These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[April] [Updated] Confessor and Svipul Balance Tweaks

First post First post
Author
Cade Windstalker
#501 - 2015-04-23 21:12:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Cade Windstalker
Cleanse Serce wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
They're not, almost everyone agrees that the T3 Cruisers need a serious working over with the nerf-bat.


T3 Cruisers can't compete with BSs ?
Really ?
That's not what i can witness in game actually.


That's not what I said (or at least certainly not what I meant)

No one is saying that the current state of T3 Cruisers is okay, especially not CCP. (from this old dev blog on ship rebalancing)

This thread is about T3 Destroyers, not T3 Cruisers, so lets fix these before they stick around too much longer. The current state of T3 Cruisers is both healthier and more stable than the state of T3 Destroyers so it'll keep for a while longer still. They are going to get their turn in Fozzie and Rise's rebalance-o-matic though. (or get taken out behind the wood shed with the nerf bat, whichever analogy you prefer)

Cleanse Serce wrote:

Yes, that was my point actually.
Nobody cries about how T3 Cruisers can destroy T2 Dessies, but they do for AFs.
I mean, i see no pb about that, they are a superior class after all, aren't they ?
Dessies are MEANT to destroy frigates, that's their unique role, right ?
So a T3 Dessy shouldn't have any problem at all to reck an AF i guess.


Most T1 Cruisers can deal with a T2 Destroyer, so T2 Destroyer pilots don't fight Cruisers unless they know they can win.

A T2 Destroyer can give an AF a run for its money if flown well but the reverse is equally true. Neither class overwhelms the other and Destroyers aren't particularly more powerful than Frigates in general, they just have different strengths and weaknesses. These Tactical Destroyers were just flat better in almost every way than an AF (or any other T2 Frigate).

Also the more appropriate comparison would be T3 Cruisers wrecking a T2 Cruiser, which is exactly what happens right now and people do have complaints about it...
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
#502 - 2015-04-23 21:20:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Cleanse Serce
Cade Windstalker wrote:
That's not what I said (or at least certainly not what I meant)

No one is saying that the current state of T3 Cruisers is okay, especially not CCP. (from this old dev blog on ship rebalancing)

This thread is about T3 Destroyers, not T3 Cruisers, so lets fix these before they stick around too much longer. The current state of T3 Cruisers is both healthier and more stable than the state of T3 Destroyers so it'll keep for a while longer still. They are going to get their turn in Fozzie and Rise's rebalance-o-matic though. (or get taken out behind the wood shed with the nerf bat, whichever analogy you prefer)


Oh, ok, i apologize for misunderstanding your statement. :x

I agree.

I was just pointing that people are arguing about a T3 Dessies being OP compared to their lower class while T3 Cruisers can easily compete with their upper class.

I do know though that ship classes shouldn't be compared like i'm doin so there.

One should just not forget that Destroyers are MEANT to destroy frigates, that's their role, that's what they were invented for.

Cade Windstalker wrote:
Most T1 Cruisers can deal with a T2 Destroyer, so T2 Destroyer pilots don't fight Cruisers unless they know they can win.

A T2 Destroyer can give an AF a run for its money if flown well but the reverse is equally true. Neither class overwhelms the other and Destroyers aren't particularly more powerful than Frigates in general, they just have different strengths and weaknesses. These Tactical Destroyers were just flat better in almost every way than an AF (or any other T2 Frigate).

Also the more appropriate comparison would be T3 Cruisers wrecking a T2 Cruiser, which is exactly what happens right now and people do have complaints about it...


I don't know what appropriate comparison should be actually.

But i'm not agree with this, Destroyers have been invented to destroy frigs, and they should excell doin so, especially T3 Dessies vs AFs.

___

Also, balancing is a very difficult thing to do, and must be a tough job.
I'm impressed by the CCP guys workin on that, really.

