These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[June] Fighter Damage Reduction

First post First post First post
Author
Xerxes Fehrnah
The Fallout Shelter
#681 - 2017-06-09 17:59:37 UTC
This is a bold and dramatic decision. Looking at the game mechanics, perhaps other options exist and more careful deliberation with a player focus group should be held before you finalize this decision.
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#682 - 2017-06-09 17:59:42 UTC
singthegrief wrote:
So here is a idea how about all that are in the AT just use rookie ships this year. if i can get people to agree i will have my guys do the same. enough is enough #fuCCP


LOL if you think nobody will sell out to get the shiny prizes.
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#683 - 2017-06-09 17:59:51 UTC
CCP Larrikin, you forgot about Citadels, didn't you.

You just nerfed their defences, too.
Fl4chz4ng3
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#684 - 2017-06-09 17:59:53 UTC
http://imgur.com/akb596b

Just waiting for tuesday pm to do that !!

-9 accounts in total

Have fun guys

Thanks for the fish
C0ATL
Renegade Stars
Stellae Renascitur
#685 - 2017-06-09 18:00:05 UTC
Like somebody else said before: the recent ********-level changes that CCP has made in the last year is the reason why I find myself spending less and less time in EvE.

Ever since the carrier/supercarrier chances, these ships have seen nothing but nerfs and in HUGE numbers. I remember when everybody was complaining about Ishtar fleets just roaming around with sentry drones, melting any other type of fleet composition...and only after a tremendous amount of time, CCP decided to nerf Ishtar sentry dmg by 5%. FIVE!

Nobody is complaining about carriers. You already stripped down capital survivability by a huge amount. Now you are taking away their damage and usefulness altogether. Support fighters are and always were a joke and normal fighters became a joke once everybody realized that a t2 frig can literally counter an entire 3bil isk ship. Now you are nerfing them again...by 20 % .


I've kept my cool when CCP nerfed carrier dmg by 40% and tracking by 60% in one big patch...
I've remained civil in expressing what could only be disgust towards CCP when they decided to increase the sig radius of fighters by 100% and make NPCs aggro them continuously, completely ignoring the pages and pages of posts from ppl telling them they are in the wrong.
No more.

The people deciding to implement this nerf are complete CRETINS. No sane person can take a look at a carrier in its current state and say "yeah...its too strong". Not with its vulnerability to E-war... Its inability to withstand damage compared to other capitals... Or the vulnerability of fighters vs anything smaller than a BS.

A carrier pilot will make good ticks because he invested 3-4 bil in his ship and sinked a lot of his time in skills. Instead of being rewarded for their patience and dedication to the game (might i remind you that just from lvl4 to lvl5 carrier, it takes ~55 ******* days) they are repeatedly slapped in the face with nerfs to ships that nobody has complained about ... implemented by people who have not even spent time playing the game.

In the meantime, nobody cares about the AFK ratting VNI, Ishtars and Rattlesnakes... multi-boxing faction BSs just destroying Havens in minutes with smartbombs... or the fact that a character in highsec can generate more isk/hour doing incursions with no risk to his ship.

I understand that in the eyes of lazy devs, its much easier to draw a line at 20% nerf to a certain ship, rather than creating and implementing a new and good tactic for balancing the game (such as some of the suggestions in previous posts), but EvE has slowly turned from a wonder of gaming, who's devs were in sync with the players...to a steaming pile of ****. All of this because you are lazy, because you dont care about your players. Sooner or later all of these insults to your own players will circle back.

The day that nerf is implemented, I stop investing my time and money in this game. If I was dissatisfied before with the way CCP has been handling its crown jewel, I can say that on a personal level, this is the straw that broke the camel's back. Until such a time that EvE gets back on track with a new set of minds or logic when deciding how to balance the game, I take my leave.

o7 Respectful salute for the people who made the game great in its day -- and ..|.. (^_^) ..|.. for those that are ruining it.

