These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

A little bit more Dps and diference between new and old
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Gargantoi
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1 - 2013-10-10 01:24:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Gargantoi
Ideea is simple . Due to tank boosts + ancilary reppers taking down targets is getting harder if you are solo or even with 1 friend .
Another problem is the advantages new players have vs the old ones wich is ok but still at the same time it isn`t there isn`t a gap or a diference . To get to the point of this id sugest the specialization skills on guns / missiles should at lvl 5 should give 25% more dmg / rof insteed of 10% wich they already give and second of all the 25% to be split on levels ..not like 5% / lvl but lvl 1 2% lvl 2 % 3% lvl 3 5% lvl 4 7% lvl 5 8% ..added together u get 25% ..also that works "against" implants because first off the 2% on the lvl isnt even noticeable atm ..second off i got large autocannon spec lvl 5 ..but a friend if he has lvl 4 on spec and +5 implant outdmg'es me by 3% ..if i install the +5 dmg implant we go back to the first part ..where 2% doesent make to much diference . At this curent stage i can ask 1 simple question ..why spend 23-30 days ( depending on implants / attributes ) to train a spec skill from 4 to 5 for just 2% dmg ..is a waste of time ..in that time u could do a lot of better skills . Criticism will come ofc ..but still if you take it logical u will see that what i said makes sense .


Forgot to specify : BONUS should apply ONLY to LARGE Weapon systems
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#2 - 2013-10-10 02:48:31 UTC
Quote:
why spend 23-30 days ( depending on implants / attributes ) to train a spec skill from 4 to 5 for just 2% dmg ..is a waste of time ..in that time u could do a lot of better skills .

That is actually the point behind the current skill system.

Putting more time and/or ISK into something has a diminishing return that...

- allows younger players who specialize to be competitive against older veterans.
- rewards those to put in the disproportionate amount of time/ISK with one more "edge" that few will want to spend time/ISK on.

Also, no to adding new specialization skills on top of existing specialization skills. They won't add any new value to the game other than "one more skill to train to 'be at everyone else's level.'"

How did you Veterans start?
Gargantoi
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3 - 2013-10-10 14:21:21 UTC
ShahFluffers wrote:
Quote:
why spend 23-30 days ( depending on implants / attributes ) to train a spec skill from 4 to 5 for just 2% dmg ..is a waste of time ..in that time u could do a lot of better skills .

That is actually the point behind the current skill system.

Putting more time and/or ISK into something has a diminishing return that...

- allows younger players who specialize to be competitive against older veterans.
- rewards those to put in the disproportionate amount of time/ISK with one more "edge" that few will want to spend time/ISK on.

Also, no to adding new specialization skills on top of existing specialization skills. They won't add any new value to the game other than "one more skill to train to 'be at everyone else's level.'"


No, not add more spec skills ..change the existing ones ..change the 2% bonus to either 5% / lvl or to the 2/3/5/7/8 system
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
#4 - 2013-10-10 14:47:15 UTC
Gargantoi wrote:
ShahFluffers wrote:
Quote:
why spend 23-30 days ( depending on implants / attributes ) to train a spec skill from 4 to 5 for just 2% dmg ..is a waste of time ..in that time u could do a lot of better skills .

That is actually the point behind the current skill system.

Putting more time and/or ISK into something has a diminishing return that...

- allows younger players who specialize to be competitive against older veterans.
- rewards those to put in the disproportionate amount of time/ISK with one more "edge" that few will want to spend time/ISK on.

Also, no to adding new specialization skills on top of existing specialization skills. They won't add any new value to the game other than "one more skill to train to 'be at everyone else's level.'"


