These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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] Ship Resistance Bonuses

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Askulf Joringer
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#261 - 2013-04-13 00:56:34 UTC
Van Mathias wrote:
How I fit my ship is very relevant, because how much actual raw dps is sliced off at the end of the calculation is dependent on where my resists are at the time. I have already done the math for you, explaining to you how this works.

Indeed, it is this phenomena that has directly lead to the discussion and planned implementation of the proposed nerf. If what I was saying was false, we wouldn't be having this conversation. After all, a 13 Dps bonus will eat thru your ship a lot more slowly than a 30 DPS bonus, even though both bonuses are given by the same proportional stat adjustment.

Also, the previous example uses the same DPS against two different resistances. No difference in original damage was made. So I'm now starting to wonder if you are even reading what I'm writing.



Stop posting
Van Mathias
Dead Space Continuum
#262 - 2013-04-13 00:58:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Van Mathias
And you fail to understand that 6.7% reduction of 100k ehp is different from a reduction of 6.7% of 150k ehp. You might take more off the 150k, but it will still end up with a higher absolute number than the result of the former calculation.

Your fit is a big deal on this. Let me explain it this way: given the same DPS, a 5% reduction in resists at a lower resist will result in a greater reduction in time till death than a 5% reduction in resists at a much higher resist would provide for. This is because the associative property of multiplied numbers. Changes in rates by themselves are meaningless, you have to look at the number you are modifying as well.

Addendum: If the OP wants me to stop, all he has to do is ask. While I appreciate your feedback, I'm not the kind of person to stop engaging in one of the most entertaining debates I've had in months.

Post your advanced battleship ideas here!
mine mi
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#263 - 2013-04-13 00:58:51 UTC
why not create a new module ?, remote target breakers, you can have all the resistances you want, but if no one repairs ...
Prometheus Exenthal
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#264 - 2013-04-13 01:02:58 UTC
The change is good.
This content of this thread is not lmao

https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage

DO YOUR JOBS, CCP DEVS. FIX THE GAME INSTEAD OF FKING IT
Jack C Hughes
State War Academy
Caldari State
#265 - 2013-04-13 01:07:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Jack C Hughes
Correct me if I am wrong..
Shouldn't the Amarr be considered more like a fleet combat race and Gellente as a more solo/dule race?
just trying to find a Amarr ship that could solo better than a same sized Gellente.
when you compare using the ishtar and zealot, Deimos with Sacriledge, Myrmidon with Harbinger,(and so on) it is obvious that gelente perform much better when soloing.
No need to mention Oracle and Talos, Abaddon and Hypo
And now what?
We are giving the more solo race a similar ability as the fleet combat race
not by chaning their bonus but reducing the fleet combat race's bonus.

We are not going to do what a hypo can do with a Abaddon,
as our laser will shot up the cap that fast that we are not going to have double rep on our ship.
And now the advantage in fleet combat has been reduced.
Rented
Hunter Heavy Industries
#266 - 2013-04-13 01:09:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Rented
Van Mathias wrote:
And you fail to understand that 6.7% reduction of 100k ehp is different from a reduction of 6.7% of 150k ehp. You might take more off the 150k, but it will still end up with a higher absolute number than the result of the former calculation.

Your fit is a big deal on this. Let me explain it this way: given the same DPS, a 5% reduction in resists at a lower resist will result in a greater reduction in time till death than a 5% reduction in resists at a much higher resist would provide for. This is because the associative property of multiplied numbers. Changes in rates by themselves are meaningless, you have to look at the number you are modifying as well.


So basically..... you've completely reversed your addled thinking that this harms your poor personal Rokh more than it harms invuln-stacking fleet Rokhs, and you are now whining that it hurts the fleet Rokhs more than it hurts your personal Rokh.

Congrats on the complete 180, and you wonder why we say you make no sense. You're apparently not terribly sure what you're saying either.
Callduron
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#267 - 2013-04-13 01:10:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Callduron
CCP Fozzie wrote:

This affects 44 ships total.

Shield:
Ibis, Taipan, Merlin, Worm, Harpy, Cambion, Moa, Gila, Eagle, Onyx, Broadsword, Drake, Ferox, Nighthawk, Vulture, Tengu, Loki, Skiff, Mackinaw, Hulk, Rokh, Scorpion Navy Issue, Rattlesnake, Chimera, Wyvern.

Armor:
Impairor, Punisher, Vengeance, Malice, Malediction, Maller, Sacrilege, Mimir, Vangel, Devoter, Phobos, Prophecy, Absolution, Damnation, Loki, Legion, Proteus, Abaddon, Archon, Aeon.


