These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[March] Damage Control Tiericide

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#41 - 2016-02-11 20:54:25 UTC
Does this change the balance or strength between the Reactive hardener and the damage control?
Elizabeth Norn
Nornir Research
Nornir Empire
#42 - 2016-02-11 20:56:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Elizabeth Norn
CCP Fozzie wrote:

adding a base 33% hull resistance to ships by default.


Will polarized weapons negate this?

Free 3rd party services

Buddy link w/ bonus 250k SP, you keep the whole PLEX upon subscribing
Hendrink Collie
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#43 - 2016-02-11 20:59:53 UTC
Elizabeth Norn wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:

adding a base 33% hull resistance to ships by default.


Will polarized weapons will negate this?


It strips out all other built in resist, so I'd assume so, yeah. Smile
eiedu
Wildly Inappropriate
Wildly Inappropriate.
#44 - 2016-02-11 21:01:11 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:

The impact is Freighters, but we like to pair buff and nerfs to suicide ganking to keep things in balance, and after the February Wreck HP change these ships can handle a bit more tank without the "predator and prey" environment being thrown out of whack.


I would just like to point out that the correlation between wreck HP and freighter HP is coincidental. Wrecks having more HP does not make it easier to gank freighters. Whereas freighters having more hp actually makes it harder to gank. All you're really doing is throwing the "predator and prey" environment out of whack.

So how about you buy us dinner first?
Adam Lyon
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#45 - 2016-02-11 21:02:35 UTC
I'd like to see the new IFFAs at the same CPU requirements for the current ones. There are a lot of fits that use IFFAs for fitting rather than vanity over the M3 version and at the end of the day 3 cpu can kill certain niche fits.
Mark Marketson
Tribal Science Institute
#46 - 2016-02-11 21:03:11 UTC
Querns wrote:
Mai Khumm wrote:
Hendrink Collie wrote:
Mai Khumm wrote:
Berry Nice wrote:
So let me get this straight:

Wreck shooting in highsec (mostly of freighers) was a very cheap, (less than 2 mil isk per thrasher) nearly impossible to counter method of destroying tens to hundreds of billions of loot. Fixing this to at least require more than 2 million (doable with 70 million now) was absolutely the right call.


But now freighters are (on top of previous EHP buffs over the years, and the addition of bulkheads) gained another 12-30% EHP no matter how they are fit.

Are you saying you fixing a broken mechanic (which only appeared in the last 3 months anyway) caused you to want to increase the EHP of freighters?

edit: let me say this

A fully bulkheaded anshar in a 0.5 would require just shy of 30 taloses to be ganked in a perfect situation. Not only is that 4-5 billion in ships, but you need 30 people, on standby, ready to do it.

Good...


Yeah, I'm not seeing the issue here.

You Should need 4-5 Billion to pop a ship in Highsec that's worth 8-9 Billion.

Risk vs. Reward

Freighters are only worth 1.something billion. JFs are less than 7.


yep, and how many T1 catalyst you need to pop a freighter in .5 system? About 300 M ISK worth?
Anthar Thebess
#47 - 2016-02-11 21:05:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Anthar Thebess
This is bit extreme change for all type of ships, people will abuse it.
Armagedons, moros , revelation - and all similar ships will be bulkhead tanked by default.
This will limit small guys ganking, as you will need big group of gankers - so this kind of ganks will be limited for sure.
People will stop hauling 1 bil in bulkhead freighters, because it is safe they will pack more.

Super, do they deserve so huge buff?

You want to change freighter ganking?
Give them bonus to resistances connected to race.
This way there will be no more 1 gank ship for all ganks.

Do it only for freighter not to all ships.

WHY THERE IS NO SANSHA DAMAGE CONTROL
(not true sansha)

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
Light Combat Drone
Bearded BattleBears
#48 - 2016-02-11 21:06:19 UTC
Berry Nice wrote:
A fully bulkheaded anshar in a 0.5 would require just shy of 30 taloses to be ganked in a perfect situation. Not only is that 4-5 billion in ships, but you need 30 people, on standby, ready to do it.

Nice fake, exagerated math there!

With a 33% increase to hull would mean a fully-bulkheaded, all Vs Anshar which costs 7.5B isk and sacrificed cargo for EHP and can only carry 121k m3 of it, would require 17 pilots in Taloses (costing 2.4B isk) to kill it in 0.5 if they set up the gank right and prime Concord.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#49 - 2016-02-11 21:07:50 UTC
Mark Marketson wrote:

yep, and how many T1 catalyst you need to pop a freighter in .5 system? About 300 M ISK worth?

A lot less than you'd need to pop the same freighter that actually fit for running through the known highsec chokepoints in the game. If you're unwilling to use the tools the game provides you to safeguard yourself, CCP shouldn't have to hold your hand.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#50 - 2016-02-11 21:09:41 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
The impact is Freighters, but we like to pair buff and nerfs to suicide ganking to keep things in balance,

I'm not sure freighters need to be any safer, but at least I am glad you are now on record saying that you "like to pair buff and nerfs to suicide ganking". History has shown that has not been your development stance in the past, but I will now know not to worry too much if another nerf to suicide ganking is announced as a buff will be right around the corner.


