These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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] Module Rebalancing Part One: RSBs and TEs

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ganthrithor
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#161 - 2013-03-27 02:38:37 UTC
I don't really get the RSB nerf either. Guy guys we need a way to make burning back to gates easier. Because this game really needs to be more forgiving of pilot error.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#162 - 2013-03-27 02:40:04 UTC
Ganthrithor wrote:
I don't really get the RSB nerf either. Guy guys we need a way to make burning back to gates easier. Because this game really needs to be more forgiving of pilot error.

Agreed.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Ganthrithor
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#163 - 2013-03-27 02:41:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Ganthrithor
Basically you should probably go back to 2007 game balance, where webs were death, on-grid probing took long enough to allow sniping ships to work, and both kiting ships AND immobile, close-range death ships both worked.

...and people couldn't burn back to gates. God, better days.
Alexandra Vyvourant
State War Academy
Caldari State
#164 - 2013-03-27 02:42:35 UTC
Ganthrithor wrote:
I don't really get the RSB nerf either. Guy guys we need a way to make burning back to gates easier. Because this game really needs to be more forgiving of pilot error.


yea, and let's be sure that you can't shoot anyone from too far either. we want everyone to pile on top of each other.

we want all kiting ships to fight in scram range...

wait. what..?
Ganthrithor
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#165 - 2013-03-27 02:44:19 UTC
Alexandra Vyvourant wrote:
Ganthrithor wrote:
I don't really get the RSB nerf either. Guy guys we need a way to make burning back to gates easier. Because this game really needs to be more forgiving of pilot error.


yea, and let's be sure that you can't shoot anyone from too far either. we want everyone to pile on top of each other.

we want all kiting ships to fight in scram range...

wait. what..?



Its imperative that they either fight inside scram/web range or don't do any damage outside it. Otherwise they could conceivably kill my armor-tanked gimmick Myrmidon if I engage like a moron without baiting them in first. That's no fun!
Suyer
Half Empty
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#166 - 2013-03-27 02:54:03 UTC
>greentext story time as a tl;dr
>playing eve, not in a huge napfest like bluedoo
>want to fight
>mfw I get blobbed anywhere I go
>learn to adapt, fly fast long range ships to allow for my escape
>mfw raivi and kil2 become CCP devs
>hope they make the game harder for lamer pubbies who blue up at the first sign of trouble
>mfw TE's going to be nerfed
>mfw force multipliers like links are getting nerfed
>mfw they nerf HMLs
>mfw they nerf the hurricane and the drake in kiting setups
>mfw they think I should be flying the prophecy and myrm (lol no way CCP, im not going into scram range ever)
>mfw they're going to nerf T3's
>mfw there are still no viable armor kite setups where I don't have to triple box my ship and skirm/legion links to make it work
>mfw there is still SP loss when you use T3's (seriously this is a joke i've lost probably like 5mil sp, it's max dumb)
>Why is CCP making it harder for me to kite nerds
>mfw they think me winning 1v20 is unfair
>don't realize that pubbies suck and I'm abusing my superior knowledge and experience to own them
>don't realize 99.999999999999% of players are max risk averse and don't want to fit to win, but would rather fit a 10bil isk ratting carrier and then die to pizza
>now I have to fight with my talos at 20km
>mfw CCP doesn't realize that 20km isn't far enough to kite a 20 man gang at
>what am i supposed to do now
>mfw maybe I should actually focus on real life instead of this infuriating game

CCP pls stop making any sort of solo pvp in ships above frigate or cruiser size non-viable, tia, I don't like flying frigates except the arty wolf BUT TOO BAD IT RELIES ON 2 TE's .

This is a dumb change.

What should have happened is a significant buff to tracking computers to make them worth fitting over webs. There is no autocannon dominance, the only dominance in pvp I see right now is large blasters. It would be cool if you actually changed modules so that turret based ships that were armor tanked could actually increase their effective range on their weapons. Right now you can fit TC's, but that's literally dumb as balls because TC's suck and webs are way better.

Guess its cool that fozzie wants all small scale pvp to be brawl style pvp.... At this rate, loki links won't even need a nerf because the extra point range and speed won't even be able to be utilized because no ship will be able to shoot that far.

Now I'm going to have to actually fly for hours to find a fight where I won't get instantly blobbed when I go into scram range, instead of just going into a large alliances home system and sitting near the station till they undock and I can start kiting.

Maybe I'll have to fly the 100mn AB tengu again with the nerfed HML's. Too bad that last time I tried that I got volleyed by 4O1k when they undocked literally 50 muninns on me and volleyed my tengu.




raging star
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#167 - 2013-03-27 03:02:13 UTC  |  Edited by: raging star
A TE nerf of any kind is not really needed, If you guys think some ships are over power in this area then target them specifically instead of all of them. MIN ships and gallente ships will be hurt really badly by TE nerf and tier 3 are find as they are and
from my point of view the game is fine as it is let it be!
a nerf like this will kill small gang/solo pvp an art thats almost none existent
I thought KIl2 was hire to ehlp in this area.
Beekeeper Bob
Beekeepers Anonymous
#168 - 2013-03-27 03:03:51 UTC
As usual, CCP decides unilaterally that they need to nerf something, and then they go way over the top....Roll

I wonder if they ever consider the big picture when doing this, or it's simply:

"Lets screw with this, and see what happens, we can always nerf everything else to match."

