These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
AlexKent
Lowlife.
Snuffed Out
#241 - 2013-03-27 08:08:46 UTC
For once there was a tiny bit of balance between races, now with this stupid TE you will be making Gallente and Minnie crap again...

IMO this nerf is completely unjustified and will just cause more damage than good. Please don't fix what does not need fixing CCP.
Naomi Knight
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#242 - 2013-03-27 08:11:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Naomi Knight
whinematards :D so much butthurting qq goes on

btw now te will be balanced vs tc , and thats a good thing
PAPULA
The Chodak
Void Alliance
#243 - 2013-03-27 08:12:51 UTC
AlexKent wrote:
For once there was a tiny bit of balance between races, now with this stupid TE you will be making Gallente and Minnie crap again...

IMO this nerf is completely unjustified and will just cause more damage than good. Please don't fix what does not need fixing CCP.

agreed
Lev Arturis
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#244 - 2013-03-27 08:13:56 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:


Except several of us are also discussing ships e.g. the SFI that lose about 30-40 DPS in their standard operating regime, where they don't have all that much DPS to begin with. The ship goes from being just barely viable as a kiter to being completely useless because its DPS and tank are too weak to brawl with and it can't kite because its DPS is easy to shrug off.


SFI isn't a kiter. Tells me how much you know about small gang warfare.
Kaal Redrum
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#245 - 2013-03-27 08:14:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaal Redrum
I guess the AC shield - Cane, Tornado, Rupture, Stabber, Vagabond, Lokis, Sleipnirs and Scram kiting - Slasher, Rifter, Firetail, Wolf, Jaguar all died with a collective smash across the face (add gallente to the list)

They really hate ACs or really want Matari pilots to use Arties when shield tanking

Please fix unbonused EWAR usage rather than try and ruin the frigate, cruiser, destroyer, BCruiser balance youve spent months achieving with this stupidly unneeded change. The Applied damage nerf to every blaster and AC ship is so far reaching, i dont think youve thought this through.
Naomi Knight
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#246 - 2013-03-27 08:22:52 UTC
AlexKent wrote:
For once there was a tiny bit of balance between races, now with this stupid TE you will be making Gallente and Minnie crap again...

IMO this nerf is completely unjustified and will just cause more damage than good. Please don't fix what does not need fixing CCP.

so what dmg does it cause? huh? that shield tanked nano gall ships cant kite as good ? quess what they never intended for that role
and for winmatar
when was the last time minmatar was crap??? it has been years since matard is the dominant race in small pvp,
cause they are so op , they loose like 0 dps due to insane falloff at kite range , machariel 80km+ falloff with a short range gun ,yeah that is so balanced
unimatrix0030
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#247 - 2013-03-27 08:23:49 UTC  |  Edited by: unimatrix0030
So will a blaster-talos be able to hit a large tower after this nerf?
If not there won't be any gallente ship usuable to remove posses from C1 wormholes... .

No local in null sec would fix everything!
Tub Chil
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#248 - 2013-03-27 08:28:05 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:

Any chance of TE-s affecting missiles?
In combination with TD-s affecting missiles.

CCP was talking about it, why wasn't it done? inability to disrupt missiles is a big problem in any small scale engagement.
Naomi Knight
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#249 - 2013-03-27 08:28:28 UTC
Kaal Redrum wrote:
I guess the AC shield - Cane, Tornado, Rupture, Stabber, Vagabond, Lokis, Sleipnirs and Scram kiting - Slasher, Rifter, Firetail, Wolf, Jaguar all died with a collective smash across the face (add gallente to the list)

They really hate ACs or really want Matari pilots to use Arties when shield tanking

Please fix unbonused EWAR usage rather than try and ruin the frigate, cruiser, destroyer, BCruiser balance youve spent months achieving with this stupidly unneeded change. The Applied damage nerf to every blaster and AC ship is so far reaching, i dont think youve thought this through.

so how they die with that small nerf ?tell us
oh and add gallente to the list... :D that makes me laugh
butthurt arent you?
AlexKent
Lowlife.
Snuffed Out
#250 - 2013-03-27 08:38:47 UTC
Naomi Knight wrote:
AlexKent wrote:
For once there was a tiny bit of balance between races, now with this stupid TE you will be making Gallente and Minnie crap again...

IMO this nerf is completely unjustified and will just cause more damage than good. Please don't fix what does not need fixing CCP.

so what dmg does it cause? huh? that shield tanked nano gall ships cant kite as good ? quess what they never intended for that role
and for winmatar
when was the last time minmatar was crap??? it has been years since matard is the dominant race in small pvp,
cause they are so op , they loose like 0 dps due to insane falloff at kite range , machariel 80km+ falloff with a short range gun ,yeah that is so balanced


Blasters will be **** again. Huge damage means nothing if you can't project it.

Just because matar is the dominant race in pvp does not mean it needs a kick in the nuts, other races should be brought up to par. The reason minnie ships work is the AC falloff that compensates for arty being **** (besides alpha).

