These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: EVE updating - Winter expansion 2011

First post First post
Author
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University
Ivy League
#481 - 2011-10-25 18:46:37 UTC
So in the latest analysis off the test server - destroyers are getting a boost (looks like about 20% more damage and a good bit more EHP), tier 3 battlecruisers with battleship level DPS, hybrid boost.

How about a bone for the fragile T1 and T2 industrial ships and the T1 barges and T2 exhumers so that they're not made of paper?
Tiger's Spirit
Templars of the Shadows
#482 - 2011-10-26 04:47:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Tiger's Spirit
Changes: http://pastebin.com/TkY3rY6q

Hybrid boost = megauberfail again from CCP

No optimal or falloff range plus just a little tracking, cap and fitting change ??? The main problem still will be there.

Railguns: fitting and cap and ridiculous damage changes.

Example:

425mm Railgun II damage changes 3.3x (old data) => 3.63x (new data)
Railguns still will be garbage.
Akturous
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#483 - 2011-10-26 05:18:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Akturous
Tiger you are a fool. Tracking and fitting is all they needed. Why is the vindicator awesome? Because it can hit it's targets. If you want range go another race, Gallente is about close range brawling. Damage buff for rails is balanced I think.

Frankly the changes are pretty damn good. I do think they haven't gone quite far enough with the tracking, it needs another 20% on the hybrids.

Vote Item Heck One for CSM8

Tiger's Spirit
Templars of the Shadows
#484 - 2011-10-26 05:25:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Tiger's Spirit
Akturous wrote:
Tiger you are a fool. Tracking and fitting is all they needed. Why is the vindicator awesome? Because it can hit it's targets. If you want range go another race, Gallente is about close range brawling. Damage buff for rails is balanced I think.

Frankly the changes are pretty damn good.


Fool ? Little morron.
Please never post anymore. I told the cap and tracking plus is bad ? No i never told, but the Blaster ships main problem is the short optimal+falloff ranges after speednerf (+web nerf), the fitting is just the secondary problem and CCP won't fix the main problem again.
Akturous
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#485 - 2011-10-26 05:51:20 UTC
Tiger's Spirit wrote:
Akturous wrote:
Tiger you are a fool. Tracking and fitting is all they needed. Why is the vindicator awesome? Because it can hit it's targets. If you want range go another race, Gallente is about close range brawling. Damage buff for rails is balanced I think.

Frankly the changes are pretty damn good.


Fool ? Little morron.
Please never post anymore. I told the cap and tracking plus is bad ? No i never told, but the Blaster ships main problem is the short optimal+falloff ranges after speednerf (+web nerf), the fitting is just the secondary problem and CCP won't fix the main problem again.



You don't get it do you, so let me spell it out: BLASTERS ARE SHORT RANGE, if you want long range go another race.

Vote Item Heck One for CSM8

Tiger's Spirit
Templars of the Shadows
#486 - 2011-10-26 06:40:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Tiger's Spirit
Akturous wrote:
Tiger's Spirit wrote:
Akturous wrote:
Tiger you are a fool. Tracking and fitting is all they needed. Why is the vindicator awesome? Because it can hit it's targets. If you want range go another race, Gallente is about close range brawling. Damage buff for rails is balanced I think.

Frankly the changes are pretty damn good.


Fool ? Little morron.
Please never post anymore. I told the cap and tracking plus is bad ? No i never told, but the Blaster ships main problem is the short optimal+falloff ranges after speednerf (+web nerf), the fitting is just the secondary problem and CCP won't fix the main problem again.



You don't get it do you, so let me spell it out: BLASTERS ARE SHORT RANGE, if you want long range go another race.


You need brain, I can fly with all race with t2 weapons and i can compare weapons after 8 years EVE gaming.
Maybe you are a docking warrior, who not need better fire range just tracking , but who using blaster know that, tracking not enough if he can't move to short range because blasters fire range is horrible and tracking not help to hit the far enemies. (far ? all right for blaster, over 10-15km is too far :D) Compare with laser 4.5km optimal vs 45km optimal. Oh dont forget, large blaster have falloff too with antimatter (13km). Wow
That's realy nice number maybe for you, but... Check those lasers which have 45 optimal, they have 10km falloff !!!!!
17.5km range with falloff penalty over 4.5km range vs 55km range with falloff penalty over 45km.
Just a noob does not see this and talkin blabla things like "BUT BLASTER IS SHORT RANGE WEAPON, LEARN ANOTHER SHIPS".


