Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I think I'm going to save this post just so I can link back to it every time someone is arguing for something bat-ship overpowered.

Never stop posting Malcanis.

I don't have a problem with a bug being fixed. As I have said, I even support the removal of such undocumented arcane features/bugs/whatever.
Why should someone have less structure tank o n his Taranis than he "deserves"? Why not?
This is not my point.
This is also not about whining or what Nados or industrials should or should not kill or survive.

I just wanted to stress this:
As of Tuesday, the vast majority of kills will need ONE HIT MORE. Be it PvP or PvE, Titan or frigate.
Do your math. One hit will almost always take more than half of the remaining structure and that hit will not kill any more.

In many situations this is irrelevant.
Fleets using focus fire: target is taking tons of hits anyway, one more does not matter.
1v1s: both ships sustain one hit more, so there is no real advantage on eiter side as long as they use similar weapons.

But it DOES become relevant if you are either killing lots of things (like in missions, incursions, sleeper sites, whatever).
All those guys who measure completion of sites in seconds will see that there is a drop in income.

And it's also getting more important the longer your weapon cycle is (because that is what the one more hit takes).

The balance of things has changed and those who liked to kill rats with artillery are affected most. Followed by those Nado gankers...

I can understand your frustration that this change made it so ships you used to one-shot now take two shots, which adds extra time to complete a mission / anomaly, which potentially alters the equation for alpha gankers, etc. I think the change is for the better, and the fact it was not previously announced means you haven't had the chance to investigate how this alters your playstyle before the patch hit.

I still think the change made complete sense though, and thing it is for the better.

Note: It has had several unintended consequences:

Drones become disabled rather than destroyed more often (this happens when they hit 25% structure).
There is a bug where some ships experience strange behaviors when they reach low structure. There are several reports of NPC's gaining crazy hull resists that require several extra shots to "finish off" despite having only 5% structure. A dev mentioned player ships might experience this too, but I haven't heard of it yet.

THIS.



AND THIS.

Again:
I do not complain about things that have changed for me. Please check the killboards - I am not a butt-hurt Jita-ganker (and I promise I don't post here for one of my 500 Jita gank alts).

But it is clear that weapons with long cycle times (Artilleries, Light/Heavy/Cruise Missiles, Rails, Beam Lasers) lose power compared to weapons with shorter cycle times.

I think the change itself is GOOD (agree with all these posts above), because it makes the rules more transparent (if you ignore this odd drone capture thing).
BUT I would have expected something like:
... and all Artys, Rails etc. get +5% damage to compensate for the disadvantage they have now because they now need an extra volley that takes much longer than for blasters or ACs.

EVE is awesome, because you have multiple options to fit your ships, different tactics etc.
Remember Retribution and the tiericide initiative? This is all to make ALL ships and ALL weapon systems viable options. They are putting so much effort in this.
And now we get this change, I read it and I thought: "oh, that will weaken all long range weapons significantly. I will definitely use them less (if at all) in this environment."

That is why I ask: Has the balancing team considered this effect?
If they say "yes, don't worry. All weapons will still be in a fine place and we still expect long range variants to be popular", then I am perfectly fine with the change.

Was that now clear enough?

This is worse than carebear tears, a bug has been fixed - no need for discussion.

Game play that developes based on a bug is bad game play. Fixing the bug fixes the bad game play and is not a nerf.

if you read and understand english. that change makes complete sense.

NO it isnt a nerf.

I read about this bug release day. I've ran a almost two dozen missions since then just to see how things have changed, and this bug never surfaced. I've also participated in several PvP engagements, and again this bug hasn't surfaced. I know it is possible, but I simply have yet to see it.

In truth, if most players new about how up to 50% of your hull HP didn't "count", there would have been more pressure to fix this earlier. The change is appropriate, even if it makes alpha principles more difficult.

The whole "some things get big resists when in low structure" is interesting, and potentially annoying (especially for carebears trying to maximize their isk). It is being looked into though, and in my limited experience so far, isn't common enough to be game breaking.

FWIW, I have run into the new bug a few times while running missions. Actually, now that I think of it, I have run into it multiple times in the same mission but not at all in most others, which is interesting. Anyway, I have found that untargeting the NPC in question does the trick -- the next time you get it targeted, the next volley will finish it off as normal. For those of you reading the thread who have encountered this and who are genuinely frustrated, give it a try instead of having to waste ammo.