These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[March] Damage Control Tiericide

First post First post First post
Author
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#861 - 2016-03-01 21:43:30 UTC
baltec1 wrote:

And where is that?

Please post the before & after stats of the DCU II.
Ignore any other changes, just the DCU II stats.
Then explain how the DCU II is now giving more than it used to give.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#862 - 2016-03-01 21:59:22 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

And where is that?

Please post the before & after stats of the DCU II.
Ignore any other changes, just the DCU II stats.
Then explain how the DCU II is now giving more than it used to give.


Due to the way things in EVE work the DCU II after this change will boost your ship with 13% shields, 15% armour and 61% structure resists.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#863 - 2016-03-01 22:03:53 UTC
baltec1 wrote:


Due to the way things in EVE work the DCU II after this change will boost your ship with 13% shields, 15% armour and 61% structure resists.

No it won't. That will be the END result. Not the boost that the DCU II gives itself.
You are stacking two separate effects together for your claims.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#864 - 2016-03-01 22:09:11 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
baltec1 wrote:


Due to the way things in EVE work the DCU II after this change will boost your ship with 13% shields, 15% armour and 61% structure resists.

No it won't. That will be the END result. Not the boost that the DCU II gives itself.
You are stacking two separate effects together for your claims.


The END result is we keep doing what we are currently doing. After this change we will still be using the DCU on all the ships that currently fit the DCU.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#865 - 2016-03-01 22:14:52 UTC
baltec1 wrote:

The END result is we keep doing what we are currently doing. After this change we will still be using the DCU on all the ships that currently fit the DCU.

And? That is irrelevant to your claims that the module itself provides a larger bonus than it used to, which is an outright lie.
The module provides a smaller bonus.

If the module has been nerfed enough to make a noticeable difference in how many people use it is irrelevant to the question of if it has been nerfed at all. And the module has certainly been nerfed.

You just are doing your normal thing, of cherry picking statistics and ignoring or flat out lying about everything else. And it's seriously old now.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#866 - 2016-03-01 22:18:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Morrigan LeSante
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

The END result is we keep doing what we are currently doing. After this change we will still be using the DCU on all the ships that currently fit the DCU.

And? That is irrelevant to your claims that the module itself provides a larger bonus than it used to, which is an outright lie.
The module provides a smaller bonus.

If the module has been nerfed enough to make a noticeable difference in how many people use it is irrelevant to the question of if it has been nerfed at all. And the module has certainly been nerfed.

You just are doing your normal thing, of cherry picking statistics and ignoring or flat out lying about everything else. And it's seriously old now.



Sorry but he's bang on.

You can't take a module deemed "must fit", buff the fits using it and claim "Look, it's now less desirable! Because everyone using it is not even stronger"

The very notion is ridiculous. The oxymoron to end all oxymorons.


Ed: It is like saying "Hey guys, ganking is too good so we're going to go ahead and buff catalyst and talos DPS"
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#867 - 2016-03-01 22:24:10 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:


Sorry but he's bang on.

You can't take a module deemed "must fit", buff the fits using it and claim "Look, it's now less desirable! Because everyone using it is not even stronger"

The very notion is ridiculous. The oxymoron to end all oxymorons.


Ed: It is like saying "Hey guys, ganking is too good so we're going to go ahead and buff catalyst and talos DPS"

Actually you can, because the module is less desirable.
If they halve the impact of say.... Weapon Upgrades but then give a 10% buff to weapons base damage, fits using weapon upgrades are less desirable, regardless of the end result overall.
So no, it's not ridiculous, you just have no idea how to do an independent assessment of a single factors impact & value, vs the overall value of an entire package.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#868 - 2016-03-01 22:32:07 UTC
No, it is not. It is not only still 100% essential for non half assed snowflake bullshit which isn't relevant, it's now even more effective in its role.


The number of people in this thread who actually think the hull resists are why you fit a DC is mind boggling. Truly mind boggling.

Let me repeat it again. If you nerf a DCU down to 0% hull resist it is still essential for serious work. Because you're not fitting it for the hull resists.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#869 - 2016-03-01 22:53:06 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:

And? That is irrelevant to your claims that the module itself provides a larger bonus than it used to, which is an outright lie.
The module provides a smaller bonus.

If the module has been nerfed enough to make a noticeable difference in how many people use it is irrelevant to the question of if it has been nerfed at all. And the module has certainly been nerfed.

You just are doing your normal thing, of cherry picking statistics and ignoring or flat out lying about everything else. And it's seriously old now.


So now its a personal vendetta just to try and "get me"?

I am looking at this change as a whole and what it means. Fitting the DCU on any ship will give you those resists, thats why I am lumping them together. Every single ship that fits a DCU will get 61% hull resists which is slightly more than what is available today. That is the point I am making.