It depends on so many variables, skills (book), skills (player), solo, fleet, small gang, fitting, links, boosters, implants, etc, etc...

I'm sad that this rebalance comes with the statement that advanced pilots (player with piloting skills) are pushing the limit so far of those ships that they HAVE TO be nerfed.

I concider myself as a relatively normal pilote, not bad, not good, and i never felt OP in a Confessor for which i felt in love, and which improved my piloting skills.

(sry for bad english, it's getting late, and i'm tired :p)
Cade Windstalker
#503 - 2015-04-23 21:54:04 UTC
Cleanse Serce wrote:
Oh, ok, i apologize for misunderstanding your statement. :x

I agree.

I was just pointing that people are arguing about a T3 Dessies being OP compared to their lower class while T3 Cruisers can easily compete with their upper class.

I do know though that ship classes shouldn't be compared like i'm doin so there.

One should just not forget that Destroyers are MEANT to destroy frigates, that's their role, that's what they were invented for.


I don't think anyone is forgetting that, it's just not the topic of this thread. Until CCP finds a way to clone devs they'll continue to have limited development bandwidth so they have to fix one thing at a time. These Tactical Destroyers haven't settled yet so it's best to fix them early when they're not so much of a problem. T3 Cruisers on the other hand have a fairly stable state, even if they are out-classing HACs rather badly.

Cleanse Serce wrote:
I don't know what appropriate comparison should be actually.

But i'm not agree with this, Destroyers have been invented to destroy frigs, and they should excell doin so, especially T3 Dessies vs AFs.


In Eve this has never been the case. T1 Destroyers trade the speed and sig-tank ability of a Frigate for more firepower and projection. T2 Destoryers make a similar trade-off but have increased surviveability because of their T2 resists and fittings.

They've never been flat better than comparable frigates, they just have different strengths and weaknesses. The only exception was, for a long time, the Sabre but even then it was best at catching and killing Interceptors and a good AF could still go toe to toe with it. This went away with the Interdictor rebalance though.

Cleanse Serce wrote:
Also, balancing is a very difficult thing to do, and must be a tough job.
I'm impressed by the CCP guys workin on that, really.

It depends on so many variables, skills (book), skills (player), solo, fleet, small gang, fitting, links, boosters, implants, etc, etc...

I'm sad that this rebalance comes with the statement that advanced pilots (player with piloting skills) are pushing the limit so far of those ships that they HAVE TO be nerfed.

I concider myself as a relatively normal pilote, not bad, not good, and i never felt OP in a Confessor for which i felt in love, and which improved my piloting skills.

(sry for bad english, it's getting late, and i'm tired :p)


Powerful ships are a lot of fun, but in this case the ship was flat better in a direct numbers comparison than the ships it fights against and that's both counter to CCP's philosophy for T3 ships and bad for gameplay.
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
#504 - 2015-04-23 23:48:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Cleanse Serce
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Powerful ships are a lot of fun, but in this case the ship was flat better in a direct numbers comparison than the ships it fights against and that's both counter to CCP's philosophy for T3 ships and bad for gameplay.


I would tell for the Svipul, sure.
I found the Confessor balanced though.

But i might not be quite objective there.
Cade Windstalker
#505 - 2015-04-24 02:07:04 UTC
Cleanse Serce wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Powerful ships are a lot of fun, but in this case the ship was flat better in a direct numbers comparison than the ships it fights against and that's both counter to CCP's philosophy for T3 ships and bad for gameplay.


I would tell for the Svipul, sure.
I found the Confessor balanced though.

But i might not be quite objective there.


Svipul was better than the Confessor, but the Confessor was still better than basically everything else.
Maradusa Macarthy
Doomheim
#506 - 2015-04-24 04:54:21 UTC
So glad I ignored them and continue training for the Loki. Well done CCP nerf nerf nerf them T3D's to the ground until they're completely worthless.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#507 - 2015-04-24 05:52:04 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
While I always like nerfs to the barbarian rust-buckets, my Confessor most certainly doesn't need one.