Admiral Sarah Solette
Lmao Ty For Structure
#686 - 2017-06-09 18:00:17 UTC
210x the isk investment of a VNI to make about 4x the isk they make while also not being able to multibox and afk it, 10x the isk investment to make about 25% more isk than a carrier ratting, and you still apply shittily to AB armor cruisers down.

lol get ****** CCP. ITT garbage company doesn't understand balance.
Brigadine Ferathine
Presumed Dead Enterprises
Against ALL Authorities.
#687 - 2017-06-09 18:01:10 UTC
Unbelievable. Summer of rage 2 coming right up CCP. Every single patch has been a nerf on carriers. Why not just reduce bounties in general.... nerfing the crap out of a group of some ships is apparently more sensible... NOT
singthegrief
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#688 - 2017-06-09 18:01:24 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
singthegrief wrote:
So here is a idea how about all that are in the AT just use rookie ships this year. if i can get people to agree i will have my guys do the same. enough is enough #fuCCP


LOL if you think nobody will sell out to get the shiny prizes.




i know worth a try
Dazzak
New Order Outreach Division
CODE.
#689 - 2017-06-09 18:01:27 UTC
CCP Larrikin wrote:
[img]http://web.ccpgamescdn.com/newssystem/media/71813/1/GermanFlag33.png[/img]  [img]http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/devblog/FLAG_-_RUSSIAN-33.png[/img]

Hi Space Friends,
Coming with our release on Tuesday, we’re significantly reducing the damage output of Fighters.

Why:
We are making this change because Carriers & Supercarriers are too strong in PvE, specifically anomaly ratting in Nullsec. As you may have seen in the May Monthly Economy Report, there is a significant upward trend in the Money Supply. This is primarily due to NPC Bounties.

This trend is unsustainable. Having such a large ISK faucet is bad for the economy, and this ISK faucet is concentrated to a relatively small number of players.

We also think that Carriers and Supercarriers are a bit too effective in PvP now. This change will significantly change the PvP balance, but we’re confident that Carriers and Supercarriers will remain powerful options for PvP.

What:
  • Light Fighters (Space Superiority): No Change
  • Light Fighters (Attack): 20% reduction to Basic Attack and Heavy Rocket Salvo damage.
  • Support Fighters: No Change
  • Heavy Fighters (Heavy Attack): 10% reduction to Basic Attack and Torpedo Salvo damage.
  • Heavy Fighters (Long Range Attack): 30% reduction to Basic Attack damage.
  • Heavy Fighters (Shadow): No Change
  • NPCs are 15% more likely to shoot at fighters than they are currently.


We will continue to observe the economy after these changes and will make adjustments as necessary to keep it healthy for all our players.


So yet again CCP is changing pushing people back to AFK ratting in VNI or ISHTAR, The carrier changes we to get players more involved with playing the game and carrier ratting is what I consider the most player intense thing to do you have to be active all the time

This changes will not help the player base but continue to push old players onto other games

Risk V Reward you should have benefit from using carriers and supers
Jen Makanen
Roving Guns Inc.
Pandemic Legion
#690 - 2017-06-09 18:02:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Jen Makanen
First off, I'm going to say this: I've never been one for carrier ratting. I just don't enjoy the idea of ratting and fielding that much isk for an activity I can do easier for far less work.

From a PvP stand point though, Carriers have been in a dire state for a while now and this will further knock them down. I can't comment on the supercarrier side of this change, but I will say it's probably quite over the top.

As many people have said here, EVE is in the middle of probably the largest cold war since its release (at least for me it feels this way), entities are scrounging for as many resources as they possibly can, so that when the next great war kicks off we can all jump in our ships and give the boot to whoever needs it the most without worrying so much about our wallets.

I do a lot of theorycrafting, as I'm sure many other posters here do. I also do a lot of testing, both on TQ and on SISI/TD when the time allows it. I can catergorically tell you that carriers are already weak. As a carrier pilot, you spend ridiculous amounts of time training into this fabled ship, only to see it go through so many balance passes from being an effective cap killer and logistics platform that required skill and finese into an effective subcap killer where we saw them being used solo for some interesting content to whatever the hell they are now.

