These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Latest in a long line of small gang PVP nerfs...
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
De'Veldrin
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#141 - 2013-02-20 16:14:29 UTC
Andski wrote:
"guys we were just trolling LOL gotcha"


I'm actually waiting for this - back pedaling is the most sincere form of admitting defeat.

De'Veldrin's Corollary (to Malcanis' Law): Any idea that seeks to limit the ability of a large nullsec bloc to do something in the name of allowing more small groups into sov null will inevitably make it that much harder for small groups to enter sov null.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#142 - 2013-02-20 16:15:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Eve is not a game about fair fights. Even if you're outnumbered, a skilled pilot (or a small gang) should be able to pick at and weaken/inconvenience/incapacitate a larger gang.
…and making the viable ship decision cover a larger spectrum of ships rather than have everyone + dog in the same two ships means that there will be even more room to make use of your clever decisions (in both ships and fittings and tactics) to pick at the mistakes done by the lesser-skilled.

It means that more skill will be required to put together a well-sorted fleet and make all the parts match up; more skill to provide a full set of counters; more skill to employ said counters at the right time against the right thing; more skill required for every single part… and the monoculture blob will be ridiculously maladapted to all the variations that will come its way (if you're skilled enough to keep them guessing).

Quote:
They. Were. Not. Overpowered. They were the only ships with proper fittings and attributes to do their damn jobs.
…in other words, overpowered. They were not meant to do all that stuff (much less at once) — they were meant to be pieces of a larger jigsaw, where everything put on them meant something else was left out. Now you have to, you know, apply a bit of skill to fit them for the one specific job they're going to fill at any given time.
De'Veldrin
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#143 - 2013-02-20 16:16:32 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Eve is not a game about fair fights. Even if you're outnumbered, a skilled pilot (or a small gang) should be able to pick at and weaken/inconvenience/incapacitate a larger gang.
…and making the viable ship decision cover a larger spectrum of ships rather than have everyone + dog in the same two ships means that there will be even more room to make use of your clever decisions (in both ships and fittings and tactics) to pick at the mistakes done by the lesser-skilled.

It means that more skill will be required to put together a well-sorted fleet and make all the parts match up; more skill to provide a full set of counters; more skill to employ said counters at the right time against the right thing; more skill required for every single part… and the monoculture blob will be ridiculously maladapted to all the variations that will come its way (if you're skilled enough to keep them guessing).



But...but...but :effort: Cry

De'Veldrin's Corollary (to Malcanis' Law): Any idea that seeks to limit the ability of a large nullsec bloc to do something in the name of allowing more small groups into sov null will inevitably make it that much harder for small groups to enter sov null.
silens vesica
Corsair Cartel
#144 - 2013-02-20 16:16:46 UTC
Tippia wrote:

It means that more skill will be required to put together a well-sorted fleet...

This appears to the center of the butthurt issue for many folks.

Tell someone you love them today, because life is short. But scream it at them in Esperanto, because life is also terrifying and confusing.

Didn't vote? Then you voted for NulBloc
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings
#145 - 2013-02-20 16:20:52 UTC
Quote:
"guys we were just trolling LOL gotcha"


I'm sorry we wasted your time raising serious issues to the community.

De'Veldrin wrote:
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
They were the only ships with proper fittings and attributes to do their damn jobs.

This was precisely the problem. They made every other battlecruiser in the game obsolete, which is indicative of poor game balance.

Petrus Blackshell wrote:

Now they've been nerfed to be the same as the rest of the crap they call for "ships". Why not pull those up instead, hmm?


Because obsoleting every cruiser in the game by making ALL the battle cruisers over powered would be indicative of even worse game balance than we already had.

We get it - you're pissed because your play style got changed (I won't use nerfed, because that's not an accurate term, if you look at the issue objectively). To that, I will say, in the words of CCP themselves: "HTFU." Adapt or die - it's the Eve way.


I'm not gonna lie, I don't think his play style got nerfed.
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#146 - 2013-02-20 16:20:57 UTC
De'Veldrin wrote:
Andski wrote:
"guys we were just trolling LOL gotcha"


I'm actually waiting for this - back pedaling is the most sincere form of admitting defeat.

