These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[April] [Updated] Confessor and Svipul Balance Tweaks

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Daimus Daranius
Warcrows
THE OLD SCHOOL
#321 - 2015-04-14 12:46:03 UTC
At what date will those changes become live?

Amarr Victor!
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#322 - 2015-04-14 13:00:46 UTC
shield confessors eh .. funky, a possible solution is too nerf the base resistances to T1 default and maybe reduce shield HP a little as well.. i still haven't heard from fozzie why T3's have T2 resists .. have asked multiple times...

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
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#323 - 2015-04-14 13:30:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Phoenix Jones
William Rokov wrote:
This t3d shows us the problem with assault frigs, its nice time to think about them and their niche in pvp.


Honestly they should look at both interceptors and assault frigates. Could just merge a few of them (so instead of 2 interceptors and 2 assault frigates, just turn them into a new type of frigate fleet

1 interceptor (fast light tackle), one assault frigate (dps tackle), one heavy tackle frigate (tank, tackle). Throw out one of the ships for each race.

Just thoughts, use the d3 forms and make a frigate based on each, one fast tackle, one good dps, one good tank.

Then again why bring one when you can bring a destroyer that can transform into each at will...

Yea they'll need to be rethought

Yaay!!!!
Oddsodz
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#324 - 2015-04-14 13:41:06 UTC
Did anybody come around to the idea that maybe we should just leave them as they are?

What is it that the 10mn AB fits that we like the most? Its the fact that no t1 ship with a t1 scam can stop D3 MWD like speed. And that makes the ship stand out. So maybe, Just maybe we should look at adding a role to the the ship that means that a scam has no effect of MWD operation. I Am not saying a scam will not work to stop a D3 warping off. But it would be interesting if it did not stop an MWD from working. That is the thing that makes the D3 with 10mn AB stand out. It can keep it's speed. Sig Bloom is not the main factor in fitting a 10mn AB. It is the ability to keep speed as a option.

Again,. I still feel the D3 should be left as is. Increase COST to build is OK, Hell make it more for all I care. But I would like to see them stay as is. Players are flying them as they like them. Why take away something that is 1,. Not pay to Win. 2, Players seem to enjoy?
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#325 - 2015-04-14 13:48:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Iroquoiss Pliskin
Phoenix Jones wrote:
William Rokov wrote:
This t3d shows us the problem with assault frigs, its nice time to think about them and their niche in pvp.


Honestly they should look at both interceptors and assault frigates. Could just merge a few of them (so instead of 2 interceptors and 2 assault frigates, just turn them into a new type of frigate fleet

1 interceptor (fast light tackle), one assault frigate (dps tackle), one heavy tackle frigate (tank, tackle). Throw out one of the ships for each race.

Just thoughts, use the d3 forms and make a frigate based on each, one fast tackle, one good dps, one good tank.

Then again why bring one when you can bring a destroyer that can transform into each at will...

Yea they'll need to be rethought


Interceptors are perfectly balanced as is.

Only two out of four destroyers have been released, and they have already obsoleted a class of ships that I was very fond of, around the year 2007. Roll

1) I would raise the AF resist profiles to levels, which would constitute a "hard tackle" -> EHP surpassing T3Ds by 30-50% at the very least.
2) Alternatively, reduce T3D resists across the board, or the % bonus amount from Defensive modes.

That, or delete either AFs/T3Ds from the gaem. What?

// [PvP Damage Done by Class (Scylla)] //

[Cruisers Online]
Thanatos Marathon
Moira.
#326 - 2015-04-14 14:01:35 UTC
If you block T3Ds from small FW complexes AFs have a niche again (although a pretty small one).

JUSTK is recruiting
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#327 - 2015-04-14 14:03:16 UTC
Artificial restriction is artificial.

Cancer will spread to null, especially with the coming new Sov capture mechanics.

// [PvP Damage Done by Class (Scylla)] //

[Cruisers Online]
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#328 - 2015-04-14 14:06:35 UTC
Thanatos Marathon wrote:
If you block T3Ds from small FW complexes AFs have a niche again (although a pretty small one).


it's better to actually fix the game than make special 'avoid broken counters' areas. that way we could actually see non-interceptor/kite frigates, non-T3/snipeycorm destroyers, non-T3/logistics cruisers, etc. in actual combat.
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#329 - 2015-04-14 14:11:17 UTC
Thanatos Marathon wrote:
If you block T3Ds from small FW complexes AFs have a niche again (although a pretty small one).

It's weird because there is a big blur with the interceptor and assault frigate.

I just think there is one too many.

Yaay!!!!
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#330 - 2015-04-14 14:17:05 UTC
Before this is over, if the devs are serious about fixing broken concepts (oh Ishtar nm), I foresee the review of both the Defensive and Propulsion modes, and the percentage increase that they grant.

// [PvP Damage Done by Class (Scylla)] //

[Cruisers Online]
Marian Devers
Rage and Terror
Against ALL Authorities
#331 - 2015-04-14 14:22:59 UTC
I guess this is the place to ask why Svipul has 2x defensive bonuses (to armor and shield resists), and the confessor only has one (armor).