I agree a carrier shouldn't be able to solo a competent gang. I agree there must be counterplay so I could somewhat forgive the initial nerf carriers faced after the changes and the introduction of the NSA to both the baby carrier and the supercarrier. BUT, going from being able to effectively fight off small gangs of ships with a lone carrier to being locked down by a single griffin? You can't be serious. Not only can my fighters not track said griffin, but now they can't even lock him so who cares.

I can't see any scenario where it isn't better to drop 5 HAW dreads on a gang than to drop 5 carriers on the same gang. FAX are supposed to be DPS support ships. Why would anyone commit a carrier in a capital fight when they can't hit the broadside of a barn without bucket loads of tracking? Plus, a dread will always be better than a carrier in a capital fight. Oh, and not forgetting the fact a dread also has a fleet hanger and SMA, so the ONE thing carriers had sacred isn't even there to persuade people who just want a suitcase, when you can get a dread far quicker for that purpose.

Oh and while I'm on about support; if I wanted to be a giant capital bhaalgorn, I'd fly an ACTUAL bhaalgorn. Even with these changes coming to pirate faction ships, a few bhaalgorns will still probably be cheaper than a carrier and equally if not more effective?

Now; from a PvE perspective, heres my two cents:

- Nerf the ratting bounties?
- Make anoms respawn slower, forcing people to move systems, hence making ratting more risky and active.
- Incursions? Think about those, just saying.
- Oh, and improve NPC AI and increase rat EHP?

And quite frankly, if someone has spent the best part of half a year training to sit in this ship and wants to use it for ratting, they should make more than Mr Alpha in a free account VNI. You're forgetting the sheer amount of effort that goes into training and piloting a carrier -- even just for ratting, god forbid those people be rewarded for their invest to the game, cmon guys.

TLDR: Are you sure CCP? Might wanna review the PvP side of EVE.
Ping PangWang
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#691 - 2017-06-09 18:02:54 UTC
here i thought the credo of eve was HTFU.............
yogizh
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#692 - 2017-06-09 18:02:54 UTC
C0ATL wrote:
... or the fact that a character in highsec can generate more isk/hour doing incursions with no risk to his ship.




:same:
Brigadine Ferathine
Presumed Dead Enterprises
Against ALL Authorities.
#693 - 2017-06-09 18:05:09 UTC
Jen Makanen wrote:
First off, I'm going to say this: I've never been one for carrier ratting. I just don't enjoy the idea of ratting and fielding that much isk for an activity I can do easier for far less work.

From a PvP stand point though, Carriers have been in a dire state for a while now and this will further knock them down. I can't comment on the supercarrier side of this change, but I will say it's probably quite over the top.

As many people have said here, EVE is in the middle of probably the largest cold war since its release (at least for me it feels this way), entities are scrounging for as many resources as they possibly can, so that when the next great war kicks off we can all jump in our ships and give the boot to whoever needs it the most without worrying so much about our wallets.

I do a lot of theorycrafting, as I'm sure many other posters here do. I also do a lot of testing, both on TQ and on SISI/TD when the time allows it. I can catergorically tell you that carriers are already weak. As a carrier pilot, you spend ridiculous amounts of time training into this fabled ship, only to see if go through so many balance passes from being an effective cap killer and logistics platform that required skill and finese into an effective subcap killer where we saw them being used solo for some interesting content to whatever the hell they are now.

I agree a carrier shouldn't be able to solo a competent gang. I agree there must be counterplay so I could somewhat forgive the initial nerf carriers faced after the changes and the introduction of the NSA to both the baby carrier and the supercarrier. BUT, going from being able to effectively fight off small gangs of ships with a lone carrier to being locked down by a single griffin? You can't be serious. Not only can my fighters not track said griffin, but now they can't even lock him so who cares.

