These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Octoven
Stellar Production
#701 - 2013-03-28 14:08:08 UTC
Alsyth wrote:
ReSebo nerf welcome.

TE nerf unnecessary.

The only ship that makes TE overpowered is Machariel, that much damage and tracking at that range shouldn't exist. +50% falloff on LARGE AC and too many lowslots for a shield/nanoship is the problem there.

Others are fine, be it tier3 BCs -even AC tornado, few lowslots and no falloff bonus-, HAC snipers (poor things...), frigates/destroyers, AC Vaga/Sleipnir/Cynabal.


I agree, but recently changes to the game have pointed to the aspect of getting players up close to each other to fight. HML were nerfed by 20 km, and now they want to nerf TEs? It isn't because they are OP its because CCP is killing the sniper role as we know it and replacing combat with nothing but blaster, pulse, AC, HAMs up close and personal. To be honest, I am disappointed in the way the devs are handling this game.

STOP making changes you want CCP and start listening to the players who pay your salaries. Before that whole load of devs quit a few years back the game was awesome; however, despite some good things that have come out in recent expansions, its been mostly trash and nerfs.
Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance
Ragequit Cancel Sub
#702 - 2013-03-28 14:08:39 UTC
Octoven wrote:

First off I would like to point out that armor tanking has always been preferred over shield in pvp simply because you put your tank in the lows which allows for your mids to use ewar such as webs and scrams. To say that shields are more powerful then armor is BS.



Hi.

Just wondering, you been high for 5 years or abducted by aliens or maybe cryogenically frozen or?
Lin Fatale
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#703 - 2013-03-28 14:10:24 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:


Couple that with the fact that they've outright stated that the 5% boosts are going away and that the command ship 3% links will be king of the hill, how on earth is losing 3 kilometers going to hurt you? The loss in TE range will be compensated for by an overall reduction in web ranges due to a removal of a broken set of t3 links.




In a kiting / roaming setup most of the time you have to fight outnumbered.
And for that you need to be
A) faster than the bulk of enemy blop and
B) you need the ability to kill tackle and stay outside scram / web range

IF you reduce one of that and it does not matter how much
it will be harder for the kiting gang to fight.

noboday is saying its not possible to fight anymore because you lose X% range
It will just be harder and it means fights you would take today, you cant take tomorrow after the nerf

result: less fights for smaller gangs / kiters
and for what? what do we get in return?
I cant see that this nerf is fixing anything besides a bad feeling of a dev that maybe the TE is a bit OP

I would like to get a clear answer, what will be the advantage of this nerf.
Octoven
Stellar Production
#704 - 2013-03-28 14:11:42 UTC
Templar Dane wrote:
Octoven wrote:

First off I would like to point out that armor tanking has always been preferred over shield in pvp simply because you put your tank in the lows which allows for your mids to use ewar such as webs and scrams. To say that shields are more powerful then armor is BS.



Hi.

Just wondering, you been high for 5 years or abducted by aliens or maybe cryogenically frozen or?




So enthrall me with your almighty wisdom as to why shield tanking trumps armor?
Mord Raven
Phrike Squadron
#705 - 2013-03-28 14:12:14 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
Mord Raven wrote:
[
As I clearly tried to express the fit is with locus coordinators and not TEs. That was not the point with the post, but you obviously missed it anyway. And yes, hypothetically for a ship that can be caught relatively easy at 22km optimal, a nerf down to 20km would have consequences, wouldn’t it?


It really doesn't, you'll still DPS out to 22km, it'll just be slightly less DPS. Thats the whole point, people are making this out to be more than it is. The kill will just take 12 seconds instead of 9 seconds (exaggeration intentional).

If you floated at 22km constantly (something thats actually very hard) you can still do exactly that, and you'll still apply DPS to your target, no big deal, again, it will just take you a few more seconds to score your kill but that doesn't matter because you're not actually tanking, you're kiting, so who cares how long it takes, you're in no real danger anyway.