Give the confessor a shield bonus, maybe it can get some use as a mini-zealot, but with beams. Otherwise, no one is gonna fly it. 10mn AB mode was the only saving grace of the ship.
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#332 - 2015-04-14 14:31:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Iroquoiss Pliskin
Marian Devers wrote:
I guess this is the place to ask why Svipul has 2x defensive bonuses (to armor and shield resists), and the confessor only has one (armor).


That is a fairly valid question.

With both ships unfitted and in Defensive mode, Confessor has 4,976, and Svipul 5,658 EHP.
Fitting a DC II gives the Confessor 7,055 EHP, and 7,475 for the Svipul.

I think the answer may lie in the fact that Confessor's Signature reduction bonus is always being applied in Defensive mode, compared to MWD-use dependent second bonus on the Svipul.

CCP Fozzie? Smile

P.S. Evil Thug still around? Pirate

// [PvP Damage Done by Class (Scylla)] //

[Cruisers Online]
prolix travail
Blue Mountain Trails
#333 - 2015-04-14 15:38:06 UTC
The new, new changes look interesting. Could you give us an idea of when they'll go live on the testserver?
SFM Hobb3s
Perkone
Caldari State
#334 - 2015-04-14 15:44:54 UTC
Marian Devers wrote:
I guess this is the place to ask why Svipul has 2x defensive bonuses (to armor and shield resists), and the confessor only has one (armor).

Give the confessor a shield bonus, maybe it can get some use as a mini-zealot, but with beams. Otherwise, no one is gonna fly it. 10mn AB mode was the only saving grace of the ship.



I've never used 10mn on a confessor, but I will certainly say this ship makes for one hell of an anti-tackle sniper, if you fly it right and don't make mistakes (in approx. 300+ kills I've made 2 mistakes, hence two losses).

So yeah, I'll be flying it. And thanks Foz, looking forward to blapping fools at 100+km away now. I'll be able to do lots with that extra 20km engagement window.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#335 - 2015-04-14 16:02:06 UTC
prolix travail wrote:
The new, new changes look interesting. Could you give us an idea of when they'll go live on the testserver?


They'll be in the next SISI update, probably in the next day or so.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Alexis Nightwish
#336 - 2015-04-14 16:15:41 UTC
Fozzie, have you considered further increasing the build cost to help offset the disparity of power between T3Ds and AFs by increasing the disparity of price between them?

CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge

EVE Online's "I win!" Button

Fixing bombs, not the bombers
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#337 - 2015-04-14 16:41:43 UTC
Alexis Nightwish wrote:
Fozzie, have you considered further increasing the build cost to help offset the disparity of power between T3Ds and AFs by increasing the disparity of price between them?


The build cost changes in this pass are pretty significant, I don't think we'll be likely to go further all at once.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#338 - 2015-04-14 17:25:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Phoenix Jones
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Alexis Nightwish wrote:
Fozzie, have you considered further increasing the build cost to help offset the disparity of power between T3Ds and AFs by increasing the disparity of price between them?


The build cost changes in this pass are pretty significant, I don't think we'll be likely to go further all at once.


Adjusting cost isn't the answer.

Frigates (specifically assault frigates, and oddly enough interceptors) need to be reviewed because there is a new Power-creep that happened with the T3 destroyers.

Cost won't balance it out, its more of a fundamental scale of gameplay.

Its pretty well known that Assault Frigates need a pass, but when you make that pass, don't ignore interceptors.

Yaay!!!!
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#339 - 2015-04-14 17:44:15 UTC
Phoenix Jones wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Alexis Nightwish wrote:
Fozzie, have you considered further increasing the build cost to help offset the disparity of power between T3Ds and AFs by increasing the disparity of price between them?


The build cost changes in this pass are pretty significant, I don't think we'll be likely to go further all at once.


Adjusting cost isn't the answer.

Frigates (specifically assault frigates, and oddly enough interceptors) need to be reviewed because there is a new Power-creep that happened with the T3 destroyers.

Cost won't balance it out, its more of a fundamental scale of gameplay.

Its pretty well known that Assault Frigates need a pass, but when you make that pass, don't ignore interceptors.


I can't think of any ships that don't need a balance pass
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#340 - 2015-04-14 17:56:45 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Phoenix Jones wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Alexis Nightwish wrote:
Fozzie, have you considered further increasing the build cost to help offset the disparity of power between T3Ds and AFs by increasing the disparity of price between them?


The build cost changes in this pass are pretty significant, I don't think we'll be likely to go further all at once.


Adjusting cost isn't the answer.

Frigates (specifically assault frigates, and oddly enough interceptors) need to be reviewed because there is a new Power-creep that happened with the T3 destroyers.

Cost won't balance it out, its more of a fundamental scale of gameplay.

Its pretty well known that Assault Frigates need a pass, but when you make that pass, don't ignore interceptors.


I can't think of any ships that don't need a balance pass


t1 cruisers

inties

recons

battleships

marauders

black ops

hacs

t1 destroyers

interdictors

heavy interdictors

command ships


You seemed to be stuck so i figured i'd help you with what ships are fine as they are.

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