Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Rep amount ships, 7.5% changed to 10% per level.

Put the overloading rig in like was intended for the armor tanking update.

Problem fixed, no need to nerf resist bonused ships.

I like the changes, but CCP need to do a rebalance pass on some of the ships.

It actually has to do with the fact that the additional hp granted by the resistance bonus compared to the rep bonus takes many many many minutes to "break even" with for a rep bonus ship. The duration to break even is honestly longer than you have cap charges. Combine that with the additional low and bam, you have a proph that does comparable drone damage even with 1 less drone, active tanks arguably better, and has the option of being significantly more fleet viable than the myrmidon.

All in all Proph > myrm in all but a very few specific cases.

Buffing the rep amount bonus to 10% per level is not the right solution as it only fixes active tanking on ships with said rep bonus. The proper solution is the nerf the resistance bonus as is being done to increase the gap in active tank while also buffing armor reppers (medium and large) by a modest amount in both cap consumption and hp repped. The amount of "buff" should be no more than 7.5% to 10%, anything else would be a bit over the top.

yeah resist bonus is good in small scale too ,but these resist bonused ships usually arent good at small scale compared to other bonused ship in the same size/role
so why are they getting an allround nerf? this nerf push them back even more at small scale,
if ccp goes throu with this they should start the rebalancing from the start with t1 frigs

new problem introduced: making most PvE content even more trivial than it is now.

Think first, post second.

from http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=88359&currentpage=1515

"I'm okay with toning down things that are too powerful.

I'm not okay with toning down things that are relatively awful (Sacrilege).

These big system-wide changes are apparently supposed to reflect some kind of CCP philosophy on resist bonuses. While it might be a noble philosophy, what's really happening is that some ships will be fine (they can deal with being toned down), some ships will just have to suck up a random nerf despite not being OP (Worm, Eagle, Drake, Ferox, Nighthawk, Rattlesnake, Malediction, Maller, Prophecy are big examples that jump out), and other ships will be completely boned because they're already pretty bad (Onyx, Sacrilege).

This does not even out the play field.

What they've done is identify a few citizens who are too tall (T3s, Chimera, Archon, Abaddon, arguably Broadsword) and decided to cut the legs off everyone in the same town up to the knees. "

The devs should consider reading the last 20 or so pages in that thread, they would quickly realize how deeply team liquid understands their game. If you really have time, just start reading that thread from newest back to oldest. You might actually learn how eve works in the process. It is probably the most insightful place on the internet when it comes to discussing these changes publicly and all of the others announced in the last month, and how to actually fit ships. Although, many of them are huge trolls and the thread is full of "inside jokes". You will have to be careful to sort out some of the more colorful explanations of things, and some of the stuff that is just them being silly.

Honestly there are a lot of things they point out that are undeniable and well explained. You are buffing some of the most overpowered ships in the game, nerfing some of the most underpowered, and making some ships completely useless for the few existing roles they still actually get used for. They are perhaps some of CCP's harshest critics, but the truth in much of what they say is undeniable.

Here are my concerns:

1) Loki. It doesn't have an armor/shield amount subsystem, so the resistance is its only tank bonus worth using. Couple that with the slot layout and their average usage, and I'm worried that this will significantly hurt the Loki's tank/ehp. Maybe leave t3's out of this one? The armor/shield hp bonus overpowers the resistance bonus in more pvp situations than I'd care to admit.

2) I think the 5% bonus is best left as is on frigates and cruisers. I'd be sad but OK to see it go on BC and battleships.

3) the archon: Here's a doozey. It's the iconic brick tank carrier. Is it so popular and good because of the resistance, or because all the others have their pg/cpu issues?

4a) Fozzie, you said you aren't happy with the Alpha doctrine. Well, this actually makes the alpha problem slightly worse. Perhaps that problem is with artillery?

4b) You've also said you want to make self-reps more effective. This hurts it on unbonused ships (well duh), but perhaps the 7.5% bonus needs to be upped to 8%? 8.5%?

Amarr has been very fortunate until this month. We've received very few nerfs, direct or indirect. With the loss of the Geddon as the total gank machine, the loss of our 8th low slot on several ships to other races that don't typically have it, and a slight hit to our resists bonus (perhaps the second iconic bonus alongside the laser cap use reduction), this hurts. (I've commented on the geddon change; I'm still undecided on it)

And yet I still find myself OK with this change other than the above points, which are *fairly* small things imo.

Blanketing this to so many ships is perhaps not the right way to go. Some ships do need to be toned down (borrowing from Olerie Viliana), but this also hurts many ships that weren't in the best of shape as well. Maybe we can't see how they're being worked on until ya'll hit tech 2 with the balance bat.

BULLSHIT

And my vision is our dear developers are trying to make this game so noob friendly, that soon 10 noobs in caracals will be taking on capital ships. Triage archon is already pretty crap, can be killed in no time by couple dreadnoughts, making it even weaker is just wrong.

People crying about logistics being overpowered should really think what they doing. If you dont have setup of your fleet good enough to break triage carrier or other logistics - just dont fight them. Im not going to cry to make something weaker if I cannot kill it. Simple.

I see the reasoning behind lowering the resists, atleast in regular T1 hulls, but should this be done to faction, T2 and capital ships aswell? It seems only natural to me that the likes of rattlesnake, vulture or chimera should have better resists than a drake or rokh for example. If it turned out that the 5% resist bonus is still too big on these more expensive ships it always could be lowered down later. I don't see the need to change every +5% resists to +4%, you could leave some of them to +5%, now couldn't you?

Fozzie, I'd love to hear the reason why its not done like this (if you got the time to explain it to us), pretty please?