No, not add more spec skills ..change the existing ones ..change the 2% bonus to either 5% / lvl or to the 2/3/5/7/8 system


The former would merely unbalance the game in favor of old players, finally making all the new player complaints about not being competitive come true. The latter would utterly crush the idea of diminishing returns on which so much of the game -- and almost the entire skill system -- is based. When it comes to increasing how well your ship performs in space you never get a linear return on investment whether that's an investment of isk or SP. And that's as it should be.
Antillie Sa'Kan
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#5 - 2013-10-10 14:50:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Antillie Sa'Kan
Gargantoi wrote:
At this curent stage i can ask 1 simple question ..why spend 23-30 days ( depending on implants / attributes ) to train a spec skill from 4 to 5 for just 2% dmg ..is a waste of time ..in that time u could do a lot of better skills.


If you feel it is a waste of time then don't train it. I haven't trained any of the T2 spec skills to V as I feel that my training time is better spent elsewhere.

The entire point of these changes was to make fights last longer and to encourage people to fleet up while making active tanks viable in small scale PVP. Making the existing skills give larger damage buffs than they do now would be completely counter productive. Say it with me; "EVE is not a solo game." If you and your friend in buffer fits got popped by a guy with an active fit then you can either switch to active fits or get more friends, maybe some logi friends.
Rented
Hunter Heavy Industries
#6 - 2013-10-10 14:57:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Rented
Training the last bits of the weapon specializations is supposed to be a waste of time. Otherwise it's just further empowering veterans to stomp on newer players for no other reason than higher training. Training is NOT intended to give proportional returns.

As it now stands, the difference in combat stats between a 5 year player and a specialized 6 month player in many ships is only around 2-10%. This is a good thing. Increasing this difference into an im-way-older-so-insta-win button is bad. Age doesn't entitle you to increasing amounts of additional power, it entitles you to increasingly less additional power... and eventually no additional power.
Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#7 - 2013-10-10 15:14:50 UTC
*I trained lvl 5 autocannon spec*
*why the hell did I do this?*
*Buff spec skills*
*this will help noobs vs older players*

My irony gland exploded reading OP's post.

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.
Velicitia
XS Tech
#8 - 2013-10-10 16:20:35 UTC
No.

Malcanis' Law applies here.

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Hopelesshobo
Hoboland
#9 - 2013-10-10 16:50:04 UTC
This just sounds like the OP got killed by an active tanked ship when his was buffer tanked.

This is not an issue with skills, this is an issue with a fit. Local tanks got buffed, deal with it, fit one yourself. Every patch that comes out changes the game mechanics in some way. Either adapt or die.

Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
Gargantoi
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#10 - 2013-10-10 21:02:05 UTC
Batelle wrote:
*I trained lvl 5 autocannon spec*
*why the hell did I do this?*
*Buff spec skills*
*this will help noobs vs older players*

My irony gland exploded reading OP's post.


No that isnt the point as i said due to tanks beeing increased and new reppers added it would of been nice if dps would be increased a little bit as well and this would of been a way to do it ..by giving insteed of 2% / lvl ..5%
Gargantoi
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#11 - 2013-10-10 21:05:35 UTC
Also a lot of people complain about how ships lack dps ..like tempest / marauders some bc's ..this would sort of fix people's complaining also ..but as i said ...is just a sugestion and everyone can express theire opinion here ..pro's and con's
Khanid Voltar
#12 - 2013-10-10 21:09:10 UTC
This idea (5% instead of 2%) would require virtually every ship in game to be rebalanced, at the point when every almost every ship and module has just been rebalanced.

Bearing in mind the current rebalancing process has already taken nearly 2 years I don't see the point.
Antillie Sa'Kan
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#13 - 2013-10-10 21:17:32 UTC
Gargantoi wrote:
Also a lot of people complain about how ships lack dps ..like tempest / marauders some bc's ..this would sort of fix people's complaining also ..but as i said ...is just a sugestion and everyone can express theire opinion here ..pro's and con's

This is better addressed by making changes to the specific hulls. Not by messing with the skills. Also the 800 DPS dual heavy neut tempest would like a word with you.
Gargantoi
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#14 - 2013-10-11 21:13:21 UTC
Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:
Gargantoi wrote:
Also a lot of people complain about how ships lack dps ..like tempest / marauders some bc's ..this would sort of fix people's complaining also ..but as i said ...is just a sugestion and everyone can express theire opinion here ..pro's and con's

This is better addressed by making changes to the specific hulls. Not by messing with the skills. Also the 800 DPS dual heavy neut tempest would like a word with you.