Astarte,Eos,Brutix and many gallente ships with these changes still will be garbage with their ridiculous shot range because they wont reach their targets too fast but but you believe it tracking will help you LOL, when enemies attacking you from 20-24km and +10 m/s ship speed changes wont help them.
Who using these ships ? Maybe just you and some pilots because those ship is very bad with their short firerange and still wont use anyone after patch. Before speednerf blaster ships was the top damage dealers in fleet. Now ? Just if they are in 2km when the battle begin. Tracking changed ? Nothing, just changed the ship speeds and web deaccelerate factors.
I don't care you are an akward and you cant use your blasterships and you need first +pg or CPU for guns when their primary problem is other thing.

I hope you will die fast and horribly from those ships which faster than you and can shot from farther range than you while you can't reach their 20km range because you too slow and while you will shot with your large guns to 9km with 50% penalty from falloff.
Akturous
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#487 - 2011-10-26 07:17:03 UTC
A Megathron with null has approx the same dps at 25k as a tempest with equivalent fittings and barrage. You argument is horse ****. Blasters will do great damage with the tracking increase, bring friends in fast tackle, bring a rapier, bring web range bonuses, use a faction web, learn to fly, because you clearly haven't in 8 years.

Vote Item Heck One for CSM8

Tiger's Spirit
Templars of the Shadows
#488 - 2011-10-26 07:27:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Tiger's Spirit
Akturous wrote:
A Megathron with null has approx the same dps at 25k as a tempest with equivalent fittings and barrage...


In you dream EFT warrior. You need to flying them and not using EFT. A tempest easily kill a mega over 20km if keep range even then when tempest have worse tank compare mega.
And other thing, blaster will be better if you bring more man ? LOL man what will be happen if you wont bring more man ?
Pathetic.
Abigail Sagan
Skeleton Liberation Front
#489 - 2011-10-26 07:29:59 UTC
I thought there was some increase in most if not all hybrid ship agilities and/or velocities. That is a much needed upgrade to blaster boats. The new values might not be enough though (especially for gallente frigates), but it is a change in the right direction - perhaps CCP will still fine tune the change (now the velocity change seemed to be a flat 10m/s for all the Gallente boats). Anyways, the information looked very interesting - first time I saw such info - thanks for it. :)
Caiyuga Onishi
Rangers of the New Republic
#490 - 2011-10-26 08:14:06 UTC
Insane Randomness wrote:
It's like they're finally listening.

Shooting the monument in Jita for several days + going inactive for a couple of months better should have made them listening bro!

On the other side all those changes in 1.1.3 and those announced in the winter expansion, aaand not to forget Hilmar's letter make me a satified and proud customer again. Way to go CCP!
Josefine Etrange
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#491 - 2011-10-26 11:37:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Josefine Etrange
Tiger's Spirit wrote:
Akturous wrote:
Tiger's Spirit wrote:
Akturous wrote:
Tiger you are a fool. Tracking and fitting is all they needed. Why is the vindicator awesome? Because it can hit it's targets. If you want range go another race, Gallente is about close range brawling. Damage buff for rails is balanced I think.

Frankly the changes are pretty damn good.


Fool ? Little morron.
Please never post anymore. I told the cap and tracking plus is bad ? No i never told, but the Blaster ships main problem is the short optimal+falloff ranges after speednerf (+web nerf), the fitting is just the secondary problem and CCP won't fix the main problem again.



You don't get it do you, so let me spell it out: BLASTERS ARE SHORT RANGE, if you want long range go another race.


You need brain, I can fly with all race with t2 weapons and i can compare weapons after 8 years EVE gaming.
Maybe you are a docking warrior, who not need better fire range just tracking , but who using blaster know that, tracking not enough if he can't move to short range because blasters fire range is horrible and tracking not help to hit the far enemies. (far ? all right for blaster, over 10-15km is too far :D) Compare with laser 4.5km optimal vs 45km optimal. Oh dont forget, large blaster have falloff too with antimatter (13km). Wow
That's realy nice number maybe for you, but... Check those lasers which have 45 optimal, they have 10km falloff !!!!!
17.5km range with falloff penalty over 4.5km range vs 55km range with falloff penalty over 45km.
Just a noob does not see this and talkin blabla things like "BUT BLASTER IS SHORT RANGE WEAPON, LEARN ANOTHER SHIPS".