Maybe most of you do not know this but laser turrets and armor reps are taxing very heavy on your capacitor and I don't see a reason to nerf a boat that is doing it's job correctly.

Edit:

Maybe this comes as total news for you but my Confessor goes ~2400m/s (rounded) in propulsion mode and the super-OMG-BBQ-WTF-pwn-mobile ab fit but my Imperial Navy Slicer goes >3200m/s with the mobility of an angel-boat.

Is my Imperial Navy Slicer op?

No, she is not.

The Confessor in propulsion mode prior to the nerf had the agility of a nano-titan, so you would rely on long-range damage projection.

Still at 2400m/s you will get kited by regular tech one frigates like there is no tomorrow and in the same market catergory you will already have counters for here for less than 10m isk, if at all that much.

A three day old noob with brains can kill one. That some of the kiddy plexers in lowsec started crying is not my concern - they choose to life in very dangerous space and can honestly not expect that someone has the intention to remove them from said plex.

In wormhole space this is an even more dangerous environment where you will choose all advantages you can muster to deal with all situation you may come across.

The thing with Tactical Destroyer is that they could deal with those situation even when you chose to earny some isk by shooting nasty NPCs and someone would like to get a drop on you - business as usual on a wormhole office Monday.

Your d-scan says, coast is clear up to 14.3AU, okay go kill some Sleepers and collect blue stuff later.

Reports of a straying Astero come in and you warp to your static or other connections of the day and investigate. Yes early response and rapid launch.

My first Confessor succumed to Gila drones - the End.

Everything is fine, I bought another one.

Now you make my Confessor slower and the perfect capacitor usage : recharge ratio goes down the drain with it, are you nuts??

Now the minmatar one is a little too strong, I mean 100.000ehp destroyers are what I would call out of whack but my Confessor with 5697ehp most certainly wasn't.

And no, I will not give you counters here on the forums, figure them out on your own.

Leave my Confessor as she is and maybe increase the price a bit, she is so far from op I don't even know if you have ever flown one.

The reason she is popular is because it's an Amarr tech 3 boat done right at first try, do not take it away.


Agreed, there is nothing wrong with the confessor. It was a great introduction to a brand new class of ships and that finally gave Amarr a worthy small scale solo PVP ship. There was no talk at all about nerfing the T3D's until that Svipul came out and yes it was way overpowered. Just because the Confessor is also a T3D, CCP decided to nerf it as well assuming it was also overpowered which it wasn't. All the confessor needed was an increase in price to around 70 mill isk and it'd have it's own perfect niche right between AF and HAC's. Even in Prop mode using an 1mn AB the confessor can only go around 1500 m/s (and that is with using links), so now in Prop mode i'd be lucky to hit 1300 m/s in my confessor. I see many kiting deaths on the horizon in my confessor now, great job CCP you really know how to wreck a good thing. Btw I had to use ACR's in all 3 rig slots to fit the 10mn Ab, so what's with this extreme fitting room you were referring too huh??
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
#508 - 2015-04-24 09:49:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Cleanse Serce
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Svipul was better than the Confessor, but the Confessor was still better than basically everything else.


Confessor rely way more than the Svipul on the mode switch mechanic.
That's what made it balanced in my opinion.

If CCP is really and only pushing this mecanic, not just nerf-bat T3 Dessies randomly here and there like they did for Ishtars, it's all good i guess.
Time will tell.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#509 - 2015-04-24 11:15:57 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Svipul was better than the Confessor, but the Confessor was still better than basically everything else.


Congratulations, you finally figured out the bullet point.

Now please share with the class at what the Confessor is better at and you believe is too strong to be allowed to undock?

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#510 - 2015-04-24 11:45:26 UTC
I'm still trying to get the answer why the Svipul has 7.4k EHP vs. Confessor's 7k thanks to its double armour+shield resists bonus, while also being 15% faster and not having to rely on Sharpshooter mode to project damage.

