These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Warfare & Tactics

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

So the most recent dev blog......
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Zyella Stormborn
Green Seekers
#21 - 2012-11-08 06:56:07 UTC
Jack Miton wrote:
they also very specifically said that T3s with links will have better capabilities than CSs with link so don't go celebrating your damnation just yet since it's likely getting nerfed through the floor while getting more DPS.

frankly i think the entire boosting changes are poorly thought through at best and will make a lot of ships useless (namely all caldari and gallente boost ships.)

they'd do better to just go with a simple fix:

1. make CSs only able to fit 1 link at 5% bonus
2. make T3s be able to fit 3 links at a 3% bonus and be tankable while doing so to a viable degree
3. make boosting on field only

then just need to balance out the CSs up to the damnation level and youre done.
simple and efficient.



They are giving Commands the option. 3% bonus, dual bonus (Amarr gets armor, and skirmish, for example), and can set up for more combat oriented, or more command oriented, but not both.

They are giving T3's lesser bonus (2% base) but for triple bonus (Amarr gets armor, skirmish, information, for example), and will be more combat capable while still fielding 3 modules.

It does not seem overly complicated. The CS's are most likely going to be adjusted rather majorly (one would hope at least, as the Damnation is the only one that can field a serious tank atm, although its dps is rather limited). I agree the others should be brought up to it's tanking level, at the very least, if not buffing all of them (Damnation included) to withstand an alpha or 3.

I'll be interested to see what else they have in store for T3's as well.

~Z


P.S.: They are also (gods knows when, but I hope its soon since they are coming out with 2 more boats) planning on making a pass at Drones, and Shield / Armor tanking balance.


Tons of good stuff on the way.

There is a special Hell for people like that, Right next to child molestors, and people that talk in the theater. ~Firefly
Joanna Ramirez
Intaki Militia
#22 - 2012-11-08 07:08:48 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Seems you are making the assumption that im talking about his emotional state rather than his mental health.


For some reason you people seem to think that because you belong to a group whose leaders approved sending me death threats, I should be polite towards you because supposedly "it was for the lols" and you as underling pretend to have nothing to do with it.

Then again you would probably vote for Todd Akin with that mentality so I quess that is punishment enough for you, even if you dont see it as such.
Dan Carter Murray
#23 - 2012-11-08 10:03:06 UTC
Can someone start a list of people who will suddenly be absolutely terrible at "solo" pvp without their booster alts?

I'll start:

marketjacker

http://mfi.re/?j7ldoco 50GB free space @ MediaFire.com
Corporate Management
Apocalypse Reign
#24 - 2012-11-08 11:10:53 UTC
The way they plan to deal with links is just plain dumb. Did they not listen to anything people were saying about how and why OGB is broken? And who the hell uses information warfare links? Caldari are getting boned as now that minny CS get siege warfare bonus there is no reason to fly a vulture. Dumb dumb dumb.

All they needed to do was not allow T3 to fit multiple links, keep their 5% bonus and get them on grid. Buff the tanks of CS a little bit and, the only change I like, allow the field command ships to fit 3 links like the fleet ones do.

Another thing I don't like is the "reinforcing" of the Ferox into a sniper role. GTFO, unless it is a 10% damage per level buff to hybrids you goddamned better not remove the resists from the Ferox. Because hybrid sniping works oh so well for the Eagle right....
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#25 - 2012-11-08 12:56:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Joanna Ramirez wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Seems you are making the assumption that im talking about his emotional state rather than his mental health.


For some reason you people seem to think that because you belong to a group whose leaders approved sending me death threats, I should be polite towards you because supposedly "it was for the lols" and you as underling pretend to have nothing to do with it.

Then again you would probably vote for Todd Akin with that mentality so I quess that is punishment enough for you, even if you dont see it as such.


Ive never seen any evidence of death threats, you would probably vote for god with that mentality.

Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
I just think prevent them from boosting behind a pos shield. Perhaps make them a little easier to scan.

Making t3's on grid will just make a new obvious primary. Giving them a tank like the damnation while in boosting configuration will present massive issues for other configurations.

Perhaps, commandships have to be on grid and bosst 5%, and t3's can be anywhere but boost 3% along with the limitations i mentioned above.



Awh, a ship that doubles the battle capabilities of an unlimited number of ships will be an automatic primary?

That is SO unfair.......


Well, if they all tanked like the damnation as has been said it would be fine. As it is a t3 booster has a minimum tank due to the command link subsystem offering no local defence attributes.
Corporate Management
Apocalypse Reign
#26 - 2012-11-08 13:22:07 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:


Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
I just think prevent them from boosting behind a pos shield. Perhaps make them a little easier to scan.

Making t3's on grid will just make a new obvious primary. Giving them a tank like the damnation while in boosting configuration will present massive issues for other configurations.

Perhaps, commandships have to be on grid and bosst 5%, and t3's can be anywhere but boost 3% along with the limitations i mentioned above.



Awh, a ship that doubles the battle capabilities of an unlimited number of ships will be an automatic primary?

That is SO unfair.......


Well, if they all tanked like the damnation as has been said it would be fine. As it is a t3 booster has a minimum tank due to the command link subsystem offering no local defence attributes.

Or maybe it is the 4 command processors in place of the tank that is the problem. Just saying.
Elvis Fett
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#27 - 2012-11-08 14:20:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Elvis Fett
Zarnak Wulf wrote:

Boosters will have to be on grid.


That was the best part of the whole Dev blog. I do have one problem with the removal of OGB, CCP didn't remove them 5 years ago. No risk, no reward. Good move CCP.
kraiklyn Asatru
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#28 - 2012-11-08 15:34:37 UTC
Think I am falling in mad bro love for trinket.
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#29 - 2012-11-08 16:28:39 UTC
kraiklyn Asatru wrote:
Think I am falling in mad bro love for trinket.



'I have I'm in love with a stripper' in my head now....
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#30 - 2012-11-09 12:51:20 UTC
No touchy! That's 5 ISK extra!

~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
kraiklyn Asatru
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#31 - 2012-11-09 13:06:20 UTC
Send.

I can haz touch now?
Previous page12