These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Odyssey] Module Rebalancing Part One: RSBs and TEs

First post First post First post
Author
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#261 - 2013-03-27 09:03:43 UTC
PAPULA wrote:

Also try to apply those nerfs to machariel.


Currently my mach (shield fit) is 4.2+69, after the change it will be 3.8+56.

So you lose 13km fall off, and less than half a km of optimal.

You can't possibly be that upset over those number changes, you're still relatively firing about the same range.

PAPULA wrote:
Says pandemic legion who controls fozzie and whole game.


Yea, I gave you my friend that I play games with to help undo some of the years long neglect and you defame, insult, and slander him because you're mad about less than half a km of optimal range and a little bit of fall off.

How about you nut up and stop crying over literally nothing.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

spellbound spirit
#262 - 2013-03-27 09:03:45 UTC
This is same kind of balance as nano nerf was = let's lower skill impact on pilots effectiveness and game will be more balanced...

CCP encourages blobbing more and more with their balance changes and they want to hurt small gang/solo gang that are skill dependant to make some "F1 players" happy.

I feel that CCP's balance changes drive towards making EVE even less skill dependant, so that every 3month character not only has technical capabilities to engage 6 years old veteran, but also CCP wants to make sure that there won't be major skill gap.

All that while moon goo is still inact, practically the same it was 6years ago.

So much for keeping veterans in this game...
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#263 - 2013-03-27 09:05:58 UTC
PAPULA wrote:
Hannott Thanos wrote:
PAPULA wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:

You are all making a mountain out of a mole hill, nothing will REALLY change, other than maybe a 1-2 kilometer engagement change.


Then why the change if change is so "small"
Also try to apply those nerfs to machariel.

You lose 8km falloff. From 59km to 51km

So I guess the Machariel is dead and useless now. /sarcasm

8km is alot.



No, its not, at that range your DPS is cut so incredibly far just due to being the outside edge of your fall off that you're drastically exaggerating the loss.

Again, you really won't notice this change much at all in any real way, you're actually spazing out over nothing.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#264 - 2013-03-27 09:07:45 UTC
PAPULA wrote:
Hannott Thanos wrote:
PAPULA wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:

You are all making a mountain out of a mole hill, nothing will REALLY change, other than maybe a 1-2 kilometer engagement change.


Then why the change if change is so "small"
Also try to apply those nerfs to machariel.

You lose 8km falloff. From 59km to 51km

So I guess the Machariel is dead and useless now. /sarcasm

8km is a lot.

At that range, are you serious? If you can't get around this issue then you do not have the intelligence I would assume is required to play Eve. If a blaster cruiser like the Thorax lost 8km range, THAT, would be a lot. A ship that has over 50km range with "short" range guns losing some of that range is no big deal.

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}

To mare
Advanced Technology
#265 - 2013-03-27 09:08:23 UTC
i can understand the need of a nerf to TE but since some minmatar ship got rebalanced being weaker than their cunterparts in recent balancing can we take a look at that as well?
PAPULA
The Chodak
Void Alliance
#266 - 2013-03-27 09:09:35 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
PAPULA wrote:

Also try to apply those nerfs to machariel.


Currently my mach (shield fit) is 4.2+69, after the change it will be 3.8+56.

So you lose 13km fall off, and less than half a km of optimal.

You can't possibly be that upset over those number changes, you're still relatively firing about the same range.

PAPULA wrote:
Says pandemic legion who controls fozzie and whole game.


Yea, I gave you my friend that I play games with to help undo some of the years long neglect and you defame, insult, and slander him because you're mad about less than half a km of optimal range and a little bit of fall off.

How about you nut up and stop crying over literally nothing.

Says man who controls eve.
Xyris Rixx
Perkone
Caldari State
#267 - 2013-03-27 09:11:41 UTC
Is there a current trend to nerf shield tanking into the ground when compared to armor tanking? For years shield tanking was almost obsolete and irrelevent with megas and apocs being the ships of choice for fleet combat. Right now there is a solid choice to be made between the advantages and disadvantages of both, but it appears through direct buffs and indirect nerfs that shield tanking is going to be rendered obsolete again - is this a deliberate plan on behalf of ccp or just accidental?
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#268 - 2013-03-27 09:11:53 UTC
PAPULA wrote:
Says man who controls eve.

Argument of the year award goes to this guy

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}

Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#269 - 2013-03-27 09:12:48 UTC
Xyris Rixx wrote:
Is there a current trend to nerf shield tanking into the ground when compared to armor tanking? For years shield tanking was almost obsolete and irrelevent with megas and apocs being the ships of choice for fleet combat. Right now there is a solid choice to be made between the advantages and disadvantages of both, but it appears through direct buffs and indirect nerfs that shield tanking is going to be rendered obsolete again - is this a deliberate plan on behalf of ccp or just accidental?

Let me get this right.. Hmm, how do you say it... WHAT???

