These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Odyssey] T1 Frigate Polish Pass and Naglfar fix

First post
Author
mr passie
Purgatorial Janitors Inc.
#21 - 2013-03-11 14:44:06 UTC
with the naglfar changes something in my pants feels vertical Lol

Yankunytjatjara
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#22 - 2013-03-11 14:44:20 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Some of you will notice that there are certain imbalances that these changes do not fully rectify (for instance the current strength of light missile speed fits, the slight relative weakness of the Rifter, Breacher and the solo Punisher). We're hoping to smooth out a few of the rough edges via stat changes to the ships themselves, while some others will be addressed via changes to other parts of the metagame.

Would you please try to be more specific if possible? The rifter is suffering from the comparison with the slasher, which already has less tank, and adding some tank wouldn't really help when the bar is set by the incursus and punisher...
Minnies simply have to go back to their ganky origins, and copy from the rupture the double damage to weapons for the rifter!! Some more alpha and you kill all the pesky drones quickly, then who needs tank ;-)

My solo pvp video: Yankunytjude... That attitude! Solo/small gang proposal: Ship Velocity Vectors

Luteros
Souls of Steel
#23 - 2013-03-11 14:45:41 UTC
Regarding the Naglfar changes:
+ No split weapons
+ No low-slots wasted for Ballistic Control Systems
+ Damage of three guns / Ammo use of two

Sounds like a good start to me
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#24 - 2013-03-11 14:46:01 UTC
Going to requote one paragraph from the OP that is important, even while apologizing for the fact that it is necessarily vague at this time.

Quote:
Some of you will notice that there are certain imbalances that these changes do not fully rectify (for instance the current strength of light missile speed fits, the slight relative weakness of the Rifter, Breacher and the solo Punisher). We're hoping to smooth out a few of the rough edges via stat changes to the ships themselves, while some others will be addressed via changes to other parts of the metagame.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Jonas Sukarala
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#25 - 2013-03-11 14:47:27 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Going to requote one paragraph from the OP that is important, even while apologizing for the fact that it is necessarily vague at this time.

Quote:
Some of you will notice that there are certain imbalances that these changes do not fully rectify (for instance the current strength of light missile speed fits, the slight relative weakness of the Rifter, Breacher and the solo Punisher). We're hoping to smooth out a few of the rough edges via stat changes to the ships themselves, while some others will be addressed via changes to other parts of the metagame.


does this include nerfing the range of rockets?

'Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line' CCP Ytterbium Nerf missile range into place where is the TD missile change?  ..projectiles should use capacitor. ABC's should be T2 HABC and nerf web strength its still too high

Capt Retard
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#26 - 2013-03-11 14:51:29 UTC
AyayaPanda wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:


Yes to the double damage bonus, the skill bonuses are not changing.

As for the utility high, we think the ship will be quite competitive with the three highs and the damage bonus. We did consider leaving a utility high on it but decided to keep it more in line with its peers.



Hmm do you mean the

Incoming 5% ROF 5% dmg of Nag? : http://serpentinelogic.wordpress.com/author/serpentinelogic/


Okay so

New Nag: 5% ROF 5% dmg per level

Current Moros: 5% ROF 5% dmg per level

Current Revelation: 10% cap 5% dmg per level


Would Moros and Nag out-dps Rev a little bit too much?
How about give Reva fixed bonus (-40% or -50% cap usage), and 5% ROF 5% dmg per level as well?
or 10% cap 7.5%~10%dmg per level? (ROF is little better than flat dmg, right?)

Me no dread pilot though.


Ok - so somewhat happier about the Nag now .. but again, lets not get too excited. Overall, its shield doctrine that makes Minnie and Caldari suck somehwhat, but as a change its fine. Turret damage? Rev has damn good range and tracking, with no reloads. It doesnt need more damage imho. Blasters get the DPS but range is their issue at max damage, and the midpoint is Projectile with falloff.