Astarte,Eos,Brutix and many gallente ships with these changes still will be garbage with their ridiculous shot range because they wont reach their targets too fast but but you believe it tracking will help you LOL, when enemies attacking you from 20-24km and +10 m/s ship speed changes wont help them.
Who using these ships ? Maybe just you and some pilots because those ship is very bad with their short firerange and still wont use anyone after patch. Before speednerf blaster ships was the top damage dealers in fleet. Now ? Just if they are in 2km when the battle begin. Tracking changed ? Nothing, just changed the ship speeds and web deaccelerate factors.
I don't care you are an akward and you cant use your blasterships and you need first +pg or CPU for guns when their primary problem is other thing.

I hope you will die fast and horribly from those ships which faster than you and can shot from farther range than you while you can't reach their 20km range because you too slow and while you will shot with your large guns to 9km with 50% penalty from falloff.


tl: dr
But you sounds mad in in your first paragraph.
ROSSLINDEN0
State War Academy
Caldari State
#492 - 2011-10-26 12:29:06 UTC
I live in wh space and love having no local but i dont think they should make nullsec the same as wh space, i think if they gave like a 30/60sec session timer before you showed up in local it would be fine and thats more than enough time to catch bots unless your a ****** and suck at this game.
Zoe Alarhun
The Proactive Reappropriation Corporation
#493 - 2011-10-26 15:00:31 UTC
Quick question (trying to avoid reading 26 pages for a specific piece of info)

What changes are they making to FW ?
Mal Nina
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#494 - 2011-10-26 15:38:09 UTC
I like the idea of true null having no local. However if you spend time upgrading your sov status then reducing it from no local to a delayed local would be a great reason for maintaining sov. as such there should be a mechanism for staged reduction in the delay based on some criteria. Afterall it is your system and you should have some intel in your system.

Jill Antaris
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#495 - 2011-10-26 18:14:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Jill Antaris
I looked over the ships in pyfa a bit today, here is my little impression CCP:

Oracle

Lacks a bit capacitor for a good kitting ship(only got 110s with MWD) and caps out in under 4 minutes by just firing the guns. Otherwise it is very good designed, it got some minor CPU issues like other amarr hulls what are manageable with named/faction mods like on the gedon and it doesn't obsoletes the Harbinger within point range by fielding mostly the same DPS with less tank. It doesn't outclass the BS and is a nice alternative to the Harbinger for bigger fleets by the bigger range and higher speed. Overall the best and most balanced design. Thumbs up, however did the stats.

Tornado

Well it is like a cane but it is better as the cane at nearly everything. Tank is pretty much the same, it is quite a bit faster, got tons more range(even more than nano pests with less TEs), more damage and even less signature. The extra speed over the Oracle isn't so much on paper but since you need to fit a armor tank on the Oracle and you can get the similar EHP out of the shield tank on a tornado the difference is massive(580m/s Shocked) after fitting. Also the capacitor here last 3 times as long and it out damage the oracle quite a bit(with selectable damage types on top of it). It should only have 7 or even just 6 turrets(with some small drones or missile launchers), since as it is now basically just a better version of the cane for anything outside 1o1(by the lack of drones and neuts), brings less sig and twice the speed of the BS with the same damage to the table and could easily gank or just disengage against nearly any kind of target.

Naga

The torp fitting got serious pg and cpu issues, remember that BCUs need 10 points more cpu per mod than other damage mods. You can't fit more than one LSE after a full rack of T2 trop launchers and a MWD. It probably lacks about 50 points of power grid and 40 points cpu. Also you should consider to improve structure and shield a bit to hit at least 60k EHP in a full tank fitting, since it is fairly close range with torps and the intended targets(BS) also tend to throw a lot DPS back at you. With blasters I don't see a point over the HAM drake, while you could do a little more DPS using void, the HAM Drake provides a lot more EHP, a better range and still good DPS, what is probable more useful thing if you fight at this ranges. With rails it looks ok as some sort of over sized sniperhac, however this is more a role the eagle and other sniper hacs should fill and I'm not very comfortable if this hull would take over this spot.