I'm sure that they are aware how skewed things are towards gankers. While not the ultimate solution, this change at least shows that the guys in development are aware of the need to balance the field somewhat, so I'm looking forward to future changes of looting (and maybe even bumping) mechanics.
Also, very interesting change overall.
flesh tearer
Horde Armada
Pandemic Horde
#51 - 2016-02-11 21:18:34 UTC
can will now get bonuses on logi ships for using hull reppers ShockedShockedShocked
Jin Kugu
Make Luv Not War
Goonswarm Federation
#52 - 2016-02-11 21:18:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Jin Kugu
This is such a bad and unimaginative change.

Freighters are in a fine place. Don't believe me? Go look at Jita, Uedama or Niarja. People use freighters a lot even though there are plenty alternatives that are almost unkillable. DSTs, blockade runners, JFs are all almost immune in high sec if properly flown.

I guess ccp dumped the whole analysis thing when it comes to ganking nerfs? How many freighters die to a gank per 1000 freighter jumps? How many freighter die to wardecks compared to ganking?
Makoto Priano
Kirkinen-Arataka Transhuman Zenith Consulting Ltd.
Arataka Research Consortium
#53 - 2016-02-11 21:19:51 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Makoto Priano wrote:
5pitf1re wrote:
"Syndicate Signal Damage Control"?


Seconded.

Syndicate Signal? Any relation to this?


Copy/paste error.


Well, bugger.

Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries: exploring the edge of the known, advancing the state of the art. Would you like to know more?
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#54 - 2016-02-11 21:24:34 UTC  |  Edited by: X Gallentius
flesh tearer wrote:
can will now get bonuses on logi ships for using hull reppers ShockedShockedShocked

Exeqs should get hull repping bonuses as well.
Light Combat Drone
Bearded BattleBears
#55 - 2016-02-11 21:25:58 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Here's the most recent iteration of the numbers:

How about varying the proportion of resist between shield/armor/hull it gives between different models? As it stands everyone will be using T2 always or the highest meta they can afford. If you varied these %s slightly, there would be compelling reasons to use specific versions of the module on specific ships.

Ex. a 15/7.5/30 model vs a 10/7.5/40
Jin Kugu
Make Luv Not War
Goonswarm Federation
#56 - 2016-02-11 21:28:01 UTC
How many expanded freighters die compared to bulkheaded ones? 1/20 would be my guess


Maybe that's a hint that freighter pilots are making decisions that lead to their death? It also proves that ehp is not really the issue.
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#57 - 2016-02-11 21:30:10 UTC
Berry Nice wrote:
......

edit: let me say this

A fully bulkheaded anshar in a 0.5 would require just shy of 30 taloses to be ganked in a perfect situation. Not only is that 4-5 billion in ships, but you need 30 people, on standby, ready to do it.

Then don't do it. Eve is a big game. There are plenty of other things to do.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
Black Pedro
Mine.
#58 - 2016-02-11 21:30:11 UTC
Rhamnousia Nosferatu wrote:
Black Pedro wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
The impact is Freighters, but we like to pair buff and nerfs to suicide ganking to keep things in balance,

I'm not sure freighters need to be any safer, but at least I am glad you are now on record saying that you "like to pair buff and nerfs to suicide ganking". History has shown that has not been your development stance in the past, but I will now know not to worry too much if another nerf to suicide ganking is announced as a buff will be right around the corner.


I'm sure that they are aware how skewed things are towards gankers. While not the ultimate solution, this change at least shows that the guys in development are aware of the need to balance the field somewhat, so I'm looking forward to future changes of looting (and maybe even bumping) mechanics.
Also, very interesting change overall.
It is an interesting change - it will shake up ship balance everywhere which is always a good thing.

But didn't you read what the man wrote? They like to pair buffs and nerfs when it comes to suicide ganking. And changes to looting or bumping that nerf the activity of suicide ganking will come with corresponding buffs for the gankers. Conversly, this change is being made to balance out the benefits of easier looting that gankers are currently enjoying courtesy of CCP's last change.

Nothing stays the same - ships, modules, and mechanics can and do change. But suicide ganking isn't going away. Freighters are still going to regularly explode after this change and will after any hypothetical changes to looting or bumping.

I see no evidence that CCP thinks things are "skewed" in any way - more like things are working pretty much as intended as Fozzie said above. If they do, they certainly keeping secret about it and moving at a glacial pace. I think that may just be a case of wishful thinking on your part.

The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Globby
Never Ignorant Gettin' Goals Accomplished
Gimme Da Loot
#59 - 2016-02-11 21:34:35 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
It's happening!
but we like to pair buff and nerfs to suicide ganking to keep things in balance


where was the ganking buff post hyperdunking?
Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#60 - 2016-02-11 21:39:49 UTC
Lovely discussion of the topic by guys that went HTFU just a few threads before (hing: Bumping and looting mechanics proposals + wreck changes). Love you guys.