Of course, I wasted skillpoints on Capital Missiles .. if only the changes came with a chance to shift them specifically to Cap Projectiles.
Buhhdust Princess
Mind Games.
Suddenly Spaceships.
#27 - 2013-03-11 14:54:05 UTC
Thank you fozzie for correcting part of the Naglfar, it is one step closer to actually becoming viable.

Unfortunately though the tank slots you've given it are just not enough to keep it, as you say, "In-Line" with the other Dreads. It does need either an extra mid/low depending on how CCP want to see this Naglfar used. Or maybe +1 to both to give it the variety most minmatar ships have.
Bagehi
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#28 - 2013-03-11 14:56:46 UTC
AyayaPanda wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:


Yes to the double damage bonus, the skill bonuses are not changing.

As for the utility high, we think the ship will be quite competitive with the three highs and the damage bonus. We did consider leaving a utility high on it but decided to keep it more in line with its peers.



Hmm do you mean the

Incoming 5% ROF 5% dmg of Nag? : http://serpentinelogic.wordpress.com/author/serpentinelogic/


Okay so

New Nag: 5% ROF 5% dmg per level

Current Moros: 5% ROF 5% dmg per level

Current Revelation: 10% cap 5% dmg per level


Would Moros and Nag out-dps Rev a little bit too much?
How about give Reva fixed bonus (-40% or -50% cap usage), and 5% ROF 5% dmg per level as well?
or 10% cap 7.5%~10%dmg per level? (ROF is little better than flat dmg, right?)

Me no dread pilot though.


Moros does more damage, Revelation doesn't use ammo. Rev also has better base resists, so you can sacrifice a tank mod for a cap mod, leaving you with a ship that can exit siege, after shooting, at around jump cap (unlike the Moros). There is a good trade off between the two ships.
Bloodpetal
Tir Capital Management Group
#29 - 2013-03-11 14:56:56 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Going to requote one paragraph from the OP that is important, even while apologizing for the fact that it is necessarily vague at this time.

Quote:
Some of you will notice that there are certain imbalances that these changes do not fully rectify (for instance the current strength of light missile speed fits, the slight relative weakness of the Rifter, Breacher and the solo Punisher). We're hoping to smooth out a few of the rough edges via stat changes to the ships themselves, while some others will be addressed via changes to other parts of the metagame.



I understand, I'm just tackling the discussion that you're obviously hinting at...

Unless you expect me to focus only on the +50 hull bonus?

I'm sure we could have a long night of alcohol induced debate and in-depth mathematical invocations over the pros and cons value of +50 hull... Pirate

Or we can talk about how we can address the next issue at hand.

Where I am.

Bagehi
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#30 - 2013-03-11 14:59:27 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Going to requote one paragraph from the OP that is important, even while apologizing for the fact that it is necessarily vague at this time.

Quote:
Some of you will notice that there are certain imbalances that these changes do not fully rectify (for instance the current strength of light missile speed fits, the slight relative weakness of the Rifter, Breacher and the solo Punisher). We're hoping to smooth out a few of the rough edges via stat changes to the ships themselves, while some others will be addressed via changes to other parts of the metagame.


Incoming nerf to light missile range? It would make sense considering how overwhelmingly powerful Talwars are currently.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#31 - 2013-03-11 15:00:21 UTC
Bloodpetal wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Going to requote one paragraph from the OP that is important, even while apologizing for the fact that it is necessarily vague at this time.

Quote:
Some of you will notice that there are certain imbalances that these changes do not fully rectify (for instance the current strength of light missile speed fits, the slight relative weakness of the Rifter, Breacher and the solo Punisher). We're hoping to smooth out a few of the rough edges via stat changes to the ships themselves, while some others will be addressed via changes to other parts of the metagame.



I understand, I'm just tackling the discussion that you're obviously hinting at...

Unless you expect me to focus only on the +50 hull bonus?