CCPlease
NovemberMike
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#511 - 2015-04-24 19:05:15 UTC
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
I'm still trying to get the answer why the Svipul has 7.4k EHP vs. Confessor's 7k thanks to its double armour+shield resists bonus, while also being 15% faster and not having to rely on Sharpshooter mode to project damage.

CCPlease

It makes a certain amount of sense. The Svipul will either be shield or armor tanked, so one of the bonuses is going to be much less useful depending on the actual loadout of the Svipul. If the Svipul is still tankier than a Confessor after they've been fitted then I'd see a problem.
Cade Windstalker
#512 - 2015-04-24 19:31:35 UTC
Cleanse Serce wrote:
Confessor rely way more than the Svipul on the mode switch mechanic.
That's what made it balanced in my opinion.

If CCP is really and only pushing this mecanic, not just nerf-bat T3 Dessies randomly here and there like they did for Ishtars, it's all good i guess.
Time will tell.


Sure, to get the most out of the hull, but you could still take a Confessor, throw it into Propulsion Mode, and be faster, tankier, and have more DPS than most of the things you'd be fighting.

Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
I'm still trying to get the answer why the Svipul has 7.4k EHP vs. Confessor's 7k thanks to its double armour+shield resists bonus, while also being 15% faster and not having to rely on Sharpshooter mode to project damage.

CCPlease


I'm going to take a guess and say that it's because the Sig bonus in Defense mode is extremely strong at mitigating incoming damage, especially on a MWD fit.
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#513 - 2015-04-24 20:02:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Iroquoiss Pliskin
NovemberMike wrote:
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
I'm still trying to get the answer why the Svipul has 7.4k EHP vs. Confessor's 7k thanks to its double armour+shield resists bonus, while also being 15% faster and not having to rely on Sharpshooter mode to project damage.

CCPlease

It makes a certain amount of sense. The Svipul will either be shield or armor tanked, so one of the bonuses is going to be much less useful depending on the actual loadout of the Svipul. If the Svipul is still tankier than a Confessor after they've been fitted then I'd see a problem.


A dual MASB Svipul tanks just as much as a dual SAR Confessor with the latter having 400 less EHP, and a 1x MSE Svipul has the 2k more EHP than a 400mm Confessor (2x CDFE vs 1x Trimark rigs). What?

Armour resist part of the double bonus has to go - can't have 15% more speed, same/better tank, equal cap regen and better ~applied~ projection at the same time vs. the AMARR VICTOR.

:CCP:

Cade Windstalker wrote:

I'm going to take a guess and say that it's because the Sig bonus in Defense mode is extremely strong at mitigating incoming damage, especially on a MWD fit.


Yes, I've considered that - the Confessor's Defensive Sig reduction bonus is being applied all the time, compared to the MWD-dependent one on the Svipul.

I still want to hear their reasoning. What?
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
#514 - 2015-04-24 20:11:56 UTC
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
Armour resist part of the double bonus has to go - can't have 15% more speed, same/better tank, equal cap regen and better ~applied~ projection at the same time vs. the AMARR VICTOR.


It's good to see specific bonuses for each T3 Dessy.
Instead of erasing double bonus, it would've been smart to set htem at 22.2% or 16% instead of 33%.
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#515 - 2015-04-24 20:12:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Iroquoiss Pliskin
Cleanse Serce wrote:
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
Armour resist part of the double bonus has to go - can't have 15% more speed, same/better tank, equal cap regen and better ~applied~ projection at the same time vs. the AMARR VICTOR.


It's good to see specific bonuses for each T3 Dessy.
Instead of erasing double bonus, it would've been smart to set htem at 22.2% or 16% instead of 33%.