Talos

First I love the concept, even if it isn't this useful in fleets. My first idea was a over sized shield brutix but the result gives you only 25k EHP, what was not really feasible. With a armor tank you get 40k+ EHP but the DPS isn't much higher than with a shield brutix(that also got 50k EHP) and since large turrets track worse than medium ones it isn't even such a big tracking improvement(however the ability to control range and the range would be a lot better what is pretty nice). The way it is now, it lacks focus, be it a extra med and more shield hp to become the shield gank brutix from hell with a low but acceptable EHP amount or overall more shield, armor and structure hit points plus a extra low to become a versatile armor tanked heavy tackler with a serious punch(probably more balanced speed wise if you consider that it will see more use in smaller gangs).
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University
Ivy League
#496 - 2011-10-27 02:46:17 UTC
Another wish list item for the winter expansion:

Buff Amarr & Caldari drones to be more competitive with the Gallente/Minmatar drones (especially the T2 variants).

Right now, raw DPS numbers from EFT:
14 dps - Acolyte II (Amarr)
18 dps - Hornet II (Caldari)
20 dps - Hobgoblin II (Gallente)
16 dps - Warrior II (Minmtar)

The weaknesses of the Acolytes are they are the lowest damage and only do EM damage. While EM is useful against shield-based enemies, it's not very good against armor at all. A possible fix for the Acolyte would be to increase the DamageMod variable from 1.38 to 1.72 (25%) or give it dual-damage types of mostly EM but with a bit of THE (15 EM + 5 THE).

Hornets suffer mostly from doing only KIN damage. A touch of another damage type (maybe THE?) would round them out better.
0Musky
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#497 - 2011-10-27 04:20:54 UTC
All the Destroyers are getting buffed. Does this also mean the Light Interdictors are getting the same buffs?
Cron Moonvexor
Halloween Mining Party
#498 - 2011-10-27 10:35:32 UTC
0Musky wrote:
All the Destroyers are getting buffed. Does this also mean the Light Interdictors are getting the same buffs?


As I remember, (Light) Interdictors never had a penalty to ROF, so no changes there.
But there are some changes to interdictor probe launchers
Lunce
The Icarus Expedition
Solyaris Chtonium
#499 - 2011-10-27 12:32:39 UTC
Ammath wrote:
Honestly there are a few major problems I see with 0.0 right now and they come down to fundamentals not specifics. CCP seems focused on a bottom-up fixing of a certain weapon system or module, or whatnot and this is not the right approach.

1. Define roles for each class of ship, or if multiple ships in a class variances on those roles.

2. Stick to a methodology in terms of combat relationships. supers beat caps beat battleships beat cruisers beat frigs, and inside a ship class ships have some level of parity. The previous is an example, but stick to something and don't jump around.

3. EvE should be about Corporations not alliances. Corporation mechanics should be strengthened, Alliance mechanics weakened. An alliance in the real world implies peers working together for a goal and these tend to run fairly democratically. Doing things at an alliance level should be beurocratic and time consuming. Get rid of dictatorial alliances. Make most alliance actions require CEO votes via mechanics like adding/removing corps, standings changes (although allow a 24hr temp standings change), alliances fees/tax mechanics should be put in the game and be voted on as well.

Alliances have become what corporations once were and that in my opinion is not a good thing. I am not saying do away with them but we already started with Sov mechanics such as TCUs being onlined by corps not alliances. Examples would be whoever holds the TCU is the only corp allowed to hold outposts, ihubs, customs thingys, etc. Let a corporation set a tax level for a system set on the TCU that applies to those not in the corp who use the space. Yes alliances can still work around this with holding corps etc if they so choose but there is much that can be done to strengthen corporations from better divisional tools, better member management tools, direct control of systems under their TCUs and many many other things.

4. Moons / True-Sec - These things should vary with player action. On a moon you find a vein of Tech.. cool.. when its mined out it randomizes a new mineral vein for you. Easy peasy... again this puts finances back in the hands of corporations and out of the hands of alliance elites. True-sec as well should either degrade with heavy ratting/plexing or improve with a lack thereof, if this is too complicated it should be randomized all this stuff quarterly or something as a less elegant solution. Also, moon minerals should appear at the Planetary Customs Office and be subject to tax just like planetary resources now that this will be a player mechanic. It also encourages raiding PCOs that should drop a chunk of the goods they have inside if popped.

5. The ihub nerf - For a brief period in EvE history small alliances and corps could grab a chunk of space spend billions of isk and upgrade even crappy 0.0 space to be semi-decent space. This was PRO small alliance, PRO small corporation and good for the game. Of course RMT and other factors ruined this. ihubs should not in any way have their efficacy tied to system true-sec, this change once again reduced vast stretches of 0.0 to garbage compared to the handful of pockets occupied by the already wealthy and powerful.