Tch, you'd deem me a mere troll?

I'll be a Drake pilot till the day I die. 1372 kills in them and going strong.

I am just lamenting the ruin of what used to once be a good ship to now being a second rate piece of trash. Of course I'll "adapt" (geez you guys are like a broken record), but the reason I am complaining is because I do not think adapting is possible after so much performance reduction. I'm sure there are others who feel the same.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
Arduemont
Rotten Legion
#147 - 2013-02-20 16:24:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Arduemont
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
De'Veldrin wrote:
Andski wrote:
"guys we were just trolling LOL gotcha"


I'm actually waiting for this - back pedaling is the most sincere form of admitting defeat.

Tch, you'd deem me a mere troll?

I'll be a Drake pilot till the day I die. 1372 kills in them and going strong.

I am just lamenting the ruin of what used to once be a good ship to now being a second rate piece of trash. Of course I'll "adapt" (geez you guys are like a broken record), but the reason I am complaining is because I do not think adapting is possible after so much performance reduction. I'm sure there are others who feel the same.


Fit gank over tank and you'll be laughing. The drake is not broken, it's just more of a heavy hitter than a tank now. Put a scram and a web on it and fit for max damage. Do hit and runs and you'll kill things significantly faster than people will think your capable of. You'll have to commit to the fight. No running after you've started, you just need to make sure you can kill it before it's friends turn up. If you want to keep your incoming damage low, kite outside of heavy hitters range with HAMs and they'll be doing negligible damage compared to you who will be hitting at max damage out at 9km.

"In the age of information, ignorance is a choice." www.stateofwar.co.nf
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#148 - 2013-02-20 16:26:03 UTC
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
I'm going to go out on a limb here and agree with OP. It is absolutely unreasonable for the Drake to be nerfed multiple times. What do CCP think it is, a ****** titan?!

The Drake used to be the perfect balance for small gang PvP and now it is unusable. Couple that with the Tengu being kicked into obsolesence , and the Hurricane becoming a pile of you-know-what, I don't know how solo and small gang PvP will survive.

CCP needs to wake up. Don't nerf things that work well just becuase everything else sucks. Buff the things that suck! For example, like happened to frigates.

If you have to have an extremely overpowered ship to be successful at solo or small gang PVP, you weren't actually very good at it to begin with. Blink

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#149 - 2013-02-20 16:32:31 UTC
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
I am just lamenting the ruin of what used to once be a good ship to now being a second rate piece of trash.
Yes, the fate of the Phantasm is indeed a very sad story. It doesn't particularly have anything to do with making sure both the Drake and the Cane remain very good ships, even when the other BCs are being adjusted to be worth-while alongside them… but so far, it has worked rather well.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#150 - 2013-02-20 16:34:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Tippia wrote:
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
I am just lamenting the ruin of what used to once be a good ship to now being a second rate piece of trash.
Yes, the fate of the Phantasm is indeed a very sad story. It doesn't particularly have anything to do with making sure both the Drake and the Cane remain very good ships, even when the other BCs are being adjusted to be worth-while alongside them… but so far, it has worked rather well.

I really want to still love my Phantasm, I really do, but circumstances conspire to make that very difficult to do. Sad

Still, faction rebalance is on the way.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Kurt Saken
Star Cluster Wanderer
#151 - 2013-02-20 16:38:20 UTC
It hurts a bit to see one of your favourite ships in the game getting nerfed, but Drakes and Canes are still kings compared to the rest of BCs (except Nagas and Nados).

Anyway, most of the "battles" in EvE are decided before starting, so we shouldn't worry too much about the "balances". It's all about overwhelming the opponent and that is all.

Sure you can have good fights here and there, but this isn't common.

Edit. Typo
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#152 - 2013-02-20 16:39:06 UTC
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
De'Veldrin wrote:
Andski wrote:
"guys we were just trolling LOL gotcha"


I'm actually waiting for this - back pedaling is the most sincere form of admitting defeat.

Tch, you'd deem me a mere troll?

I'll be a Drake pilot till the day I die. 1372 kills in them and going strong.