Mach is 1.5b ship, it's supposed to be good as not everyone affords to buy and loose them.

Look at the killboards, after last round of rebalancing you can see all kinds of ships being used, from small to big. Before that everyone was just flying drakes... Do you miss that?

On topic: If this is supposed to be an AC nerf, just nerf the AC by reducing their falloff, don't nerf all the ships that use this module.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#251 - 2013-03-27 08:39:40 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:


Except several of us are also discussing ships e.g. the SFI that lose about 30-40 DPS in their standard operating regime, where they don't have all that much DPS to begin with. The ship goes from being just barely viable as a kiter to being completely useless because its DPS and tank are too weak to brawl with and it can't kite because its DPS is easy to shrug off.


And you're all wrong, the amount of range you'll lose is vastly exaggerated in this thread. The actual loss is very small.


Heres an example, the standard PL Blaster Rokh fit that uses 2 TE's:

24.6+28.7 before the nerf, to 22.6+24.6 after the nerf.


LOOK AT THAT MASSIVE RANGE CHANGE THERE OH MAN. Thas on a battleship, where the TE range boost is much more obvious. On smaller ships the change will be significantly lower.

You are all making a mountain out of a mole hill, nothing will REALLY change, other than maybe a 1-2 kilometer engagement change.




Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#252 - 2013-03-27 08:42:44 UTC
Seriously anybody saying this is a blaster nerf should probably drink bleach, the change is negligible in range, and I'm seriously curious if any of you have a single clue about ship stats or if you just see the word nerf and lose the farm.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
PAPULA
The Chodak
Void Alliance
#253 - 2013-03-27 08:43:03 UTC  |  Edited by: PAPULA
Grath Telkin wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:

You are all making a mountain out of a mole hill, nothing will REALLY change, other than maybe a 1-2 kilometer engagement change.


Then why the change if change is so "small"
Also try to apply those nerfs to machariel.

Quote:
nothing will REALLY change

Says pandemic legion who controls fozzie and whole game.
AlexKent
Lowlife.
Snuffed Out
#254 - 2013-03-27 08:45:16 UTC
Grath,

Blaster-related do you consider this change to be necessary?
Nomad I
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#255 - 2013-03-27 08:47:48 UTC
What is going to be happen is, that everyone is going to be more close range. This will be in favor for blaster ships. On the other side , shooting large POS with blaster ships will be more tedious.

Concepts for blob wars like the supporting alpha tornado getting more problems.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#256 - 2013-03-27 08:51:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Grath Telkin
AlexKent wrote:
Grath,

Blaster-related do you consider this change to be necessary?



I think that the change isn't strong enough. The Tracking Computer is an active module, it should be both stronger and more attractive then its passive low slot counter part. Thats not the case currently, the Tracking Enhancer is currently more attractive in every single way. If it were me I'd have dropped the TE by about 50%.


Also looking at the fleet stabber that everybody is crying about, it looses 1/2 a km in optimal and 3km and fall off.


EDIT: GG on freaking out over less than 1/2 a km in optimal and 3km in fall off, the world is truely over.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
AlexKent
Lowlife.
Snuffed Out
#257 - 2013-03-27 08:57:55 UTC
In that case, maybe the TC needs a slight buff to compensate for the loss.

I feel like blasters were finally decent, i really don't want to see blaster ships suffer from this change, IMO it's totally uncalled for. Maybe a small faloff buff is in order for blasters if this change makes it to TQ. Not enough to make them the new OP, FOTM guns, but just so they maintain current range.
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#258 - 2013-03-27 09:00:12 UTC
PAPULA wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:

You are all making a mountain out of a mole hill, nothing will REALLY change, other than maybe a 1-2 kilometer engagement change.


Then why the change if change is so "small"
Also try to apply those nerfs to machariel.

You lose 8km falloff. From 59km to 51km

So I guess the Machariel is dead and useless now. /sarcasm

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}
PAPULA
The Chodak
Void Alliance
#259 - 2013-03-27 09:01:56 UTC
Hannott Thanos wrote:
PAPULA wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:

You are all making a mountain out of a mole hill, nothing will REALLY change, other than maybe a 1-2 kilometer engagement change.


Then why the change if change is so "small"
Also try to apply those nerfs to machariel.

You lose 8km falloff. From 59km to 51km

So I guess the Machariel is dead and useless now. /sarcasm

8km is alot.
Sinigr Shadowsong
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#260 - 2013-03-27 09:03:12 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:

Key stat for this change is a reduction in the Optimal/Falloff bonus on a T2 Tracking Enhancer from 15%/30% to 10%/20%.


A nerf to TE had been needed for a long time. However I think that it will make already inferior Railguns even more weaker compared to anything that don't use TE a lot.
Have you considered instead 15%/30% -> 10%/20% more specified nerf of 15%/30% -> 15%/15%? With such change TC will have an unique utility of great falloff benefit and will be often seen as good option for Minmatar ships.