Thanks for your time, I am just putting ideas out there.



^ This!

Ammath has hit the nail on the head here. It's the fundamentals that count when it comes to the health of 0.0 space. Alliances are an awesome part of the game, but they are FAR too powerful. It leaves the vast majority of corps powerless, and so, to a large point, pointless.

I have stopped playing in 0.0 myself because I see no point (and no fun) in having to join an alliance in order to be in 0.0 at all, and then having the alliance dictating where I and my corp can be and what we have to do. Yes that's a pretty general statement, but the bottom line for myself is that the corp I have been a part of since I started playing EVE (a 0.0 corp) has all but disappeared because it's players got tired of being at the mercy of one alliance or another, and have moved to Empire or WH space (or quit the game all together because they they couldn't make the transition back to Empire.

Please, CCP, give some thought to the points above. They make a lot of sense.
Ammath
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#500 - 2011-11-05 14:07:29 UTC
Lunce wrote:
Ammath wrote:
Honestly there are a few major problems I see with 0.0 right now and they come down to
5. The ihub nerf - For a brief period in EvE history small alliances and corps could grab a chunk of space spend billions of isk and upgrade even crappy 0.0 space to be semi-decent space. This was PRO small alliance, PRO small corporation and good for the game. Of course RMT and other factors ruined this. ihubs should not in any way have their efficacy tied to system true-sec, this change once again reduced vast stretches of 0.0 to garbage compared to the handful of pockets occupied by the already wealthy and powerful.

Thanks for your time, I am just putting ideas out there.



^ This!

Ammath has hit the nail on the head here. It's the fundamentals that count when it comes to the health of 0.0 space. Alliances are an awesome part of the game, but they are FAR too powerful. It leaves the vast majority of corps powerless, and so, to a large point, pointless.

I have stopped playing in 0.0 myself because I see no point (and no fun) in having to join an alliance in order to be in 0.0 at all, and then having the alliance dictating where I and my corp can be and what we have to do. Yes that's a pretty general statement, but the bottom line for myself is that the corp I have been a part of since I started playing EVE (a 0.0 corp) has all but disappeared because it's players got tired of being at the mercy of one alliance or another, and have moved to Empire or WH space (or quit the game all together because they they couldn't make the transition back to Empire.

Please, CCP, give some thought to the points above. They make a lot of sense.



See this is exactly what I am talking about and I largely have been in the same boat. Twice I helped grow nice good corporations of 50-75 or so people who worked well together, had fun, got kills, made ISK but in both cases over time the corporations deteriorated because of alliances. Moving from one to another because of being screwed over or having alliance leadership go totally off the deep end and doing crazy things (and having all assets/systems under their holding corp preventing the sensible corporations from taking over).

You play this game to be social and play with your buddies, your buddies is not your 3000 closest friends its the people in your corporation. As a corporation you unite with peers for strength to do larger things. The current way mechanics for alliances work means giving up a LOT of your self reliance and identity to join this borg-like entity. Alliances should be made among peers not a few kings and a lot of serfs. We should rename them 'kingdoms' if that is the case.

Some fairly simple but profound changes to in-game mechanics could change the social landscape for the better, notably forcing alliances to be democratic and have to run votes on adding/removing corporations, standings changes that last more than 24hrs, alliance leadership, etc. This strengthens the role of corporations and honestly strengthens alliances as well by making alliances be selective about their peers and keeping all corporations on an equal footing. Strong corps make a strong alliance.

Also my other thoughts on randomized moon mineral veins, having minerals land at player owned PCOs, removing true-sec as a component for ihub bonuses, making true-sec and mineral classes fluctuate with usage (or hard randomization monthy as a less elegant approach) all put more control, more wealth in the hands of the corporations and away from a few alliance elites.

It also serves that if 90% of the systems were all on an even level (a few spots of fixed goodness as focal points isnt bad) then alliances wouldnt need to hold 6 regions for 2000 pilots.... they do that to moon grab, and true-sec grab and care very very little for hundreds of systems "under their control' which is where the whole renter crap comes in. Mega alliance real estate reduction, more control of alliances to corporations, more wealth to corporations means YOUR corp and YOUR friends are stronger and happier in 0.0. This is good for everyone except the .1% of eve players who are mega alliance leadership. CCP should figure out where the money comes from that keeps the lights on and its not from the top 100 people in EvE.