These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Carnyx] Sentry Drone Adjustments

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Maximos Jenks
East Coast Grass Growers Association
#201 - 2015-05-21 20:56:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Maximos Jenks
Zappity wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Tyr Dolorem wrote:
Why are you nerfing the drones not the hulls that are the problem?

Because both the drones and the hulls are problems, and the solutions will involve ongoing changes to both.

Um...
CCP Rise wrote:
First, we wanted to establish whether the problem was more about the Ishtar or more about Sentry Drones. The data makes a pretty convincing case that it really is mostly the Ishtar. While several other ships (Dominix, Navy Vexor, Archon, etc.) are making use of sentries, none of them are anywhere near as sentry reliant as the Ishtar and none of them are coming close to the overall damage that Ishtars represent on TQ.


This guys is right.. CCP rise the hero of my heart


[–]Ranzera
Jesus, what the hell were Gardes doing? I've not seen any abuse there. Sign me up with the "why nerf an entire weapon platform for 2-4 hulls' sins?" crowd.

This was posted on reddit, which is also particularly relevant
cMo McCloud
Echelon Research
Goonswarm Federation
#202 - 2015-05-21 21:02:39 UTC
I realize these changes are because of the how they are used in PVP but this really hurts using them for PVE. Seems like a band-aid to fix other issues.

To survive is just not enough. To live is to fight.
Terra Chrall
Doomheim
#203 - 2015-05-21 21:06:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Terra Chrall
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Terra Chrall wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Terra Chrall wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:

The sentries range cap out much shorter if not for this projection bonus. This is why it needs to be counted as projection. Normal drone boat range cap out much closer to ishtar because of that. If you don't see it as a projection bonus, you are delusional. People fit DLAs to their but a bonus to drone range does not count because :reasons:...


It is as much a projection bonus as a targeting computer. Yes it is beneficial. I discounted it because I was not considering ships targeting range in the equation when comparing to drone boats. I'll look at some numbers and edit this post.

Yes Drone Control range benefits 3/4 of the sentries. Base is drone contol range is 60km and the Ishtar bonus takes it to 85km. I assume this was done due to other HACs having base targeting ranges in the 70km to 90km range.


Because having your weapon max range cap go from 60km to 85 KM is not a bonus? Ishtar targettign range is 100km so there is no need for a module to boost it untill you go with DLAs. Bouncers, curators and wardens all still do damage past the 60km mark that would be the limit if the Ishtar didn't have a range bonus.

So if a HML Cerberus (95km base targeting range) had a 60KM limit on missiles being able to engage that would be okay? The control range bonus is to bring the weapon system in line with with the ships targeting range. SO while it is a bonus it is only in order to equalize the weapon system.

The only way I can see CCP getting around this would be to remove control range and use a ships targeting range instead. In which case no bonus would be needed.


2 out of 3 missile type on the cerberus won't shoot to it's maximum lock range. One of them can't shoot to the unbonused drone range. Oh and please don't forget to mention the cerb need 2 range bonus on those weapon to achieve those range numbers. I think the sentries needed 2 bonus to range (max velocity and flight time) just like sentries do (drone control range and optimal).


Right, you're proving my point for me. The base lock range of the ship exceeds the usable range of all but T1 missiles. Thus you can shoot any missile at any target you can lock, they won't all hit because they have limited range to apply damage. Drones will not shoot at any target you can lock. They will only engage a target you lock AND is in their control range. It is a unique feature to the weapon system that no other system has. If control range didn't matter, then in passive mode, lock range and the drones optimal/falloff would be equivalent to the other weapon systems.

I'll stop after this one because it is clear we won't agree.

You fit a Cerberus with HML it will shoot ALL T1 missiles to 141km, Faction to about 72Km, and T2 Fury to 106KM. Imagine you had another limiting factor on your launchers that wouldn't let you shoot them unless you also had a missile control range, and it started at 60km. Thus what you see as an extra bonus is only bringing the use of drones up to the same engagement window of other HACs.
Jatok Reknar
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#204 - 2015-05-21 21:14:10 UTC
Sad about this proposed nerf. If there was a problem with a specific hull being overpowered, adjust its bonuses rather than a blanket nerf on sentries altogether imho.
Terra Chrall
Doomheim
#205 - 2015-05-21 21:17:41 UTC
Lady Aesir wrote:
Ishtar

A Cruiser should not be able to field sentries PERIOD

Yes they should. All other drones are not considered ranged weapons, and both in PvP and PvE having drones travel long distances proves this.

There are two way I see to solve this:

1) Nerf sentries a bit and buff the BS+ hull bonuses to compensate
2) Create a Medium Sentry class and change cruiser bonuses to this size sentry.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#206 - 2015-05-21 21:30:52 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Fozzie
Hey folks, thanks for the feedback so far.