If this thing had forced you into brawling range with the slicer and required a complete rethink on fits then it might be a different story, but most fits honestly won't change at all, in the slightest bit, people will still kite their hearts out, with the added benefit of fights being slightly longer affairs.


The time to get a kill is important in many ways if you fly solo.

In essence I think the main problem people have with this is that no matter how you look at it it is still yet another nerf to solo and small group players. A playerbase that should be promoted instead of marginalized.
Alsyth
#706 - 2013-03-28 14:15:12 UTC
amurder Hakomairos wrote:

Its not even OP on the Mach. When a ship's hull costs 6-12x the cost of a normal battleship you should be getting a significant increase in performance.


-overpowered speed/agility mix (better than any BC/CS and most cruisers)
-overpowered damage projection
-top-class dps
-tank is not bad compared to other non-specialized shield BSs

Get rid of the damage projection and I'm fine with the Machariel as a powerful tool for rich guys, but as it is, it's too much. Or drop a lowslot.

I can't think of any (subcapital) ship making as effective use of TEs as Machariels, and the point CCP PL raised is that TEs give too much of an advantage to kiting minmatar ships: the Machariel is the absolute best example for that, and in my opinion the only one that needs a nerf.
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
#707 - 2013-03-28 14:19:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Did some comparsion for my shield mission machariel: 4x RF gyro, 3xTE (used T1 TEs instead of T2 @0 speed to remove tracking difference in those modules)

T2 ACs, t1 ammo, no implants, no bonuses, no drones, all-5
http://i.imgur.com/FmVHzSk.png (red line - before, green - after TE nerf)

100-120 paper DPS loss @40km range is sad but i can live with that...

Edit: changed screenshot to correct one.

Opinions are like assholes. Everybody got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks.
seth Hendar
I love you miners
#708 - 2013-03-28 14:20:37 UTC
Alsyth wrote:
amurder Hakomairos wrote:

Its not even OP on the Mach. When a ship's hull costs 6-12x the cost of a normal battleship you should be getting a significant increase in performance.


-overpowered speed/agility mix (better than any BC/CS and most cruisers)
-overpowered damage projection
-top-class dps
-tank is not bad compared to other non-specialized shield BSs

Get rid of the damage projection and I'm fine with the Machariel as a powerful tool for rich guys, but as it is, it's too much. Or drop a lowslot.

I can't think of any (subcapital) ship making as effective use of TEs as Machariels, and the point CCP PL raised is that TEs give too much of an advantage to kiting minmatar ships: the Machariel is the absolute best example for that, and in my opinion the only one that needs a nerf.

so PL cries, CCP changes, and the rest of the players can stfu?

nice....
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#709 - 2013-03-28 14:36:58 UTC
seth Hendar wrote:
Alsyth wrote:
amurder Hakomairos wrote:

Its not even OP on the Mach. When a ship's hull costs 6-12x the cost of a normal battleship you should be getting a significant increase in performance.


-overpowered speed/agility mix (better than any BC/CS and most cruisers)
-overpowered damage projection
-top-class dps
-tank is not bad compared to other non-specialized shield BSs

Get rid of the damage projection and I'm fine with the Machariel as a powerful tool for rich guys, but as it is, it's too much. Or drop a lowslot.

I can't think of any (subcapital) ship making as effective use of TEs as Machariels, and the point CCP PL raised is that TEs give too much of an advantage to kiting minmatar ships: the Machariel is the absolute best example for that, and in my opinion the only one that needs a nerf.

so PL cries, CCP changes, and the rest of the players can stfu?

nice....


Just for clarity, what did we cry about and how does this change help our game play while hurting yours?


I'd like specific examples if you have any.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
seth Hendar
I love you miners
#710 - 2013-03-28 14:40:02 UTC  |  Edited by: seth Hendar
Grath Telkin wrote:
seth Hendar wrote:
Alsyth wrote:
amurder Hakomairos wrote:

Its not even OP on the Mach. When a ship's hull costs 6-12x the cost of a normal battleship you should be getting a significant increase in performance.


