary' (hey, if it won't have any effect, it's, by definition, unnecessary) change, instead of altering the details of that specific situation, is (a) sloppy, (b) lazy, or (c) hiding something, none of which bode well for future efforts.

A 'mere 5% reduction' in DPS is most definitely NOT insignificant - would any pilot who flies, say, MARAUDERS, BATTLESHIPS, and TIER 3 BATTLECRUISERS, sit idly by and support a change exactly like this one?

You know damned good and well that wouldn't happen, so, why should Dread and Titan pilots blindly accept it?

As for the Dreadnaught Balance Pass, when it occurs, anyone who flies them understands that the Moros is unbalanced - that's why all fleet doctrines state that your FC's would prefer Moros>Nag>Rev>Bomber>Dictor>Velator>Phoenix.Shocked

So, yeah, we know that the ride will end, and we'll probably want to train into something else (I REALLY hope it's not the Phoenix).
Basil Pupkin
Republic Military School
#316 - 2014-01-18 14:21:27 UTC
Goon story, bro.
Again.

Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.

If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.
May Ke
Chemically Inconvenienced
#317 - 2014-01-18 15:09:11 UTC
CCP:

You suck. Nerf Nerf Nerf Nerf Nerf. Tweak Tweak Tweak. Balance Balance Balance.

First: this is a terrible change. YET ANOTHER NERF TO CAPITALS.

Can you please do some EXPANDING in your next EXPANSION.

More players will leave after this latest failure.

P.S: You Suck.


Starcraft, anyone? EVE is being bummed by CCP.

Who? Me?
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#318 - 2014-01-18 16:24:19 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:


If you could blap webbed players with your Moros before, you'll still be able to do it.
If you could farm sleeper escalations using supported dreads before, you'll still be able to do it.
If you could burn down a bounced supercarrier with your dread hotdrop before you'll still be able to do it.
If you could alpha an orbiting Archon with your Omegafleet Nags before you'll still be able to do it.
If you could hit those Omegafleet Nags with your titan guns before you'll still be able to do it.
If you could mine veldspar with your Revelation before you'll still be able to do it.

I think you will all find that this change results in pretty much the same gameplay as before, and only serves as a very slight reduction in total effectiveness compared to the status quo. If you discover differently on SISI or potentially later on TQ, let us know in a calm and reasoned manner and we'll always be very open to reevaluating these kinds of attributes.


Did you intend to sound like you were promoting Obamacare? Because it sounds like you are intentionally mimicking the stunning success of that amazing plan. It does not increase confidence amongst your US players.

Why can't you put your analysis up front when you announce a change?

1. Here is the problem we have identified... This is our long-term goal or vision we are trying to achieve...
2. Here is our proposed solution... With charts, graphs, and rational argument.
3. Please give us constructive feedback.
4. Profit???

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Baali Tekitsu
AQUILA INC
Verge of Collapse
#319 - 2014-01-18 17:05:05 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:


If you could blap webbed players with your Moros before, you'll still be able to do it.
If you could farm sleeper escalations using supported dreads before, you'll still be able to do it.
If you could burn down a bounced supercarrier with your dread hotdrop before you'll still be able to do it.
If you could alpha an orbiting Archon with your Omegafleet Nags before you'll still be able to do it.
If you could hit those Omegafleet Nags with your titan guns before you'll still be able to do it.
If you could mine veldspar with your Revelation before you'll still be able to do it.

I think you will all find that this change results in pretty much the same gameplay as before, and only serves as a very slight reduction in total effectiveness compared to the status quo. If you discover differently on SISI or potentially later on TQ, let us know in a calm and reasoned manner and we'll always be very open to reevaluating these kinds of attributes.


Did you intend to sound like you were promoting Obamacare? Because it sounds like you are intentionally mimicking the stunning success of that amazing plan. It does not increase confidence amongst your US players.

Why can't you put your analysis up front when you announce a change?

1. Here is the problem we have identified... This is our long-term goal or vision we are trying to achieve...
2. Here is our proposed solution... With charts, graphs, and rational argument.
3. Please give us constructive feedback.
4. Profit???



How about:

1.Make an almost meaningless tweak which in the end changes exactly nothing
2.See people go maad
3.harvest tears
4. repeat

And by god dont touch anything that really needs fixing because :effort:

RATE LIKE SUBSCRIBE
Baali Tekitsu
AQUILA INC
Verge of Collapse
#320 - 2014-01-18 17:09:22 UTC
Also going by their current approach to "balancing" they should just take all dreads and nerf them completely beyond being **** to Phoenix level. See rapid light missiles.

RATE LIKE SUBSCRIBE