For those of you who are worried that we won't touch any specific ships because we're making these changes, I'll point you again to the second paragraph of the OP. We are not ruling out any changes to specific ships as we go forward. We made changes specifically to the Ishtar in Scylla, and we plan on continuing to make changes bit by bit to continually improve the game's balance.

We're making an adjustment already to the original proposal, adding some more falloff to the Gardes.

New Garde range changes are: -25% optimal, +66.7% falloff.

The shift from a moderate reliance on optimal to a moderate reliance on falloff is still part of the plan as it will help close the gap between range bonused ships and range unbonused ships, but with this version the crossover point between ranges where the Gardes do less damage than before and the point where they do more damage than before will be earlier.

Thanks as always, and have a great evening!

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Desudes
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#207 - 2015-05-21 21:40:36 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey folks, thanks for the feedback so far.

For those of you who are worried that we won't touch any specific ships because we're making these changes, I'll point you again to the second paragraph of the OP. We are not ruling out any changes to specific ships as we go forward. We made changes specifically to the Ishtar in Scylla, and we plan on continuing to make changes bit by bit to continually improve the game's balance.

We're making an adjustment already to the original proposal, adding some more falloff to the Gardes.

New Garde range changes are: -25% optimal, +66.7% falloff.

The shift from a moderate reliance on optimal to a moderate reliance on falloff is still part of the plan as it will help close the gap between range bonused ships and range unbonused ships, but with this version the crossover point between ranges where the Gardes do less damage than before and the point where they do more damage than before will be earlier.

Thanks as always, and have a great evening!


You realize gardes are already almost useless right now because of how bad you nerfed their range and this is just going to make it worse, right ?

Excuse me, but what the f*ck are you desu?
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#208 - 2015-05-21 21:42:07 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey folks, thanks for the feedback so far.

For those of you who are worried that we won't touch any specific ships because we're making these changes, I'll point you again to the second paragraph of the OP. We are not ruling out any changes to specific ships as we go forward. We made changes specifically to the Ishtar in Scylla, and we plan on continuing to make changes bit by bit to continually improve the game's balance.


What other ship beside the Ishtar and the Dominixe are problematic with sentries to make the entire weapon system deserving of a nerf and not only those 2 hulls?
Dreekus
Pls Be Gentle
#209 - 2015-05-21 21:42:09 UTC
I am not big fan of Falloff based weaponry, It mostly just confuse ppl about their paper dps vs practical application.

That being said, I have same opinion as ppl that would prefer seeing Ishtar tweaking instead doing changes that will cause colleteral damage to hulls that are not so readly abused. (Like eos, dominix, Geddon).


Sentries bonuses for BCs and larger hulls only.
Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#210 - 2015-05-21 21:47:35 UTC
Every sentry ship is severely outclassed by the Ishtar, to the point where pretty much nobody uses anything but (except for us).

The last several times we've told you this you've given us the same stupid "thanks for the feedback but we're confident we're right". You're not. The drones are not the problem, it's the Ishtar.
Hilti Enaka
Space Wolves ind.
Solyaris Chtonium
#211 - 2015-05-21 21:49:59 UTC
I've said this many times after seeing the game become more and more "balanced", nice way of saying nerf BTW.

When things are "unbalanced" they game is exciting and you have people trying to theory craft ways to counter the trends.

Many times over I've seen exciting gameplays get it's arsed ripped out because CCP decided to nerf rather than be proactive and think of ways to allow us gamers to counter act. Part of what made/makes eve so exciting is the freedom but the rules and the constant tiers of "this needs balancing" annoys me rotten. This is what made Eve so formidable as a MMORPG.

Please Fozzie, rather than nerf things and sugar coat it as balancing, think in the opposite direction to allow us to think strategically about being able to play out counter-attacks. The way it is at the moment you nerf one thing and another gameplay will emerge that you will nerf *cough* balance again.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#212 - 2015-05-21 21:54:15 UTC
Hilti Enaka wrote:
I've said this many times after seeing the game become more and more "balanced", nice way of saying nerf BTW.

When things are "unbalanced" they game is exciting and you have people trying to theory craft ways to counter the trends.

Many times over I've seen exciting gameplays get it's arsed ripped out because CCP decided to nerf rather than be proactive and think of ways to allow us gamers to counter act. Part of what made/makes eve so exciting is the freedom but the rules and the constant tiers of "this needs balancing" annoys me rotten. This is what made Eve so formidable as a MMORPG.

Please Fozzie, rather than nerf things and sugar coat it as balancing, think in the opposite direction to allow us to think strategically about being able to play out counter-attacks. The way it is at the moment you nerf one thing and another gameplay will emerge that you will nerf *cough* balance again.