-overpowered speed/agility mix (better than any BC/CS and most cruisers)
-overpowered damage projection
-top-class dps
-tank is not bad compared to other non-specialized shield BSs

Get rid of the damage projection and I'm fine with the Machariel as a powerful tool for rich guys, but as it is, it's too much. Or drop a lowslot.

I can't think of any (subcapital) ship making as effective use of TEs as Machariels, and the point CCP PL raised is that TEs give too much of an advantage to kiting minmatar ships: the Machariel is the absolute best example for that, and in my opinion the only one that needs a nerf.

so PL cries, CCP changes, and the rest of the players can stfu?

nice....


Just for clarity, what did we cry about and how does this change help our game play while hurting yours?


I'd like specific examples if you have any.


what did it change to your gameplay, i don't know, how it will change mine, i fly gallente / minmatar

all the matar ship always fight within the fallof, this change will either reduce their DPS, or force them to get closer, in both cases, it breaks the only way they could be competitive.

the only ship we had with a correct tank was the cyclone, but now it has gone missile.......and does crappy DPS (like i havecruiserss that does more dps)

the only viable ships remaining will be the drone boats, and well, since drone AI is crap too, not much to expect anymore.

this change will favor blob warfare by removing one counter smaller groups had, wich was sniping / kitting, the only counters when vastly outnoumbered, and mechanicaly, thi will favor big blocks, once gain, by making one more deterrent thing to small scale pvp

one more step to turn eve online to blob online, blob shall be possible, yes, but one shall also be able to counter them fighting, and hiding from them is not an acceptable solution, wich will soon be the only choice remaining (or diying to it)
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#711 - 2013-03-28 14:43:55 UTC
seth Hendar wrote:


what did it change to your gameplay, i don't know, how it will change mine, i fly gallente / minmatar




I fly everything, whats your point? What did PL Cry about, where did we do the crying, and how did it alter your game play more than it will alter ours?

Remember where I asked for specific examples? This would be where you provide them.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#712 - 2013-03-28 14:44:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Major Killz
Lin Fatale wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:


Couple that with the fact that they've outright stated that the 5% boosts are going away and that the command ship 3% links will be king of the hill, how on earth is losing 3 kilometers going to hurt you? The loss in TE range will be compensated for by an overall reduction in web ranges due to a removal of a broken set of t3 links.




In a kiting / roaming setup most of the time you have to fight outnumbered.
And for that you need to be
A) faster than the bulk of enemy blop and
B) you need the ability to kill tackle and stay outside scram / web range

IF you reduce one of that and it does not matter how much
it will be harder for the kiting gang to fight.

noboday is saying its not possible to fight anymore because you lose X% range
It will just be harder and it means fights you would take today, you cant take tomorrow after the nerf

result: less fights for smaller gangs / kiters
and for what? what do we get in return?
I cant see that this nerf is fixing anything besides a bad feeling of a dev that maybe the TE is a bit OP

I would like to get a clear answer, what will be the advantage of this nerf.



There was a time that tracking ehancers were not used at all. There was still small scale warfare and solo pvp. Of course things will become harder. Good! I prefer a challenge because all I do is collect killmails and it gets boring really quickly. Once you get even decent at this game in terms of pvp. There's not much left to hope for other than a challenge or changes to ships and modules or new hulls.

Adapt or die. Simple.


- killz

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#713 - 2013-03-28 14:45:57 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
I understand the allure of hyperbole related to the death of the small gang versus the blob - but this change should definitely be considered in the context of a game where a gang with some standard cruisers and BCs with a couple skirmish links can engage at almost any ratio of friend to foe.

Its fun to engage outnumbered (I've heard), but expecting a few extremely strong mods to do a large portion of the work for you seems a bit over the top.

It also seems important to me that since speed isn't actually being effected here, fast moving skirmish engagements will likely look very similar except that during critical moments there will be a slightly higher tendency to commit. This could mean more vulnerability for the awesome small gang of nano pilots, or it could also mean that your prey now has to venture closer to actually apply dps.