Signature removed - CCP Eterne
UR13L
Perkone
Caldari State
#169 - 2013-03-27 03:07:47 UTC
Ap01110n wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Dabigredboat wrote:
If you would be so kind ccp fozzie. Explain to me why you would change the range of the TE and not the TC. This dirctly nerfs a fleet ship such as nagas and rokhs who rely on a TE due to shield tank being the dominate form of tank.

Why not change both equally as to adjust the change needed to effect Navy apocs as much as changing the Rokhs role. A Navy Apoc will use two tracking computers the same as a rokh uses two tracking enhances to balance the range ratio.

Any plans to fix the balance this will change in armor to shield fleets?


This change is specifically designed to change the balance between TEs and TCs. TEs still give very good range bonuses, decent tracking bonuses, and do it with less than half the fittings cost of a TC.

I know that this will affect 0.0 fleet doctrines, but shaking up doctrines a bit isn't something we consider a negative.



It wont shake up doctrines, only serve to solidify them.

TC fit pulse NaPocs are currently solidly dominant in nullsec, only (ocassionally) challenged by Rokhs (which for the past 4 years havent been used at all until recently).

If you want to shake up doctrines make torp Ravens useable and leave rokhs alone. T3 BCs probably need a range nerf, but not at the expense of every other skirmish style ship.

Shields have never been dominant in anything but small scale hit and run tactics (except for Tengus which is a separate issue altogether). For the past 2+ years its been all amarr armor (or maels just to counter abaddons incredible buffer).

Shield caps and supers are regarded as "unuseable" in major conflicts because there are no solid shield subcap doctrines. God forbid you buy a Hel, theyre pathetic compared to anything else.


Not to mention (especially sniper) HACs being completely outmoded by tier 3 battlecruisers - and now even moreso
Ganthrithor
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#170 - 2013-03-27 03:19:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Ganthrithor
Yeah everyone can agree that armor tanked ships were kind of stupid, and I think CCP were on the right track with the armor buffs (but didn't go far enough). The way to improve PvP / make formerly useless ships viable is to buff armor tanking, not run skirmish fits into the ground across the board.

I'd rather see a buff to tracking computers (allowing immobile ships to project damage better) than a range nerf to kiting ships.

Basically kiting is the EVE-equivalent of oversteer while driving cars (think drifting if you don't know what this means)-- tricky to get right, super rewarding when you do, and never gets old.
Apoctasy
GentIeman Bastards
Something Really Pretentious
#171 - 2013-03-27 03:29:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Apoctasy
The 1/3rd reduction to tracking enhancer range is very extreme. I never met any pvper in game who thought current tracking enhancers are OP, and haven't heard much complaint ever in my years of playing. If you absolutely HAVE to nerf them, I would make it 12.5% and 25%

Your proposals nerf skirmish/kiting ships pretty hard, and they were already hurt hard enough by the Great Nano Nerf
Also, non-tier 3 bc snipers are going to suffer and slip even further into non-use. Who the **** will fly a Huginn or Eagle in the future?
Malakai Asamov
Van Diemen's Demise
Northern Coalition.
#172 - 2013-03-27 03:30:16 UTC
CCP Fozzie, I think nerfing anything by 33% is quite heavy handed in an iterative approach.
Chessur
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#173 - 2013-03-27 03:30:28 UTC
This is hilarious. Now the RLM cerb / caracal are basically unstoppable. In-fact with these changes, HMLs may again become king. If my drake / caracal / cerb / cyclone can now sit at 28K and have nothing but heavy fall off from guns, then dropping tank mods for TP's will be very viable- thus making up for HML short comings.

You know i was concerned with the missile changes at first (i didn't have any gun skills) but now I am glad I didn't waste much time traning into turrets.

CCP why is it your desire to destroy nano / kiting ships? You had relegated it down to a select few ships, but now you have basically booted most of those ships away. Turret based cruisers that are not the zealot are now unplayable.

As for all of the winmatards need dat nerf- have you ever looked at EFT? Do you realize that even with out the nerf most cruiser based minni ships (minus sleip) have horrible damage application at 24/28 k? Hurricane was never that good, and it certainly wasn't during the time of the drake.

CCP do you even play this game?
Frocke
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#174 - 2013-03-27 03:33:56 UTC
Interesting changes.

Praise be to Jesus.
Apoctasy
GentIeman Bastards
Something Really Pretentious
#175 - 2013-03-27 03:34:23 UTC
Chessur wrote:
This is hilarious. Now the RLM cerb / caracal are basically unstoppable. In-fact with these changes, HMLs may again become king. If my drake / caracal / cerb / cyclone can now sit at 28K and have nothing but heavy fall off from guns, then dropping tank mods for TP's will be very viable- thus making up for HML short comings.

