These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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] Balance Tweaks: Fighters, Supercarriers & Burst Projectors

First post First post First post
Author
xOmGx
Deep Space Conquerors
Goonswarm Federation
#361 - 2017-03-14 19:34:18 UTC  |  Edited by: xOmGx
worst part that we (capital users) have spend well over a year of focused training to be able to use / fly these ships and have invested some considerable amount of time and resources in ships

and now they all become trash

Worst of all are SuperCarriers they are now useless junk

Supers are bad in general - No more Immune to EWAR, easy can be pointed by small roam of small ships and cant defend themselves

CCP MUST to refurbish money that are spend on subscription and or return all SP that is now locked in useless skills + return all ISK that is locked in useless ships

They are responsible for faulty product what we have now on the server is NOT what people have trained for
Will Swiftsure
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#362 - 2017-03-14 19:37:05 UTC
From the bright side, this might be a good change for industry people who build and sell fighters? Smile
xOmGx
Deep Space Conquerors
Goonswarm Federation
#363 - 2017-03-14 19:39:49 UTC
Will Swiftsure wrote:
From the bright side, this might be a good change for industry people who build and sell fighters? Smile


you talk like there were no fighter loss at all....
Cade Windstalker
#364 - 2017-03-14 20:21:12 UTC
Seems like a lot of people in this thread might be helped out by this video on how not to lose Fighters with the new changes.
Cpt Kupo
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#365 - 2017-03-14 20:41:38 UTC
CCP Why do fighters stop moving after killing a target? Are fighter pilots that dumb?
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#366 - 2017-03-14 20:57:10 UTC
Will Swiftsure wrote:
From the bright side, this might be a good change for industry people who build and sell fighters? Smile


Nobody would lose fighters because nobody would use carriers. I mean, you go to a haven, you lose 2, congrats, it's worth 26mil and you just lost 26 mil worth of fighters doing it. In ISK/hour terms you've been beaten by alpha clone ratting in a venture in 1.0 hisec anom.

Everyone sells their carriers and their fighters, including extra fighters they had to recover from losses. Industry people suffer because supply lifts demand and cracks it's spine.
Nisse
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#367 - 2017-03-14 21:48:06 UTC
Hopefully this will come across as measured feedback, I realise there's a fair bit of emotion in this thread!

I'm flying a Nidhoggur, T1 Templars, running Drone Hordes in a -1.0 system.

Pre-patch, if I didn't keep the fighters busy fighting, I would lose some, as they would sit there and take fire. I'm fine with that, it avoids AFK playstyles.

Post-patch, having run 4 hordes, I lose a fighter every single horde, even if I watch them like a hawk to move them between groups.

I therefore come to one of three conclusions:

1) Carrier ratting was viewed as too profitable, so the attrition of fighters is meant to lower that. I don't believe this is the case.

2) The aim is to change the meta to require Drone Durability rigs on carriers (I've not yet refitted the ship but may well try this). For most people this will result in a reduction in agility of carriers as most PvE setups run Low Friction Nozzles and Hyperspatials.

3) This is unintended behaviour brought about by the combination of a sig radius increase and AI aggression increase happening at the same time.

I believe (3) is reality in this situation, and if that's the case, I would suggest that fighter hitpoints need increasing. This would:
- Keep them at risk of having greater applied damage from NPC's, presumably the aim of increasing their sig radius
- Allow them to survive the additional sig and aggression related damage as per pre-patch
- Whilst ensuring that AFK playstyles are discouraged through fighters having more, but not an abundance of, hitpoints


Hope that all makes sense :).
Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp
Goonswarm Federation
#368 - 2017-03-14 22:07:26 UTC
Nisse wrote:
...............Hope that all makes sense :).


Perfectly.

The only thing you got wrong was your conclusion.

'1' is the absolutely correct answer - the last Economic Report showed the evidence.

Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium

Gadzooki
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#369 - 2017-03-14 22:16:38 UTC
I hate to agree with a goon but here we are (grrr).
This patch has nothing to do with 'balance', its meant to marginalize carrier ratting in an attempt to capitalize on more R/L currency in the form of subscriptions.

Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#370 - 2017-03-14 22:36:06 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Primary This Rifter wrote:
CCP: "We want your feedback on this."
Literally everyone: "This sucks. Don't do it."
CCP: "How bout I do anyway."

Nice to see this pattern hasn't changed in my extended absence.


What if the feedback people are giving is just confirming the result is what they actually intended with the change? Like if the change was targeted at making carrier ratter rethink what they do in game and making fighter easier to kill. Would they actually be listening to feedback and not have to change anything in their proposal?

I'm pretty sure they never ask for feedback in the form of we want/don't want this. It's more "CCP X will happen if you do Y" and right now, it seems X is what is intended.

No.
AmarrianJustice
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#371 - 2017-03-14 22:37:35 UTC
Moving us ever closer to pay for play only by souring the game gradually until it's completely unpalatable. I don't know why any of you are surprised by these changes. CCP is in it for the money. If any of you think they want only for your enjoyment of the game then you're naive.
Xantia Naari
Outlaws Of New Eden.
#372 - 2017-03-14 23:06:25 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Xantia Naari wrote:
For the majority among those who PLEX their account, the only thing less likely to happen, when the carpet is removed under their feet, than quitting eve, is subscribing.