Everybody says ..wow tempest lacks dps but has utility ..its not like that ..ship dies to fast ..has bad armor buff ..bad kinetic / exp resists 800 dps wich is meeh for a bs tbh ..id take a hyperion over a tempest everyday but then again back to the topic in hand keep posting opinions about the dps change ...the total buff would be 15% extra compared to what it is now
Gargantoi
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#15 - 2013-10-11 21:22:28 UTC
Khanid Voltar wrote:
This idea (5% instead of 2%) would require virtually every ship in game to be rebalanced, at the point when every almost every ship and module has just been rebalanced.

Bearing in mind the current rebalancing process has already taken nearly 2 years I don't see the point.


The only problem i would see would be blasters ..because if we compare ships ..maelstrom =878 dps abaddon =916dps in guns raven has 688 dps with cruise and 948 dps with torps as for hyperion it would have 1010 dps in guns ..all ships use 3 dmg mod upgrades in the fitting i made ..so another 15% extra dps wouldnt "unbalance them" it would make most of them reach the 1 k mark wich wouldnt really be that bad considering that some bc's can already reach 600-700 dps ...also i forgot to specify this ...the bonus should apply only to large guns not medium / small
Antillie Sa'Kan
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#16 - 2013-10-11 21:58:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Antillie Sa'Kan
You are trying to directly compare ACs, pulse lasers, blasters, and cruise missiles by only looking at their paper DPS. There are many other far more important factors to consider like projection, application, cap use, and fittings.

Besides if you gave them all +15% DPS what have you really changed? Other than making BC's even more of a joke.

Stealth "buff suicide ganking" thread detected.
Gargantoi
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#17 - 2013-10-12 01:54:44 UTC
Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:
You are trying to directly compare ACs, pulse lasers, blasters, and cruise missiles by only looking at their paper DPS. There are many other far more important factors to consider like projection, application, cap use, and fittings.

Besides if you gave them all +15% DPS what have you really changed? Other than making BC's even more of a joke.

Stealth "buff suicide ganking" thread detected.
Actually no ..u wouldnt make bc's a joke ..they can use large guns as well as for most ships applying dps isnt hard u web and u shoot the problem is u dont do enough dmg ..if you put 3 bc's vs 1 bs the bc's will win ..i just find it a joke that i can do 1 k dps with proteus then a a tempest or abaddon or 800 dps with an absolution ..not to mention astarte or sleipnir ..not to mention a gank brutix that doese 845 dps in guns without the 5 hammerheads that boost it to 1 k dps also ...the ideea is simple ..if its big it should have dps ..the only problem should be applying it ...so bs's having less dps then a bc i say this is ...hmm how would ccp put it ...oh right .."unbalanced"
Antillie Sa'Kan
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#18 - 2013-10-12 23:37:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Antillie Sa'Kan
So because the Proteus is a bit out of line we should mess with every other ship in the game? Your logic is impeccable.

Also please look at the other attributes of the 4 BCs that can fit large weapons and then compare them to the stats of the other 8 BCs and a typical BS. You might notice something interesting.
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#19 - 2013-10-12 23:56:49 UTC
DPS Tank

100% 100%
105% 100%
105% 105%
110% 105%
110% 110%



I'm sure if you look at this hard and long you will see why your post is awful.

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Gargantoi
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#20 - 2013-10-14 09:33:44 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
DPS Tank

100% 100%
105% 100%
105% 105%
110% 105%
110% 110%



I'm sure if you look at this hard and long you will see why your post is awful.


First off got no ideea what u said here :) second off ..still can`t figure out what u said
12Next page