I am just lamenting the ruin of what used to once be a good ship to now being a second rate piece of trash. Of course I'll "adapt" (geez you guys are like a broken record), but the reason I am complaining is because I do not think adapting is possible after so much performance reduction. I'm sure there are others who feel the same.

Ah ... yes, i misunderstood the part about "Approach, F1". My bad.

Anyhow ... you're actually confirming that it was overpowered.
1372 kills ... hey, that's great. Really, nice work ...
... but why couldn't you do that in anything else than a drake ?

Why didn't you pull that off in anything else ?

Why did you use the drake ?

Because the other ships were crap ? Or because the drake was overpowered ?
Thanks ... no need to respond, you've already shown your obvious bias.

Now stop ruining your credibility ... because that's what you do.


Thanks.
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#153 - 2013-02-20 16:40:30 UTC
Solstice Project wrote:
no need to respond

Right, and I'm the troll here. Roll

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#154 - 2013-02-20 16:51:45 UTC
Kahega Amielden wrote:
Bienator II wrote:
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Okay so if everything is so good, tell me: how would you handle a blob if you're solo or in a small gang (5-10 people or less). Oh and don't say "bring links" because CCP are about to nerf those too as part of their crusade to buff the goon blob.

why do you believe you should be able to fight a blob solo?


Because skill should mean more than numbers.


it does. The skill to run from the blob is part of it if you know you can not cause any damage.

what you wanted to say is that your cookie cutter OGB fitting should win the fight. Since boosted solo ships are currently so far out of balance that you can ignore any "eve skills" like situational awareness or ship knowledge. Your whole argument does not make sense. Balancing is wrong since you can no longer fly good ships? You can now fly good ships all the time. Sure your opponent has a good ship too, but thats where the fun starts.

i don't give a *** when i die to a blob. But i DO care if i die in engagements where i thought they where fair. Thats when i start to search for mistakes or optimize fittings. Those fights are good fights, since they are challenging.

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
Keno Skir
#155 - 2013-02-20 16:54:20 UTC
All i think reading this thread is that Petrus Blackshell needs to put his toys back in the pram.

You used to post useful and interesting PvP based articles and threads. You were once the first to point out that if someone is failing at PvP it's because they didn't have a good enough plan.

Seems all that's gone out the window now your win button has been taken away..

No offence intended but i never thought i'd be yelling HTFU at you Petrus What?

Black Lanterns Blog <- Read my ramblings -.-

250,000 Bonus SP when you start an Alpha Clone HERE <---
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#156 - 2013-02-20 17:55:31 UTC
Petrus Blackshell wrote:

They. Were. Not. Overpowered. They were the only ships with proper fittings and attributes to do their damn jobs. Now they've been nerfed to be the same as the rest of the crap they call for "ships". Why not pull those up instead, hmm?

I don't think you've ever fought Rifterlings (you don't show up on our KB), so it's understandable why you wouldn't understand how much the Drake means to us. You should really check it and see what we fight in those "keep at range and F1" Drakes before you level stupid accusations like that.


Hum.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#157 - 2013-02-20 17:57:19 UTC
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
De'Veldrin wrote:
Andski wrote:
"guys we were just trolling LOL gotcha"


I'm actually waiting for this - back pedaling is the most sincere form of admitting defeat.

Tch, you'd deem me a mere troll?

I'll be a Drake pilot till the day I die. 1372 kills in them and going strong.

I am just lamenting the ruin of what used to once be a good ship to now being a second rate piece of trash. Of course I'll "adapt" (geez you guys are like a broken record), but the reason I am complaining is because I do not think adapting is possible after so much performance reduction. I'm sure there are others who feel the same.


Hmmm. I suspect we'll see a second balancing pass. I'm pretty sure the "Drake" will get nerfed again. Just because of this thread. Twisted

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
silens vesica
Corsair Cartel
#158 - 2013-02-20 18:13:34 UTC
Petrus Blackshell wrote:

I'm not sure how you're getting the "same tank" since the Drake got a flat out reduction to its base HP. It is also not only slower but less agile (more massive) and thus far more poorly suited for small gang PvP. On top of that, the "higher damage" claim is only applicable if you use HAMs, which is an exceptionally bad idea when fighting outnumbered, as it means you are probably close enough to not have any route of escape, and will likely just die an embarassing death. HMLs on the Drake are now worthless. Not only do they do significantly less damage, but the "buff" that Fury missiles received also made them be as bad at hitting things as torpedoes are, cutting off the only way to get even close to the same performance.