Also a good option, tone down the Armour resist part of that double bonus. Confessor is actually how the T3D concept should be: All three Modes are employed, vs. people nanugafing in Prop all day long on the Svipul because of the innate Optimal range hull bonus.

Double bonuses are cancer - see Ishtar with its 6 bonuses vs 4 on other HACs, or 3 on the Zealot, because :cap:.
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
#516 - 2015-04-24 20:55:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Cleanse Serce
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
Also a good option, tone down the Armour resist part of that double bonus. Confessor is actually how the T3D concept should be: All three Modes are employed, vs. people nanugafing in Prop all day long on the Svipul because of the innate Optimal range hull bonus.

Double bonuses are cancer - see Ishtar with its 6 bonuses vs 4 on other HACs, or 3 on the Zealot, because :cap:.


I really like the fact that it reflects the specification of each race tanking, like the Gallente T3 Dessy will tank hull.. Minmatar has always been capable of double tank, so why lower armor and not shield ?
What will we do when Jackdaw comes out ?
Because Caldari are masters in shield-tanking we should lower Svipul's shield bonuses as well ?
No, lower them both at same ratio. Best choice. ;)

22.2% for shield/tank resists would've been better than this overall wipe of the original idea of T3 Dessies.
And the raise of the price as well of course.

But hey, we can talk as long as we want, it's done anyway.
Just wait and see how it goes with the changes announced.
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#517 - 2015-04-24 21:03:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Iroquoiss Pliskin
I agree in principle, but the current 33% for a double bonus is over the top.

Any more double bonuses being introduced into the game and I'm going to lose complete faith in CCP, primarily as a pilot of Amarr spaceships, which most of the time require an Energy Turret Activation reduction bonus merely to function, which DOES count towards the 2 total bonuses on Tech 1 ships and 4 on Tech 2. Sad

See the PvP damage link in my signature - Light blue is Drone damage, Orange - Energy weapons, Yellow - Projectiles, Dark blue - Hybrids.
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
#518 - 2015-04-24 21:30:27 UTC
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
I agree in principle, but the current 33% for a double bonus is over the top.

Any more double bonuses being introduced into the game and I'm going to lose complete faith in CCP, primarily as a pilot of Amarr spaceships, which most of the time require an Energy Turret Activation reduction bonus merely to function, which DOES count towards the 2 total bonuses on Tech 1 ships and 4 on Tech 2. Sad

See the PvP damage link in my signature - Light blue is Drone damage, Orange - Energy weapons, Yellow - Projectiles, Dark blue - Hybrids.


I'm an Amarr pilot as well, i do know how Eve plyaers in general put low interest in Laser gunnery at the moment.
I thought the last cruiser rebalance (rail and ishtar nerfs) would've raised the interest, which it did in the region i live (more Abso fleets roaming for instance), but i guess that's a bit too soon to tell.

I don't know what should be done to raise the overall interest in Laser gunnery, but it's clearly lacking something.
Your point on capacitor consomption bonuses is true and it kinda handicaps armar hull in general cause their counter part has other bonuses more 'usefull'.
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#519 - 2015-04-24 21:36:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Iroquoiss Pliskin
Cleanse Serce wrote:

I don't know what should be done to raise the overall interest in Laser gunnery, but it's clearly lacking something.
Your point on capacitor consomption bonuses is true and it kinda handicaps armar hull in general cause their counter part has other bonuses more 'usefull'.


Combining Energy Turret Activation with some other existing hull bonus, like Damage, to create a double bonus would be the best thing ever for Amarr.

Hmm, maybe I should start a thread on that. Twisted
NovemberMike
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#520 - 2015-04-24 22:39:18 UTC
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
I agree in principle, but the current 33% for a double bonus is over the top.


Possibly, but I'd need to see real fits in action before I'd be comfortable saying for sure. The two ships are very different and the dual bonus that the Svipul gets is hard to exploit, as far as I can tell. I could be wrong but I don't see anything completely off yet.