If you just want to concentrate on the DCU then its still a must have mod, no ship that fits them today will not fit them in the future.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#870 - 2016-03-01 23:03:59 UTC
baltec1 wrote:

So now its a personal vendetta just to try and "get me"?

I am looking at this change as a whole and what it means. Fitting the DCU on any ship will give you those resists, thats why I am lumping them together. Every single ship that fits a DCU will get 61% hull resists which is slightly more than what is available today. That is the point I am making.

If you just want to concentrate on the DCU then its still a must have mod, no ship that fits them today will not fit them in the future.

Yes, it's a personal vendetta to call you out for constant outright lies..... No it's not a personal vendetta. It's calling you out for outright lies, which you constantly peddle on the forums to mislead people.
You were replying directly to someone talking about purely the DCU making claims that the DCU Module has been buffed. It hasn't, the module has been nerfed. It's irrelevant what the end result is with regards to how 'must fit' the module is. Only what the module stats are.
Could they nerf the DCU even further for good balance, almost certainly, I'd love to see it become hull resists only with 0% for armour & shield, but have they nerfed it for now? Also absolutely. It's just a debate on how much of a nerf is needed and desirable, not if it's been nerfed at all.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#871 - 2016-03-01 23:14:43 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

So now its a personal vendetta just to try and "get me"?

I am looking at this change as a whole and what it means. Fitting the DCU on any ship will give you those resists, thats why I am lumping them together. Every single ship that fits a DCU will get 61% hull resists which is slightly more than what is available today. That is the point I am making.

If you just want to concentrate on the DCU then its still a must have mod, no ship that fits them today will not fit them in the future.

Yes, it's a personal vendetta to call you out for constant outright lies..... No it's not a personal vendetta. It's calling you out for outright lies, which you constantly peddle on the forums to mislead people.
You were replying directly to someone talking about purely the DCU making claims that the DCU Module has been buffed. It hasn't, the module has been nerfed. It's irrelevant what the end result is with regards to how 'must fit' the module is. Only what the module stats are.
Could they nerf the DCU even further for good balance, almost certainly, I'd love to see it become hull resists only with 0% for armour & shield, but have they nerfed it for now? Also absolutely. It's just a debate on how much of a nerf is needed and desirable, not if it's been nerfed at all.


Unfortunately you have to fit the DC to a ship and the buff to ship hull resists indirectly provide a very small buff to the DC.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#872 - 2016-03-01 23:20:41 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

So now its a personal vendetta just to try and "get me"?

I am looking at this change as a whole and what it means. Fitting the DCU on any ship will give you those resists, thats why I am lumping them together. Every single ship that fits a DCU will get 61% hull resists which is slightly more than what is available today. That is the point I am making.

If you just want to concentrate on the DCU then its still a must have mod, no ship that fits them today will not fit them in the future.

Yes, it's a personal vendetta to call you out for constant outright lies..... No it's not a personal vendetta. It's calling you out for outright lies, which you constantly peddle on the forums to mislead people.
You were replying directly to someone talking about purely the DCU making claims that the DCU Module has been buffed. It hasn't, the module has been nerfed. It's irrelevant what the end result is with regards to how 'must fit' the module is. Only what the module stats are.
Could they nerf the DCU even further for good balance, almost certainly, I'd love to see it become hull resists only with 0% for armour & shield, but have they nerfed it for now? Also absolutely. It's just a debate on how much of a nerf is needed and desirable, not if it's been nerfed at all.


After this change, as a whole, we will get more.

It was said that this change would result in slightly less than today, not a lot to make any difference. Turns out this is a buff to what we have today, slightly more but not enough to make any difference. The reality is that nothing will change for DCU fitted ships. You seem to have missed the context of this discussion
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#873 - 2016-03-01 23:51:50 UTC
baltec1 wrote:


After this change, as a whole, we will get more.

It was said that this change would result in slightly less than today, not a lot to make any difference. Turns out this is a buff to what we have today, slightly more but not enough to make any difference. The reality is that nothing will change for DCU fitted ships. You seem to have missed the context of this discussion

And I have Bingo!
Moving goalposts argument played by Baltec completes the set!

Yea..... No, I didn't miss the context of the discussion, you have decided to move your argument after you got called out on an outright lie, and pretend you were talking about something else.
Which is utterly irrelevant to the point I made, and the point you were replying to at the time.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#874 - 2016-03-02 00:00:59 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
What part of "the module does less" do you not understand?


And where is that?

Again, after this change the DCU provides slightly more tank than you get today, no other module will provide a better alternative and no damage mod is worth fitting over the DCU. The DCU is just as needed after the change as before, thus the whole change fails to do what it is supposed to do.
No, it doesn't. The combination of the DCU and your ships base stats provide more, but the DCU itself provides less, thus is less important overall.

Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Sorry but he's bang on.