I can't see any scenario where it isn't better to drop 5 HAW dreads on a gang than to drop 5 carriers on the same gang. FAX are supposed to be DPS support ships. Why would anyone commit a carrier in a capital fight when they can't hit the broadside of a barn without bucket loads of tracking? Plus, a dread will always be better than a carrier in a capital fight. Oh, and not forgetting the fact a dread also has a fleet hanger and SMA, so the ONE thing carriers had sacred isn't even there to persuade people who just want a suitcase, when you can get a dread far quicker for that purpose.

Oh and while I'm on about support; if I wanted to be a giant capital bhaalgorn, I'd fly an ACTUAL bhaalgorn. Even with these changes coming to pirate faction ships, a few bhaalgorns will still probably be cheaper than a carrier and equally if not more effective?

Now; from a PvE perspective, heres my two cents:

- Nerf the ratting bounties?
- Make anoms respawn slower, forcing people to move systems, hence making ratting more risky and active.
- Incursions? Think about those, just saying.
- Oh, and improve NPC AI and increase rat EHP?

And quite frankly, if someone has spent the best part of half a year training to sit in this ship and wants to use it for ratting, they should make more than Mr Alpha in a free account VNI. You're forgetting the sheer amount of effort than goes into training and piloting carrier -- even just for ratting, god forbid those people be rewarded for their invest to the game, cmon guys.

TLDR: Are you sure CCP? Might wanna review the PvP side of EVE.

A freaking men
Fethyst
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#694 - 2017-06-09 18:05:23 UTC
As a few others have said, changing the sites/anoms would make more sense in terms of fixing the issue.

I am not in favor of adding gates to prevent carriers/supers from Haven's or Sanctums but either

A) adding higher level sites in 0.0 for capitals to run
B) something that I didn't see mentioned, scale the difficulty up in the upper tier sites (Havens/Sanctums).
option B would maybe solve the issue of tons of AFK VNI/Ishtars running Havens. they would be forced to do lower level sites which would have less income and would make the capitals take longer to finish the sites. Both of which would slow down the inflow of ISK without effecting the overall abilities of the carries for PvP, etc.

these seem like better solutions that more accurately address the problem presented (too much isk generation) and also add more challenging game play

C09
#695 - 2017-06-09 18:05:42 UTC
Making some new anomalies for capital ships is too difficult for CCP?
Proud White Prince
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#696 - 2017-06-09 18:09:55 UTC
Oh boy they had to do it.
Not as bad as the whole Incarna update with all those **** ups and bad decisions. But hey! you're getting there!
Even CCP needs tears sometimes and this is how they do it.

But why nerf the fighters? You affect both PVP and PVE capability of the ship. You could have just done some better research or come up with a better solution if you're main problem is ISK making. And I can't possibly imagine that the CSM I voted for agreed with these drastic changes.

I just don't get it, could be me being a dumb ass or you are not explaining enough details why you made these changes the first place. So many questions and frustration.
Cassius Blade
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#697 - 2017-06-09 18:10:52 UTC
I'm unsubbing. That's my response to this bullshit.
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#698 - 2017-06-09 18:11:01 UTC
C09 wrote:
Making some new anomalies for capital ships is too difficult for CCP?


Either the anomaly will let carriers/supers generate more ISK/hours because of the rats included or the carrier/supers will just continue running the current ones.
Vetus Metallicus
Blue Angels Inc.
#699 - 2017-06-09 18:11:13 UTC
C09 wrote:
Making some new anomalies for capital ships is too difficult for CCP?


I mean they couldn't even implement the blood raider engineering complexes properly. It was taken down by frigates...
Brimestone Darkwing
THE GOLDEN KNIGHTS
Brave Collective
#700 - 2017-06-09 18:11:17 UTC
So I'm guessing these Devs never post or respond to these ever? Seriously CCP you should really read the msgs here loads of good ideas maybe it's time to actually listen to the customer base hmm? o7 CCP o7 R.I.P Eve by the sounds of things