I'm sure we could have a long night of alcohol induced debate and in-depth mathematical invocations over the pros and cons value of +50 hull... Pirate

Or we can talk about how we can address the next issue at hand.


Yup, your post is very welcome. Consider my reply a confirmation that those kinds of things are being thought about and that we welcome the discussion of them. Just don't want people to get the impression that we're limiting ourselves to these stat changes because of the fact that this is all we can announce at this time.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Kahega Amielden
Rifterlings
#32 - 2013-03-11 15:04:08 UTC
Quote:
Some of you will notice that there are certain imbalances that these changes do not fully rectify (for instance the current strength of light missile speed fits, the slight relative weakness of the Rifter, Breacher and the solo Punisher). We're hoping to smooth out a few of the rough edges via stat changes to the ships themselves, while some others will be addressed via changes to other parts of the metagame.



The Rifter isn't worse any anything else because of any metagame problems, it's worse than other frigates because it's statistically worse in pretty much every meaningful way. The fact that you aren't fixing the rifter in this change suggests you plan on doing it through "metagame changes" which is just not going to work. Unless you want to buff the Rifter's stats, aren't going to in this patch for some reason?

Why do you think the Breacher is bad? It has higher speed, competitive tank and only slightly worse DPS (that it can apply in full out to 10km) than other frigates in addition to full damage type selection.

The Punisher is already good, just not solo. If you give it a straight buff, it becomes overpowered in gangs. If you change the slot layout to give it 3 mids (the only thing making it a mediocre solo platform), then it becomes a Tormentor clone.
Jonas Sukarala
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#33 - 2013-03-11 15:04:52 UTC
Bagehi wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Going to requote one paragraph from the OP that is important, even while apologizing for the fact that it is necessarily vague at this time.

Quote:
Some of you will notice that there are certain imbalances that these changes do not fully rectify (for instance the current strength of light missile speed fits, the slight relative weakness of the Rifter, Breacher and the solo Punisher). We're hoping to smooth out a few of the rough edges via stat changes to the ships themselves, while some others will be addressed via changes to other parts of the metagame.


Incoming nerf to light missile range? It would make sense considering how overwhelmingly powerful Talwars are currently.


All missiles ranges need a nerf especially rockets and HAMS... aswell as the TD, TE, TC changes.

'Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line' CCP Ytterbium Nerf missile range into place where is the TD missile change?  ..projectiles should use capacitor. ABC's should be T2 HABC and nerf web strength its still too high

AyayaPanda
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#34 - 2013-03-11 15:08:44 UTC
Capt ****** wrote:


Ok - so somewhat happier about the Nag now .. but again, lets not get too excited. Overall, its shield doctrine that makes Minnie and Caldari suck somehwhat, but as a change its fine. Turret damage? Rev has damn good range and tracking, with no reloads. It doesnt need more damage imho. Blasters get the DPS but range is their issue at max damage, and the midpoint is Projectile with falloff.

Of course, I wasted skillpoints on Capital Missiles .. if only the changes came with a chance to shift them specifically to Cap Projectiles.



Well at least under certain circumstances the current Moros is a little bit too better than Rev:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=195124


Oh and you know the new Nag will be very useful, at killing Moros (Explosive hole) XD
Seranova Farreach
Biomass Negative
#35 - 2013-03-11 15:08:46 UTC
i somewhat feel the nag could have been better to give it the choise of having 3 guns or 3 launchers insted of 2/2 or 3/1 but ill read further and see if this could work better.

[u]___________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg[/u]

Bloodpetal
Tir Capital Management Group
#36 - 2013-03-11 15:09:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Bloodpetal
Since you're addressing the "Strengths of the Missile Speed fits"...

I really don't think they're that overpowered. The major issue is that people have to be ready to counter them. They're great guerrilla fleets, and they're very risky and very squishy in the long run.