You know i was concerned with the missile changes at first (i didn't have any gun skills) but now I am glad I didn't waste much time traning into turrets.

CCP why is it your desire to destroy nano / kiting ships? You had relegated it down to a select few ships, but now you have basically booted most of those ships away. Turret based cruisers that are not the zealot are now unplayable.

As for all of the winmatards need dat nerf- have you ever looked at EFT? Do you realize that even with out the nerf most cruiser based minni ships (minus sleip) have horrible damage application at 24/28 k? Hurricane was never that good, and it certainly wasn't during the time of the drake.

CCP do you even play this game?


Listen to this man. People look at EFT numbers and think, "WOW OP that minmatar boat gets 400-500 dps at 25km!" When in fact the truth is more like 150-250 due to being in deep falloff.
soviet56
Short Bus Riders Anonymous
#176 - 2013-03-27 03:44:09 UTC  |  Edited by: soviet56
Thanks for nerfing my alliance.

Relevant: The Future is Munnin

Edit: well the past is munnin now vOv
Taoist Dragon
Okata Syndicate
#177 - 2013-03-27 03:45:39 UTC
TE nerf? nah just a rebalance along with the ships really.

Now that I've thought about it more. Bring it on!

As for the people saying kiting will be killed or that scram range fighting is a no brainer......really?! you obviously have never kited in scram range before. Lrn2kite when people have a very slightly better chance to catch you!

This directly counters all the crap people have been posting about increasing point range DIRECTLY due to the increase of combat ranges to which TE are very responsible for.

That is the Way, the Tao.

Balance is everything.
IrJosy
Club 1621
#178 - 2013-03-27 03:51:50 UTC
Tonto Auri wrote:
IrJosy wrote:
The problem with nerfing RSB's is that it is too hard to get fights without them in many situations. Many players simply want to run away or cloak and warp. An interceptor crashing the gate simply can't be caught without an instalocking 90% web ship on the gate.

Accept the fact that there's ships that you won't be able to kill. Life is harsh, you have to live with it.



name one
Chessur
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#179 - 2013-03-27 04:00:08 UTC
Here are some EFT numbers for you for damage application at 28K.

All level 5 skills, no implants, no drugs, no heat.

Minni

Hurricane 2TE 2Gyro Barrage: 228 DPS
Cynabal 2TE 2Gyro Barrage: 270 DPS
Stabber 2TE 2Gyro Barrage: 166 DPS
Vaga 2TE 2Gyro Barrage: 277 DPS
Nado 2TE 2Gyro Barrage: 581 DPS

Amarr

Omen: 2TE 2Heat Sink Scorch: 330 DPS
Harb 2TE 2Heat Sink Scorch: 445 DPS
Zealot 2TE 2Heat Sink Scorch: 412 DPS
Omen Navy 2TE 2Heat Sink Scorch: 395 DPS
Oracle 2TE 2Heat Sink Scorch: 649 DPS

Gal (Only one ship reaches out this far with guns that are actually usable... ie blasters)
Talos 2TE 2Mag Stab Null: 678 DPS

Now for the lulzy part: Caldari

Caracal 2BCS with Fury rapid light missile: 236 DPS
Cerberus 2BCS with Scourge Fury rapid light missile: 296 DPS

I will not include any HML because on paper damage is not nearly close to applied damage.

If any one at ccp can understand simple tables, you will notice one thing- giving any of these ships a decrease in optimal or fall off will make everything turn into a brawl. 33% decrease on range for these numbers will make kiting nearly impossible unless you are flying an oracle or zealot. (missile ships excluded)

Why do you hate kiting? Unless you fly a pimped out nado or talos, your pick of cruisers is so limited already. With the proposed changes, you will make almost all turret based ships that are not large size obsoleate, and HMLs / RLMs will rule the sky. Hell even SB's using torps will be viable now. Nothing is going to be hitting them out at 24K anyway.

Please justify this CCP. You clearly have not looked at any of these numbers. Because if you have looked at the these numbers and did still come to the conclusion to nerf TE's asnwer me this-

Why are armor brawling ships becoming the only mode to play this game?

Shockingly not every one that goes out to pvp likes to hit F1 and brawl (or in the case of solo / small gang) get blobbed.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#180 - 2013-03-27 04:04:55 UTC
It's easy to use EFT to find out the effect this would have because the current meta 0 tracking enhancer is the same as the proposed T2 TE would be after the change (as far as the optimal and falloff bonuses are concerned).

With the SFI for example, the damage isn't exactly spectacular - with 3 T2 gyrostabs and 2 T2 TEs it gets 330 DPS with o/f of 3.9/30 with barrage. This amounts to 250 DPS at a typical kiting range of 20 km. With the nerf this gets reduced to an even more anemic 180 DPS. By comparison an Omen without any range mods at all and a single T2 heatsink gets 250 DPS at 24 km with scorch on HPLs.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)