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}

Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#270 - 2013-03-27 09:17:38 UTC
Xyris Rixx wrote:
Is there a current trend to nerf shield tanking into the ground when compared to armor tanking? For years shield tanking was almost obsolete and irrelevent with megas and apocs being the ships of choice for fleet combat.


I dont know who told you this but its an outright lie. Dominion launched 4 years ago, the Maelstrom was one of the most common main line battleship across that 4 years. The welp cane, the tengu, the munin fleet.

I'm not sure who told you that shield tanking was obsolete but you should be mad at them.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

Caelum Dominus
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#271 - 2013-03-27 09:18:14 UTC
I agree with your sentiments on Remote Sensor Boosters, but I don't think you need to nerf Tracking Enhancers. They may break some ships, yet on most they are fine. I think you should look at those ships instead.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#272 - 2013-03-27 09:18:23 UTC
unimatrix0030 wrote:
So will a blaster-talos be able to hit a large tower after this nerf?
If not there won't be any gallente ship usuable to remove posses from C1 wormholes... .


Rail Talos.

This TE change doesn't really mean much, but the nerd rage of the whinematards is highly amusing. As clueless as ever, they keep equalling ship speed and range to player skill, and go on about complaining that removing OGBs hurt skilled players in the same post.

Furthermore there really aren't that many blaster ships that use TEs and would suffer in any meaningful way from this tweak.

.

Hakan MacTrew
Konrakas Forged
Solyaris Chtonium
#273 - 2013-03-27 09:18:52 UTC
At least there will be more reason to fit a TC over a TE now. I never understood why an active module could not match the performance of a passive module.

Any word on wether there has been any progress on a missile version of the TE/TC and what will be don't about missile TDs?
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#274 - 2013-03-27 09:19:40 UTC
Roime wrote:
unimatrix0030 wrote:
So will a blaster-talos be able to hit a large tower after this nerf?
If not there won't be any gallente ship usuable to remove posses from C1 wormholes... .


Rail Talos.

This TE change doesn't really mean much, but the nerd rage of the whinematards is highly amusing. As clueless as ever, they keep equalling ship speed and range to player skill, and go on about complaining that removing OGBs hurt skilled players in the same post.

Furthermore there really aren't that many blaster ships that use TEs and would suffer in any meaningful way from this tweak.


Hmmm... Talos, Brutix, Vigilant, Deimos... that's about it really. I'm super curious how this will all pan out.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#275 - 2013-03-27 09:21:51 UTC
Caelum Dominus wrote:
I agree with your sentiments on Remote Sensor Boosters, but I don't think you need to nerf Tracking Enhancers. They may break some ships, yet on most they are fine. I think you should look at those ships instead.

Or maybe this was intended all along and the ships are properly balanced based on this?

You don't think TE needs nerfing because you have reasons for it, or because you use them so much?

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}

PAPULA
The Chodak
Void Alliance
#276 - 2013-03-27 09:23:06 UTC
We all see who's most active in this thread - pandemic legion.
This proves that PL is controlling the game as they please.

This is newest idea from PL - to nerf tracking falloff and optimal.
idontcare4
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#277 - 2013-03-27 09:23:54 UTC  |  Edited by: idontcare4
In all honesty there does not need to be a nerf to falloff and optimal. Minnie ships have been nerfed, I would consider great caution before you nerf all kiting ships too greatly. If say talos cane etc are going to have **** falloffs then there's going to be very little skill left within eve for people to expand ability. Kiting is a concept of its own, but had well know counters. You will be to a great extent be making this skill and ability null and void. Would refrain from any hasty daft decisions. If everything is going to be nerfed to the extent that you have to sit ontop of the hostile to do affective damage then again think, there's little skill on sitting ontop of your enemy, as the more powerful ship or the better fit ship will win without being able to use skill to avade if needs be. I just see TEs as dumbing eve further down. Enough damage has been created by doing this is the past!
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#278 - 2013-03-27 09:24:36 UTC
PAPULA wrote:
We all see who's most active in this thread - pandemic legion.
This proves that PL is controlling the game as they please.

This is newest idea from PL - to nerf tracking falloff and optimal.

Please stop posting

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}

PAPULA
The Chodak
Void Alliance
#279 - 2013-03-27 09:25:20 UTC  |  Edited by: PAPULA
Hannott Thanos wrote:
PAPULA wrote:
We all see who's most active in this thread - pandemic legion.
This proves that PL is controlling the game as they please.

This is newest idea from PL - to nerf tracking falloff and optimal.

Please stop posting

or what ?
It's the truth.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#280 - 2013-03-27 09:25:35 UTC
PAPULA wrote:
We all see who's most active in this thread - pandemic legion.
This proves that PL is controlling the game as they please.

This is newest idea from PL - to nerf tracking falloff and optimal.



Yes, I'm going to nerf your fall off and rule the universe in brawling Moa's.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.