It's been months and the statu quo is still that Ishtar are dominant. You'd think the playerbase would of found other counter by now beside faction battleships? Do you think people didn't look at the ship roster to find what was possible with the current setup? How long do we let something unbalanced to push people to try new things? How long before we consider the baalnce was actually FUBAR and need to be modified because the ideas just plainly don't work?
Rampage2010
State War Academy
Caldari State
#213 - 2015-05-21 21:54:33 UTC
Fozzie do you have any ideas for the game that don't involve nerfing everything one by one. surly you are smart enough to see that is all you are doing, perhaps you were in over your head working for CCP and you are reaching for ideas and nerf nerf nerf is all you could come up with? put more thought into stuff dude nerf hulls if you have to rather than screwing over weapon systems. talk to this guy a bit maybe, you know work with your team..

"First, we wanted to establish whether the problem was more about the Ishtar or more about Sentry Drones. The data makes a pretty convincing case that it really is mostly the Ishtar. While several other ships (Dominix, Navy Vexor, Archon, etc.) are making use of sentries, none of them are anywhere near as sentry reliant as the Ishtar and none of them are coming close to the overall damage that Ishtars represent on TQ." - CCP RISE 2015-02-27
Hilti Enaka
Space Wolves ind.
Solyaris Chtonium
#214 - 2015-05-21 22:04:27 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Hilti Enaka wrote:
I've said this many times after seeing the game become more and more "balanced", nice way of saying nerf BTW.

When things are "unbalanced" they game is exciting and you have people trying to theory craft ways to counter the trends.

Many times over I've seen exciting gameplays get it's arsed ripped out because CCP decided to nerf rather than be proactive and think of ways to allow us gamers to counter act. Part of what made/makes eve so exciting is the freedom but the rules and the constant tiers of "this needs balancing" annoys me rotten. This is what made Eve so formidable as a MMORPG.

Please Fozzie, rather than nerf things and sugar coat it as balancing, think in the opposite direction to allow us to think strategically about being able to play out counter-attacks. The way it is at the moment you nerf one thing and another gameplay will emerge that you will nerf *cough* balance again.


It's been months and the statu quo is still that Ishtar are dominant. You'd think the playerbase would of found other counter by now beside faction battleships? Do you think people didn't look at the ship roster to find what was possible with the current setup? How long do we let something unbalanced to push people to try new things? How long before we consider the baalnce was actually FUBAR and need to be modified because the ideas just plainly don't work?


Give over you plank, I said for CCP to look proactively, that means looking and inventing new games play for us players to find!
Nano Sito
#215 - 2015-05-21 22:06:15 UTC
Well... if any of you guys had doubts about how untouchable the Ishtar is, this puts them to rest. It's Ishtar Online my friends... Winmatar all over again.
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
Wrecking Machine.
#216 - 2015-05-21 22:18:34 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey folks, thanks for the feedback so far.

For those of you who are worried that we won't touch any specific ships because we're making these changes, I'll point you again to the second paragraph of the OP. We are not ruling out any changes to specific ships as we go forward. We made changes specifically to the Ishtar in Scylla, and we plan on continuing to make changes bit by bit to continually improve the game's balance.


What other ship beside the Ishtar and the Dominixe are problematic with sentries to make the entire weapon system deserving of a nerf and not only those 2 hulls?


carrier blob?
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#217 - 2015-05-21 22:23:07 UTC
Airi Cho wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey folks, thanks for the feedback so far.

For those of you who are worried that we won't touch any specific ships because we're making these changes, I'll point you again to the second paragraph of the OP. We are not ruling out any changes to specific ships as we go forward. We made changes specifically to the Ishtar in Scylla, and we plan on continuing to make changes bit by bit to continually improve the game's balance.


What other ship beside the Ishtar and the Dominixe are problematic with sentries to make the entire weapon system deserving of a nerf and not only those 2 hulls?


carrier blob?


Good catch but on the other hand, I'm waiting to see what will happen to all caps after Fozziesov. They are supposed to be re-purposed.
Nano Sito
#218 - 2015-05-21 22:26:40 UTC
Airi Cho wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey folks, thanks for the feedback so far.

For those of you who are worried that we won't touch any specific ships because we're making these changes, I'll point you again to the second paragraph of the OP. We are not ruling out any changes to specific ships as we go forward. We made changes specifically to the Ishtar in Scylla, and we plan on continuing to make changes bit by bit to continually improve the game's balance.


What other ship beside the Ishtar and the Dominixe are problematic with sentries to make the entire weapon system deserving of a nerf and not only those 2 hulls?


carrier blob?


Caps will be re-balanced soon anyway. This nerf to sentries is just to postpone the rebalance of the Ishtar one more time (since they last effort fell short and they know it).
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#219 - 2015-05-21 22:27:49 UTC
The part that surprises me is that you guys seem to think that the tracking or range slash application is the problem.

Instead of, you know, the fact that Sentries allow a cruiser to fit batteship equivalent weaponry.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Hilti Enaka
Space Wolves ind.
Solyaris Chtonium
#220 - 2015-05-21 22:33:37 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
The part that surprises me is that you guys seem to think that the tracking or range slash application is the problem.

Instead of, you know, the fact that Sentries allow a cruiser to fit batteship equivalent weaponry.


Costs about the same though doesn't t?