I like writing posts but I'm not sure its doing any good Ugh

from my own experience, I can agree with this, I can see this making speed tanked cruiser/bc gangs abit stronger if the FC knows what he or she is doing :)
Cardano Firesnake
Fire Bullet Inc
#714 - 2013-03-28 15:05:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Cardano Firesnake
I think that if you nerf Tracking Enhancers, you should creatr a Range Enhancer module that would increase Range and fall of like the today TE and with a decrease Tracking bonus of 1/3.

Posted - 2010.07.01 11:24:00 - [4] Erase learning skills, remap all SP. That's all.
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#715 - 2013-03-28 15:08:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Major Killz
Pelea Ming wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
I understand the allure of hyperbole related to the death of the small gang versus the blob - but this change should definitely be considered in the context of a game where a gang with some standard cruisers and BCs with a couple skirmish links can engage at almost any ratio of friend to foe.

Its fun to engage outnumbered (I've heard), but expecting a few extremely strong mods to do a large portion of the work for you seems a bit over the top.

It also seems important to me that since speed isn't actually being effected here, fast moving skirmish engagements will likely look very similar except that during critical moments there will be a slightly higher tendency to commit. This could mean more vulnerability for the awesome small gang of nano pilots, or it could also mean that your prey now has to venture closer to actually apply dps.

I like writing posts but I'm not sure its doing any good Ugh

from my own experience, I can agree with this, I can see this making speed tanked cruiser/bc gangs abit stronger if the FC knows what he or she is doing :)


Aye. Skirmishing tactics are just superior.

In the past I suggested as much. Gallente pilots focused to much on "speed" not realising there was more to it than that. Effective range and applied damage @ said range is the basis of said tactic. From there you can think about defense and overall velocity.

Gallente ships aren't effective because of thier primary weapon systems lack of effective range.

Like I've said. The more our player base increases the more commiting completely to an engagement becomes suicide and by that I mean. Increasing the possibility of losses.

Skirmishing has helped and will continue to help deal with that issue. Those ships NOT optimum for skirmishing on the small scale will be destroyed ALOT more than ships able to skirmish effectively.

Skirmishing is a necessary way of mitigating losses and possibly engaging more targets at any given time.

I doubt CCP is trying to completely destroy a tactic and concept surrounding something so ubiquitous.

I mean seriously. All the best fleet concept employ ships with the most effective range and applied damage at that range. Then overall resistence and hitpoint buffer are looked at. At that point overall speed becomes important or not depending on "tank".

Example: Drake, Naga, Tornado, Caracal, Bellicose, Zealot, Tengu, Legion, Loki, Abaddon, Armageddon, abaddon, Rokh, Maelstrom.

Everyone of the aforementioned have one concept in common. RANGE and often longest range short range or long range turrent.


- killz

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#716 - 2013-03-28 15:28:50 UTC
Major Killz wrote:

Gallente ships aren't effective because of thier primary weapon systems lack of effective range.



- killz



Nope.. Gallente ships are not as effective as they used to be because on lat 6 years we got large increase to tackling range t2 disruptors pushign from 20 to 24 and even after that an extra extension due to overheating.


In the past, when all combat was forcefully within 20 km, and most of time within 17 km (to have that safe border), blasters used to be super powerful and people regarded the extensive range of scorch and AC as insignificant advantages.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
amurder Hakomairos
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#717 - 2013-03-28 15:51:18 UTC
Alsyth wrote:
amurder Hakomairos wrote:

Its not even OP on the Mach. When a ship's hull costs 6-12x the cost of a normal battleship you should be getting a significant increase in performance.


-overpowered speed/agility mix (better than any BC/CS and most cruisers)
-overpowered damage projection
-top-class dps
-tank is not bad compared to other non-specialized shield BSs

Get rid of the damage projection and I'm fine with the Machariel as a powerful tool for rich guys, but as it is, it's too much. Or drop a lowslot.

I can't think of any (subcapital) ship making as effective use of TEs as Machariels, and the point CCP PL raised is that TEs give too much of an advantage to kiting minmatar ships: the Machariel is the absolute best example for that, and in my opinion the only one that needs a nerf.