Hmm, long list of ships nerfed and you forgot to include the Hurricane. Surely some mistake?

Joking aside you're absolutely right the maths is skewed and it's a good fix. We rarely see awesome pvp fits like the triple rep myrm in anything above the tiniest engagement so hopefully we'll see some interesting fits as this change impacts the meta.

I'm definitely going to try a quadruple rep microwarpdriving smart bombing Geddon powered by Noses!

I write http://stabbedup.blogspot.co.uk/

I post on reddit as /u/callduron.
Van Mathias
Dead Space Continuum
#268 - 2013-04-13 01:19:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Van Mathias
Rented wrote:
Van Mathias wrote:
And you fail to understand that 6.7% reduction of 100k ehp is different from a reduction of 6.7% of 150k ehp. You might take more off the 150k, but it will still end up with a higher absolute number than the result of the former calculation.

Your fit is a big deal on this. Let me explain it this way: given the same DPS, a 5% reduction in resists at a lower resist will result in a greater reduction in time till death than a 5% reduction in resists at a much higher resist would provide for. This is because the associative property of multiplied numbers. Changes in rates by themselves are meaningless, you have to look at the number you are modifying as well.


So basically..... you've completely reversed your addled thinking that this harms your poor personal Rokh more than it harms invuln-stacking fleet Rokhs, and you are now whining that it hurts the fleet Rokhs more than it hurts your personal Rokh.

Congrats on the complete 180, and you wonder why we say you make no sense. You're apparently not terribly sure what you're saying either.


I'm saying that the last seconds of your tank is more valuable than the first seconds of survival it provides. It's called increasing marginal utility, and it is very relevant here. If it takes 100 secs to kill your opponent, and you die in 90secs, how much more is the last 11 seconds you need to win worth than the first 90 seconds you can lose with?

That last 5% of resists is worth more than the 20 points of resist that precede it. As I said before, this nerf is a big deal. Much larger than you make it out to be. So it gets taken away, fine, I lose. What will I get in return to round out my small gang ship? I don't see more drone bay, or a faster base speed...

I'm putting my odds on getting nothing and liking it.

Post your advanced battleship ideas here!
Snapper Pumpkinpuss
Sarano Planetary Goods Distribution
DammFam
#269 - 2013-04-13 01:28:40 UTC
You guys are stupid...I own 2 companys all your doing and everything you do just NERFS things there is never a plus.. Counrty club mentallity...there too strong NERF missles NERF it dont matter you dont make them weaker you make them stronger because new players are the only ones who loose ....Coke Pepsi McDonalds Toyota dont Nerf there cars burgers or soda they work to get new consumers if you guys keep doing this and makeing it better for older players and harder fro new ones you wont have any new playsers and you will die
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#270 - 2013-04-13 02:14:30 UTC
Snapper Pumpkinpuss wrote:
You guys are stupid...I own 2 companys all your doing and everything you do just NERFS things there is never a plus.. Counrty club mentallity...there too strong NERF missles NERF it dont matter you dont make them weaker you make them stronger because new players are the only ones who loose ....Coke Pepsi McDonalds Toyota dont Nerf there cars burgers or soda they work to get new consumers if you guys keep doing this and makeing it better for older players and harder fro new ones you wont have any new playsers and you will die



I don't think your lemonade stand and your collection of pokemon cards count as companies..

You cannot have anything more comprehensive than that with such poor understanding of how things work.


(Psst, McDonalds don't need to balance burgers... You know.. because burgers don't have gameplay..)

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#271 - 2013-04-13 02:19:13 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:

(Psst, McDonalds don't need to balance burgers... You know.. because burgers don't have gameplay..)

Have you never seen a McDonalds hamburger (I mean beef flavored patty) the ketchup to mustard raito is all messed up, there is onion randomly thrown on, and don't get me started on the pickles.
McDonalds balance = FAIL

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Toshaheri Talvinen
Tritanium Industries and Technology
Goonswarm Federation
#272 - 2013-04-13 02:27:36 UTC
Please explain to me how decreasing the resistances of all these ships is going to help the alpha fleet mentality? Isn't it just going to turn into a mechanic of whomever can fire their arties faster wins the fleet fight? It's just going to encourage it, but that's just my logic speaking to me.

I really find this logic thing annoying. It makes things less enjoyable.

- - Tosh
Elsa Nietchize
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#273 - 2013-04-13 02:46:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Elsa Nietchize
The question stands as "is this a good change for the game".
The change is palatable because it's small. The real question is "will it change the game?"
The answer is simple: No
Strange Shadow
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#274 - 2013-04-13 03:13:22 UTC
Why boosting supercaps again?