You can't take a module deemed "must fit", buff the fits using it and claim "Look, it's now less desirable! Because everyone using it is not even stronger"
No, he's completely wrong. Let's make an extreme example, and imagine they changed all ships adding on all the bonuses of the DCU to it's base stats minus 2% hull resists. Then they make the DCU only add 4% hull resists. A ship fitting that after would be 2% better off in terms of EHP, but he DCU itself is basically useless because it's providing nearly none to that benefit.

Scaled down, that's exactly what's happening here, while the ships may be better off if they keep the DCU now compared with the old DCU, they lose LESS by removing it than they used to lose by removing it.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#875 - 2016-03-02 00:19:18 UTC
Very glad to see nothing much changed here.

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

The Ginger Sith
Attero Industries
#876 - 2016-03-02 05:50:56 UTC
while attending the mass test on sisi i tested out the new DCU II

it seems they decided to set the static hull resist at 34% instead of 33% (could change tho)

when i added DCU II to any ship that allowed it the ship would sit at 61% the exception to this is the hecate while in defensive mode would go up to 74% and marauders in bastion would go up to 73% i think it was.

obelisk showed around 490,000 ehp with 3 x bulkhead.

faction/officer/deadspace dcu where untestable as they mearly added their names with no stats so i doubt they where even added to the loot drop table at the time i was on sisi.

the change looks interesting and looking forward to it we shall see how it plays out :P
Cristl
#877 - 2016-03-02 06:05:24 UTC
Sheesh...you lot Big smile

Baltec, your maths is wrong, or you're trolling. The DCII itself is being nerfed: it will give the same bonuses to shield and armour ehp, while increasing hull ehp by 67% (rather than by 150% as on TQ). That's a nerf.

However, baltec is also correct that the DCII will still be too good - it still buffs shield and armour ehp by too much non-stacking penalised ehp. Very few fits will drop the DC, maybe a tackle or kiting ship will go for a prop enhancer for better speed tank and/or tactical purpose (get the tackle there faster). Not many though. Maybe a tracking enhancer.

Fozzie, grab the beast by the horns and nerf the shield and armour components. Maybe 7.5% and 10% respectively, on the DC II.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#878 - 2016-03-02 08:14:12 UTC
Cristl wrote:
Very few fits will drop the DC
But not zero.

Cristl wrote:
Fozzie, grab the beast by the horns and nerf the shield and armour components. Maybe 7.5% and 10% respectively, on the DC II.
You have to consider though that the options are then either to add the additional defense to ships base stats, or accept the nerf to the DC without adjustment. If they adjust the ships, then fits that will still fit a DC gain nothing, while fits that don;t gain the extra defense on top of their other stats. If they choose not to adjust the ships, the fits that use a DC will lose a mass of defense, while ships who could use the DC but don't lose nothing. I think they are taking a measured approach because they don't want to end up breaking the balance too much.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#879 - 2016-03-02 09:39:57 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Nevyn Auscent wrote:

Moving goalposts argument played by Baltec completes the set!


Ok so I'm getting 13% to shields, 15% to armour and 40% to structure on the DCU II. Combined with the buff to the hull its nets me 61% structure resists.

CCP buffed the DCU, its more of a must have mod now than ever.


That is what I said. Please stop trying to attribute an argument to me that I never made.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#880 - 2016-03-02 09:55:16 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
What part of "the module does less" do you not understand?


And where is that?

Again, after this change the DCU provides slightly more tank than you get today, no other module will provide a better alternative and no damage mod is worth fitting over the DCU. The DCU is just as needed after the change as before, thus the whole change fails to do what it is supposed to do.
No, it doesn't. The combination of the DCU and your ships base stats provide more, but the DCU itself provides less, thus is less important overall.

Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Sorry but he's bang on.

You can't take a module deemed "must fit", buff the fits using it and claim "Look, it's now less desirable! Because everyone using it is not even stronger"
No, he's completely wrong. Let's make an extreme example, and imagine they changed all ships adding on all the bonuses of the DCU to it's base stats minus 2% hull resists. Then they make the DCU only add 4% hull resists. A ship fitting that after would be 2% better off in terms of EHP, but he DCU itself is basically useless because it's providing nearly none to that benefit.

Scaled down, that's exactly what's happening here, while the ships may be better off if they keep the DCU now compared with the old DCU, they lose LESS by removing it than they used to lose by removing it.



Except like I said the hull resists are absolutely NOT EVER why this is fit outside of bullshit snowflake stuff.

IT IS FOR THE NON STACKING PENALIZED SHIELD AND ARMOR
IT IS FOR THE NON STACKING PENALIZED SHIELD AND ARMOR
IT IS FOR THE NON STACKING PENALIZED SHIELD AND ARMOR
IT IS FOR THE NON STACKING PENALIZED SHIELD AND ARMOR
IT IS FOR THE NON STACKING PENALIZED SHIELD AND ARMOR
IT IS FOR THE NON STACKING PENALIZED SHIELD AND ARMOR



Is it clear enough now?