So, yeah, i'm really enjoying this "buffed" Drake.

I keep coming back to this.
See, here's the problem I have: I check-fitted my primary Drake fitting last night, and found a 50% greater throw-weight with a less than 10% EHP hit, and a less than 5% velocity hit.

My Drake hits MUCH harder now than before. I was even able to dump my comically-expensive BCS units for some T2s, and retain almost all of the firepower buff. It's taken minor losses in maneuverability and toughness. Yes, I'm using HAMs. I was using HAMs before, too. Yes, it means managing your ship more intensely, but that's learnable. You're calling the result 'Trash." I'm looking at it and thinking: "Hmm. Interesting..."

Can't wait to take it out and test-drive it this evening. Twisted

Tell someone you love them today, because life is short. But scream it at them in Esperanto, because life is also terrifying and confusing.

Didn't vote? Then you voted for NulBloc
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#159 - 2013-02-20 18:13:54 UTC
Milton Middleson wrote:


The hurricane was one of the most broken ships in the game specifically because it was laughably easy to fit. Apparently CCP meant it to be an artillery platform, so its AC variations had a ludicrous amount of grid with which to fit largest guns + heaviest tank + dual medium neuts. On top of that, it was as fast as a cruiser with virtually no drawback to being so. If you wanted to pick a ship which was ruining small pvp by overshadowing most of the alternatives, the hurricane would be a good choice.

And it's hardly ruined. It's received a minor agility nerf, lost a bit of utility, and now you have to think about what you put on it and why you want those 425mm ACs rather than 220mms.


I agree there were situations where you could fit 425s where the proper compromise would have been it shouldn't have been able to fit above 220s but overall I felt it was fairly well balanced with a good play between tank and dps with some granluarity between the levels of dps and tank you could get out of it or speed and tank, etc. far too many ships you either have to go with a half arsed fit thats not very good at either or bias heavily for tank or heavily for dps with very little in the way of inbetween compromises - something that has now with this patch mostly been fixed with the other BCs but I don't think warranted changing the cane as much as it has been.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#160 - 2013-02-20 20:25:36 UTC
silens vesica wrote:
Petrus Blackshell wrote:

I'm not sure how you're getting the "same tank" since the Drake got a flat out reduction to its base HP. It is also not only slower but less agile (more massive) and thus far more poorly suited for small gang PvP. On top of that, the "higher damage" claim is only applicable if you use HAMs, which is an exceptionally bad idea when fighting outnumbered, as it means you are probably close enough to not have any route of escape, and will likely just die an embarassing death. HMLs on the Drake are now worthless. Not only do they do significantly less damage, but the "buff" that Fury missiles received also made them be as bad at hitting things as torpedoes are, cutting off the only way to get even close to the same performance.

So, yeah, i'm really enjoying this "buffed" Drake.

I keep coming back to this.
See, here's the problem I have: I check-fitted my primary Drake fitting last night, and found a 50% greater throw-weight with a less than 10% EHP hit, and a less than 5% velocity hit.

My Drake hits MUCH harder now than before. I was even able to dump my comically-expensive BCS units for some T2s, and retain almost all of the firepower buff. It's taken minor losses in maneuverability and toughness. Yes, I'm using HAMs. I was using HAMs before, too. Yes, it means managing your ship more intensely, but that's learnable. You're calling the result 'Trash." I'm looking at it and thinking: "Hmm. Interesting..."

Can't wait to take it out and test-drive it this evening. Twisted



I remade a Prophecy (oldschool theorycrafting) and well, it's freakin psychotically fun. If that's a description.

I had T2 lasers on it but opted to neut and ewar instead (super arbitrator drone boat big brother type).

Tonight I play with my harbinger, which has about the SAME dps as my Abaddon! (600+ I'm not T2 large laser yet ).

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.