And this is a problem because people are fielding huge Mach PvP fleets and owning everything right? Nerfing TEs because of the Mach or the Mach itself is a nerf to PvE only and nothing should be nerfed to make PvE a longer and more boring grind than it already is.
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#718 - 2013-03-28 15:57:13 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Major Killz wrote:

Gallente ships aren't effective because of thier primary weapon systems lack of effective range.



- killz



Nope.. Gallente ships are not as effective as they used to be because on lat 6 years we got large increase to tackling range t2 disruptors pushign from 20 to 24 and even after that an extra extension due to overheating.


In the past, when all combat was forcefully within 20 km, and most of time within 17 km (to have that safe border), blasters used to be super powerful and people regarded the extensive range of scorch and AC as insignificant advantages.


I joined the game in late 2007. So, anything beyond then does not matter to me. However, even before that large fleets used battleships with long range turret.

I was still kiting gallente ships in 2008 with 90% webs still intact. Nano-skirmishing even then was the superior tactic solo and the player base was smaller. Back then there were many bad entities and very few good ones. Today is much the same except now everyone is following the success of good entities unlike before.

Why is that important? Game filled with pilots who were not adapting fast enough including solo pilots and did the web, point and f1 - f8 thing because it was simple.

Pvp has become alot more dynamic than before and everyone has come up for the most part.

BTW the shield harbinger existed before the TE boost and was VERY viable. Same with the hml drake. The very few who used them owned in the 90% web era.

Nano hacs pwned and is what da "l33ts" used to feed on the terribubble.

Just because everyone was flying armor harbingers and hurricanes at the time. Does not mean that the hml-Drake was not better. Takes time for the player base to adapt while others adapt quickly and even innovate.

There are very few who innovate. While 99% of the player base trails and struggles to adapt.

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#719 - 2013-03-28 16:03:52 UTC
Major Killz wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Major Killz wrote:

Gallente ships aren't effective because of thier primary weapon systems lack of effective range.



- killz



Nope.. Gallente ships are not as effective as they used to be because on lat 6 years we got large increase to tackling range t2 disruptors pushign from 20 to 24 and even after that an extra extension due to overheating.


In the past, when all combat was forcefully within 20 km, and most of time within 17 km (to have that safe border), blasters used to be super powerful and people regarded the extensive range of scorch and AC as insignificant advantages.


I joined the game in late 2007. So, anything beyond then does not matter to me. However, even before that large fleets used battleships with long range turret.

I was still kiting gallente ships in 2008 with 90% webs still intact. Nano-skirmishing even then was the superior tactic solo and the player base was smaller. Back then there were many bad entities and very few good ones. Today is much the same except now everyone is following the success of good entities unlike before.

Why is that important? Game filled with pilots who were not adapting fast enough including solo pilots and did the web, point and f1 - f8 thing because it was simple.

Pvp has become alot more dynamic than before and everyone has come up for the most part.

BTW the shield harbinger existed before the TE boost and was VERY viable. Same with the hml drake. The very few who used them owned in the 90% web era.

Nano hacs pwned and is what da "l33ts" used to feed on the terribubble.

Just because everyone was flying armor harbingers and hurricanes at the time. Does not mean that the hml-Drake was not better. Takes time for the player base to adapt while others adapt quickly and even innovate.

There are very few who innovate. While 99% of the player base trails and struggles to adapt.



I do not disagree with you. Just pointing why the origianl VISIOn of gallente is not as strong as it used to be at its inception.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#720 - 2013-03-28 16:10:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Grath Telkin
Octoven wrote:


So enthrall me with your almighty wisdom as to why shield tanking trumps armor?


What?


  • agility


  • speed


  • front loaded reps


  • natural regen



I mean those alone are pretty solid benefits over armor, and I'm just grabbing things from off the top of my head, I could do a dissertation length document on why they're better and ways to change armor ships to compensate.

I can't believe you actually asked that.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.