So according to you, the majority will turn to other income sources or continue carrier ratting since there is only 1 option less likely than quitting so all others must be more likely.



That is exactly what I'm saying. I think incursions will have an increase for example

There are two kinds of children that play in sandboxes. Those who build castles and those who kick them down. It's a symbiosis.

ISD Chanisa Nemes
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#373 - 2017-03-15 04:47:15 UTC
Deleted some off-topic posts

[img]http://i.giphy.com/XwnOjVqPIlXGM.gif[/img]

ISD Chanisa Nemes

Lieutenant

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

Zenra Va'Kur
Militaris Industries
Northern Coalition.
#374 - 2017-03-15 08:32:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Zenra Va'Kur
AmarrianJustice wrote:
Moving us ever closer to pay for play only by souring the game gradually until it's completely unpalatable. I don't know why any of you are surprised by these changes. CCP is in it for the money. If any of you think they want only for your enjoyment of the game then you're naive.



The reason changes like this irk players like myself so much is mainly due to the fact this game takes a large amount of time and investment, both mentally and financially. Lots of players pay for multiple subscriptions, or have spent on many occasions money on things like plex. I'd be willing to wager lots of people have put more money into this game then any other game they've played. I know I've put over $1000 dollars into this game in less then 2 years. That's more money then I've spent on all of the MMO's I've played in my lifetime combined. With a financial investment like that, to see a company flat out ignore player feedback when they ask for it and implement a change that is so clearly meant to do nothing but lesson the use of the ship, to induce more plex or subscription sales feels like a massive slap in the face.

The biggest issue with this change and the carrier changes in general are the amount of hotkeys I have to press and how often. I don't know who over at the company thought having me hold my arm over a keyboard and press a key every 2 to 3 seconds for an hour or 2 was a good idea needs to look at a medical book on the cause and issue revolving carpal tunnel syndrome. I'm more inclined to multi box ishtars or VNi's considering, it's now less risky in game, and doesn't actively force me into play styles that are a detriment to my long term health.

The fact I'm even considering multi-boxing instead of using the carrier to rat in, a ship I literally a month ago trained into shows just how bad they've screwed the carriers up. They've turned the ship into a giant hauler for anyone who doesn't want to tap their keyboard every 3 seconds for hours on end.
Alexey Rumyancev
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#375 - 2017-03-15 08:50:04 UTC
Jeesh, thanks devs
gotta go sell muh carrier and all
Limur Deninard
Wormhole Outlaw
Outlaws.
#376 - 2017-03-15 09:53:56 UTC
I've stopped playing on my carrier pilot after lose Templar T2 from squad per one shot by 6 batteleships while fighters were tackled on Haven. T2 fighter price around 13 mil, Haven drops around 30 mil. No more matter to ratting with carrier and also no reason to get PvP because even T2 fighters don't have enough resits and DPS to save them in fight.
clipper shore
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#377 - 2017-03-15 13:31:27 UTC
so ccp here's the result of your changes

log into coms since the changes coms empty

before changes 10-15 people in coms

thanks ccp for killing the game
It Maybeatrap
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#378 - 2017-03-15 14:44:42 UTC
Hi, just chiming in that I dislike the new fighter changes.


From a super perspective - having to babysit fighters is annoying.
Flying a 30bil ship just so I can spend 300% more effort and attention to get the same isk/hour as a few afking VNIs isn't rational.

You *can* avoid losing fighters but why should you? Sell it off, inject a few VNIs and afk rat for a fraction of the effort.

PS I've seen about 10x the amount of supers selling in alliance chat in last 24 hours than I've seen in a couple months, guess it's back to being risk averse drop boat...

From a carrier POV I don't even know why you'd fly one now, rattlesnake will give you roughly same isk/hour for half the effort
Emma Ai
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#379 - 2017-03-15 15:26:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Emma Ai
I dont understand what CCP wont... carriers wasnt super ship ... Pilot need spend a lot time for studing skills. For what ? Its easer to create 2 pilots with Gila/Ishtar and have same isks with ship 5-10 times chiper and 1-2 month pilot and almost AFK .... Why do i need a carrier now ? A heard about 5 mather for sale last 24h, and a lot carriers..... Do CCP want to teach pilots mining ?
xOmGx
Deep Space Conquerors
Goonswarm Federation
#380 - 2017-03-15 16:09:46 UTC
Emma Ai wrote:
]Do CCP want to teach pilots mining ? [/b]


No they hate mining as well - they nerfed Rorq badly

They want us to buy PLEX and sell it for isk

I am sure CCP buy PLEXes back for ISK undercover



I wanted to have a Supercarrier for a very very long time... now lol i do now want it anymore

CCP make everything to make people stop learning capitals


If CCP wont fix it i will demand that all capital related skills on one of my alts are converted in to free SP
CCP is responsible for for changes that put over a year learning in to the trash and i want compensation