We've lost a lot of Kessies in the last week running Kessie Kite fleets, but at the same time killed a lot in the face of overwhelming numbers. Does that seem unfair?

Well.. no. One time there was a sniper Cormorant hitting at 70-100 that was giving us a REALLY bad time in actually hurting his buddies. The fight was, no joke, 25 v 3. We killed a Griffin and a slasher because they were separating themselves and getting arrogant, and we lost a kestrel. We kept getting forced off the field when they were in a pack because they had an actual COUNTER ready - the Cormorant. And that's what made it a fun engagement. We realized we needed to make some modifications to counter the counter, and even then still had to be aware of other problems.

The issue isn't the missile kites, it's that people have to be more adaptive to counters. This is forcing the exact thing we want to see in fleets, more diversity. Bring anti-frigate ships, bring anti-snipe ships, bring anti-xyz ships.

You want to be ready? Then commit resources to being ready for the counter on the field. Otherwise, sit in the back of the pack with the amateurs.

Where I am.

Ashen Darksabre
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#37 - 2013-03-11 15:18:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Ashen Darksabre
Bloodpetal wrote:
Quick Naglfar Comments ::

Ok, so you still get the double dps bonus for the Nag hull, correct?

On a separate note on the Nag...

There was a fringe case using the Naglfar, because it had 5 high slots... and that the launchers weren't actually bonused... you could drop one launcher, and lets say... use a Neut, or a NOS or something else.

Would you be interested in doing -1 high slot, and leaving the utility slot on the Naglfar - something that Minmatar hulls do have a tendency of having anyways?


They gotta keep the art department happy Blood. Can't demand anything too drastic like adding a turret hardpoint. A utility slot would be cool, but I don't see myself nos-ing much other than tackle, and we all know dreads that can take on tackle is OP.
Vincent Gaines
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#38 - 2013-03-11 15:25:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Vincent Gaines
CCP Fozzie wrote:
fitting a third capital turret on the hull was too problematic and held up the idea.


Arrow Didn't the art department just crank out 4 brand-spanking new ships?
Arrow Didn't a fellow from the art department just do a Q&A and said they could easily do it?

I was under the impression the act of modifying a model to have another hardpoint was something that was along the lines of "old ccp" thinking.

This is a constructive question, in that in my limited knowledge of modeling and others' more advanced knowledge, that adding a hardpoint shouldn't be too difficult.

In fact, I believe a hardpoint on a ship was just recently modified. I'll take a minute to look up which ship that was.


From the latest patch notes::

Quote:

The locations of turrets on an Enyo have been changed to display properly.

Not a diplo. 

The above post was edited for spelling.

Antir
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#39 - 2013-03-11 15:29:02 UTC
As a quick fix to the nag this is very nice, I don't care if it gets a 3rd turrent later or not it's great to finally lose the split weapons.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#40 - 2013-03-11 15:31:14 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Fozzie
Vincent Gaines wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
fitting a third capital turret on the hull was too problematic and held up the idea.


Arrow Didn't the art department just crank out 4 brand-spanking new ships?
Arrow Didn't a fellow from the art department just do a Q&A and said they could easily do it?

I was under the impression the act of modifying a model to have another hardpoint was something that was along the lines of "old ccp" thinking.

This is a constructive question, in that in my limited knowledge of modeling and others' more advanced knowledge, that adding a hardpoint shouldn't be too difficult.

In fact, I believe a hardpoint on a ship was just recently modified. I'll take a minute to look up which ship that was.


From the latest patch notes::

Quote:

The locations of turrets on an Enyo have been changed to display properly.


One some ships its a lot easier than others. On the Ferox they were able to do it without too much trouble for Retri 1.1. For the Nag we evaluated the cost-benefit of changing the model vs adding the role bonus and decided the role bonus was the better stewardship of the time we have available.

It comes down to the fact that if we make the most efficient use of the time we have available we can make the best product possible for you all.

Edit: (and the Enyo as well)

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie