These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Rubicon 1.1] Drone Shield Regen Speeds

First post
Author
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#81 - 2014-01-17 08:47:54 UTC
GetSirrus wrote:
Xe'Cara'eos wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Quick announcement to start what will be a busy day.
At the moment, all drones have the same shieldRechargeRate stat. All the way from Acolytes to Mantis'.

This was not an intended pattern and since the balance effects of fighter bombers sporting battlecruiser level passive tanks (mainly resistance to smartbombs and non-coordinated bombs) are negative we're going ahead and giving each size of drone a different shield recharge time just as we do with ships.
Like with ships, the larger drones get better hp/s but the difference will now be much smaller. Light and medium drones are getting buffed, heavies staying the same, sentries through to fighter bombers nerfed.

This stat affects the time it takes the shields to regenerate passively from 0 to full. Lower is better.

At the moment every drone has a recharge time of 250s, post patch it will be:

Light - 125s
Medium - 200s
Heavy - 250s
Sentry - 400s
Fighter - 500s
Fighter Bomber - 750s

This change will be on SISI for your testing shortly.



presuming these are T1 values - what about T2 heavies through sentries?


will faction and T2 have superior regen?

and Fozzie, since you are messing with drones when will the damage multiple between amarr and minmatar drones be correctly sorted compared to the order of their base speeds?



still think , instead of doign that they should make amarr droens have damae damage as gallente, but EM and make caldari drone same damage than minmatar but kin.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#82 - 2014-01-17 08:50:06 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Dragonzchilde wrote:
olan2005 wrote:
Just curios does anyone else perceive this as a super capital Nerf to assist the goons in their current war. IS CCP colluding with goons to hand them null sec . Did the goon tears drive you to this



what he says .... CCP taking sides in favor of the RUSRUS/ GOONS... and not even trying to hide it.


WP CCP ... how much of their RMT did they pomise you?

A very substantial amount. CCP Fozzie gets an extra cut.



Dotn beleive they change things intentionally to helpa side. But given the clear advantage to one side on these changes, woudl be wise of them to delay them. Even if not with will to, these changes are aheavy deus ex machina intervention of CCP in the war and should be delayed at least 1 monht so that all parts can prepare and adjust.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Aineko Macx
#83 - 2014-01-17 09:46:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Aineko Macx
Fozzie, the cost of fighter bombers in light of their utility vs. survivability was already pretty high (not even mentioning how easily the space coffins carrying them are thus made tooth-less). If you go through with these changes I would seriously suggest you to make them cheaper by lowering the build requirements and/or give them more hitpoints.
PinkPanter
Origin.
#84 - 2014-01-17 09:48:28 UTC  |  Edited by: PinkPanter
Aineko Macx wrote:
Fozzie, the cost of fighter bombers in light of their utility vs. survivability was already pretty high. If you go through with these changes I would seriously suggest you to make them cheaper by lowering the build requirements and/or give them more hitpoints.


Doesn't make any difference since you can't pack a lot of them in a super anyway.
CCP literally has no idea how their game works or they are RMT supporters. No other way.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#85 - 2014-01-17 09:50:44 UTC
PinkPanter wrote:
Aineko Macx wrote:
Fozzie, the cost of fighter bombers in light of their utility vs. survivability was already pretty high. If you go through with these changes I would seriously suggest you to make them cheaper by lowering the build requirements and/or give them more hitpoints.


Doesn't make any difference since you can't pack a lot of them in a super anyway.
CCP literally has no idea how their game works or they are RMT supporters. No other way.



By DEFINITION they are RMT . They CHARGE REAL MONEY FOR EVE! THat is THEIR WORK :P

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#86 - 2014-01-17 10:12:07 UTC
Eeh.. I don't understand. Sure reducing Fighter Bombers' survivability might not be a step in the right direction (and its debatable... DEATH TO ALL SUPERCAPITALS !).

... But you were not passive tanking your Fighter Bomber anyway right ? If you want to keep this expensive stuff alive, its normal that you put some effort on it, and not only let the passive regen do its job.

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart

PinkPanter
Origin.
#87 - 2014-01-17 10:20:14 UTC  |  Edited by: PinkPanter
Altrue wrote:
Eeh.. I don't understand. Sure reducing Fighter Bombers' survivability might not be a step in the right direction (and its debatable... DEATH TO ALL SUPERCAPITALS !).

... But you were not passive tanking your Fighter Bomber anyway right ? If you want to keep this expensive stuff alive, its normal that you put some effort on it, and not only let the passive regen do its job.


Between bomber runs and crap fb mobility passive tanking did save a few quite often.
Goons trying to win the war with CCP help as always. Small or large doesn't matter. Those ******* RMT motherfuckers will do everything to keep their car payments going and CCP will realize they are dumb same way it was with GMs and BoB. This time there won't be many people left paying for the game and providing CCP with cash to pay its employees.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#88 - 2014-01-17 10:23:01 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
But given the clear advantage to one side on these changes

What clear advantage? Maybe it's just because I haven't been as active in fleets recently, but I don't recall anybody using fighters or fighter-bombers. Certainly not extensively. And even if they were, the shield regen has such a minor effect in practice. If your fighters or fighter-bombers are going to die, they'll probably die with or without the regen.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Irya Boone
The Scope
#89 - 2014-01-17 10:23:20 UTC
CCP working really good to please goons , why you bother organize CSM anyway?

CCP it's time to remove Off Grid Boost and Put Them on Killmail too, add Logi on killmails .... Open that damn door !!

you shall all bow and pray BoB

James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#90 - 2014-01-17 10:35:21 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
It doesn't matter what change CCP makes at this point, scrubs are still going to scream about it being a change to please us. Even when it makes no sense to, such as here.

You should know that pretty much everyone thinks that fighters and fighter-bombers could do with being a bit more survivable. That would include us.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

PinkPanter
Origin.
#91 - 2014-01-17 10:41:38 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
It doesn't matter what change CCP makes at this point, scrubs are still going to scream about it being a change to please us. Even when it makes no sense to, such as here.


We all know the reasons why you defend CCP in every way when they work in your favor.
Thing is that fine, nerf ("adjust") stats when they are not in any way influencing current largest conflict in eve.
In a month when everybody is home ratting, fine. We all have time to readjust. Right now is like always is when you have no counter. Tears and whine and you get mommies hand.
Irya Boone
The Scope
#92 - 2014-01-17 10:51:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Irya Boone
people are aking for improving drones and drone boat for years , drone boat in pvp ( i mean real one not 5K people in local )
are pain in the A ..

and instead of improving them they :

Nerf missions for drone boats drones get massive aggro
Nerf bonuses of dominix , nerf tracking of sentries
nerf omnidirectional link
nerf everything drone related when goon ask

Gallente are supposed to be drone faction ( the lore say it ) and Prophecy has drone and be more efficient in pvp
Archon ..... no bother tell anything at this point.

Maulus only 3 drones , keres .. get drone bay and drone BW nerfed
and now drone shield regen ?

CCP be honest and Just remove drone from the game and remove the gallente LORE
need more ?

CCP it's time to remove Off Grid Boost and Put Them on Killmail too, add Logi on killmails .... Open that damn door !!

you shall all bow and pray BoB

James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#93 - 2014-01-17 10:55:11 UTC
Are they influencing the current largest conflict? Show me a recent BR of a large (at least one full fleet on each side) where fighters or fighter-bombers factored significantly in dealing damage to other ships. Bonus points if you can show me more than one.

Even if they were, if CCP ever adopted the policy of lassez-faire on balance changes until such changes would not influence any ongoing conflicts, then they would never have the opportunity to make changes at all. Alliances with a vested interest in continuing their current tactics would continue to form conflicts just for the purpose of preventing CCP from acting.

Besides, capitals and fighters/fighter-bombers have yet to be rebalanced, which we all know is incoming. Fighters and fighter-bombers are likely to be part of that balance pass. This change, despite being a nerf (and a pretty ******* minor one at that), makes sense if you read Fozzie's rationale. Now if you want to complain about the HP, do so. You'd actually have valid points there. But the regen? Come on now.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#94 - 2014-01-17 11:07:17 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
Irya Boone wrote:
Nerf missions for drone boats drones get massive aggro

This is pretty easy to avoid if you're not an idiot.

Irya Boone wrote:
Nerf bonuses of dominix

No, the Dominix prior to Odyssey had only the 10% damage and hitpoint bonus. In Odyssey it was given a very powerful buff with a 10% bonus per level to drone tracking speed and optimal range. The buff was scaled back somewhat in Odyssey 1.1, but it's still very powerful and of course overall a significant buff over what it was prior.

So the net effect in recent history was a significant buff in that respect.

The Ishtar also got two powerful drone bonuses it didn't have before in Odyssey 1.1 - one was a 7.5% per level sentry drone tracking and optimal similar to what the Dominix has (but only affecting sentries), and the other was a 7.5% heavy drone tracking and MWD speed bonus. One of the bonuses that was replaced, the drone bay capacity bonus, was instead added to the ship's stats itself so it wasn't even lost.

Irya Boone wrote:
nerf tracking of sentries

When did this happen? I'm sure you have a link.

Irya Boone wrote:
nerf omnidirectional link

As far as tracking is concerned it's a buff, and as far as range is concerned it might not be as bad of a nerf as you think it is.

Irya Boone wrote:
Gallente are supposed to be drone faction ( the lore say it )

And the game itself reflects it more than ever. Also the Prophecy wasn't even a drone boat at all until Retribution 1.1.

You do realize the shield regen is the same for heavy drones, and it's buffed for anything smaller?

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#95 - 2014-01-17 13:35:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Kagura Nikon
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
But given the clear advantage to one side on these changes

What clear advantage? Maybe it's just because I haven't been as active in fleets recently, but I don't recall anybody using fighters or fighter-bombers. Certainly not extensively. And even if they were, the shield regen has such a minor effect in practice. If your fighters or fighter-bombers are going to die, they'll probably die with or without the regen.



Ther is an implication that your opponents have superiority on SuperCarriers and they are way more pront to use them. Not to bring up the validity or not of this statement here, but taking this premisse as true (and sicen most of eve takes as true, seems to be a good start) it hurts your enemies more than hurts you. CFC has subcapital superiority and on general notes the whoel set of changes makes supercapitals weaker while subcapitals stronger.

Your side has not used much SC, but your enemy has (more earlier in the war, less recently, but still clear disparity).

As I said, I do not believe its intetional of CCP to affect the war, but just stating that it will leave such impression.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Manfred Sideous
H A V O C
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#96 - 2014-01-17 13:40:17 UTC
Fozzie suggestion for fighterbombers. Reduce sig radius on them otherwise you are going to have 1 dude running a Isboxer killing 100's of fighterbombers on each pass. Which is dumb since Supercarriers can only carry 1 flight of Fighterbombers.

@EveManny

https://twitter.com/EveManny

CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#97 - 2014-01-17 13:58:14 UTC
Manfred Sideous wrote:
Fozzie suggestion for fighterbombers. Reduce sig radius on them otherwise you are going to have 1 dude running a Isboxer killing 100's of fighterbombers on each pass. Which is dumb since Supercarriers can only carry 1 flight of Fighterbombers.


If someone can kill 100s of fighterbombers in a pass after 1.1, that means they can also do it right now. We're not changing total HP in this adjustment, just regen rate of shields.

Discussions about hp and sig radius of fighters and fighterbombers are worth having, but this is a change specifically to fix the defect surrounding the shield regen rates and the effect this was having on lighter sources of damage to drones.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Meyr
Pirannha Corp
#98 - 2014-01-17 14:20:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Meyr
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Manfred Sideous wrote:
Fozzie suggestion for fighterbombers. Reduce sig radius on them otherwise you are going to have 1 dude running a Isboxer killing 100's of fighterbombers on each pass. Which is dumb since Supercarriers can only carry 1 flight of Fighterbombers.


If someone can kill 100s of fighterbombers in a pass after 1.1, that means they can also do it right now. We're not changing total HP in this adjustment, just regen rate of shields.

Discussions about hp and sig radius of fighters and fighterbombers are worth having, but this is a change specifically to fix the defect surrounding the shield regen rates and the effect this was having on lighter sources of damage to drones.


Drones -

Quite possibly the single worst weapon system, from the viewpoint of needing to be re-vamped, and you're going about it by doing one change at a time, instead of examining them, the modules & rigs that affect them, the SKILLS that affect them (for the love of all that you may or may not consider holy, when will you get around to making E-War Drone Interfacing have an affect upon E-WAR DRONES?!) the manner in which they're used (yes, Fozzie, that includes PVE), and the ships for whom they are the primary focus, as a whole, putting in the skull sweat, and presenting a change that brings better balance to PVP, doesn't screw over PVE (yeah, like you've shown that you actually care about the parts of the game that 70% of your subscribers say is their primary focus [/SARCASM]), and appears BALANCED!

The patchwork quilt you're putting together will only, in the end, be just as bad as what we have now.

I'll also re-iterate, if you're going to be doing drone fixes in small, easily accomplished steps, how about swapping the damage modifiers between Amarr and Minmatar drones, and make a SLIGHT decrease in the damage modifier of Gallente drones? Something along the lines of -0.004, maybe -0.005? Enough to make mission runners actually THINK about more than "Enemy = Angels? If 'No', then Gallente!"

Yes, I understand, this will have a net negative upon PVP, and decrease the value of Warrior II's slightly (which I manufacture, so I'm willing to take a hit for better balance), but it will (a) be VERY easy to do, and, (b) actually improve drones overall.
Phoenus
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#99 - 2014-01-17 14:29:27 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Manfred Sideous wrote:
Fozzie suggestion for fighterbombers. Reduce sig radius on them otherwise you are going to have 1 dude running a Isboxer killing 100's of fighterbombers on each pass. Which is dumb since Supercarriers can only carry 1 flight of Fighterbombers.


If someone can kill 100s of fighterbombers in a pass after 1.1, that means they can also do it right now. We're not changing total HP in this adjustment, just regen rate of shields.

Discussions about hp and sig radius of fighters and fighterbombers are worth having, but this is a change specifically to fix the defect surrounding the shield regen rates and the effect this was having on lighter sources of damage to drones.


So what is so massively broken about Drone regen rates, that it needs fixing right now? Wait until you do a balance pass on drones as a whole, and then fix the issues alongside other changes that you may make.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#100 - 2014-01-17 14:44:33 UTC
sig radius is the biggest issue in terms of tanking for drones as considering all drones are smaller than frigates yet some have cruiser sigs and are thus easily picked off.. then of course getting around to making them actually consistent with their races might help .. like caldari drones should actually have more shield HP than structure which without resists is just easy to chew through.

then there is the engagement range which is tiny along with their tiny optimal ranges ... drones should be really agile ...
maybe T2 drones could have a role bonus .. 25% damage reduction to incoming damage due to their agility making them hard to track

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using