All that math in the OP is mostly irrelevant to HIC since it cannot be repped with his disruptor active, so this will result in plain decrease of tank for all HICs, the only ships that can tackle supers in low, and one of the two that can tackle them in null.

Result is plain less chances to tackle those behemoths that already immune to everything else.

Please fix supers first, before adjusting the only tools that can deal with them, the current balance is already very fragile and upsets many...
Bane Veradun
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#275 - 2013-04-13 03:38:00 UTC
You know...with all the changes being made to the game within the last year or so, I'm really beginning to question just how it survived to it's ten year anniversary in the first place. It's rather obvious that many of the latest changes were not game-breaking or otherwise adversely affecting the game for just one group.

Elsa Nietchize wrote:
The question stands as "is this a good change for the game".
The change is palatable because it's small. The real question is "will it change the game?"
The answer is simple: No


If the change is so small, then why make it at all? Once again, Eve made it this far, are the changes really necessary? If it's such a minute balance, then it should be questioned as to whether or not it may be worth the adverse results or balancing issues it may create in an attempt to balance such a small thing.

I don't know, maybe it's time to just keep on trucking. I severely doubt CCP really cares what a common player thinks about this game or these changes anymore.

Hi.
Auferre
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#276 - 2013-04-13 03:43:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Auferre
As an across-the-board change, this is an awful idea.

For certain ships on that list (Archon, Aeon, Drake and the new Prophecy come to mind) a resist nerf is reasonable, maybe even needed. As far as Battlecruisers, I know I hardly fly anything but Drakes and Prophecies since the rebalance because the tank+gank on those two ships is even better than before. (Assuming maxed BC skill, that is. Given the upcoming skill changes, most long-term pilots will have BC5 by the time this change happens.)

For some of the other ship lines, this is decidedly odd. Exhumers in particular - you folks did a ton of fiddling with resists and EHP for Exhumers on Singularity before the changes to that line went live. Apparently all that testing is out the window now because it would be untidy to have some ships at 4%/level and others at 5%?

As for the Nighthawk, just scrap the damn thing and start over. While you're at it, re-rebalance the Ferox.
Sigras
Conglomo
#277 - 2013-04-13 03:47:38 UTC
These changes needed to be made on an across the board level because the resist bonuses are better than the rep bonuses on an across the board level.

They may have been left on the carriers/HICs because they arent competing against a rep bonused ship in the same class, but other than that, all of the changes are justified because the bonuses were better across the board.

IE the Nighthawk might not be the best command ship but that doesnt change the fact that the 5% resist bonus is unambiguously better than the Astarte's 7.5% rep bonus

Now this may mean having to go back over and polish some of the already rebalanced ships, but if that's the case, so be it. What theyre eradicating is a bonus that is clearly better in 99% of situations so people dont ask "why does one ship get a bonus that is clearly better than another ship?"

also, to the people who are complaining "Herp Sherp i dont have battleship level 5 durrrrrr" This is actually a buff to you people as before you were 5% behind everyone else, now youre only 4% behind everyone else. Learn to math and come again please.
Rynnik
Evasion Gaming
The Ancients.
#278 - 2013-04-13 03:58:06 UTC
I eagerly await the Alpha nerf that must be coming to balance this out.
Elsa Nietchize
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#279 - 2013-04-13 04:04:03 UTC
Bane Veradun wrote:

If the change is so small, then why make it at all? Once again, Eve made it this far, are the changes really necessary? If it's such a minute balance, then it should be questioned as to whether or not it may be worth the adverse results or balancing issues it may create in an attempt to balance such a small thing.


That's essentially the point I'm making. Fozzie has done an excellent job fixing ships that were completely useless. I feel this change is a tweak and not a fix because it doesn't fix anything.

The thread has called out the issue many times. There's two types of PVP, fleet and solo. This change will be hardly noticeable to either of these styles of pvp. The thread did make an interesting point in noting that the real nerf here is to PVE.
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative
#280 - 2013-04-13 04:07:39 UTC
Bane Veradun wrote:
You know...with all the changes being made to the game within the last year or so, I'm really beginning to question just how it survived to it's ten year anniversary in the first place. It's rather obvious that many of the latest changes were not game-breaking or otherwise adversely affecting the game for just one group.

Elsa Nietchize wrote:
The question stands as "is this a good change for the game".
The change is palatable because it's small. The real question is "will it change the game?"
The answer is simple: No


If the change is so small, then why make it at all? Once again, Eve made it this far, are the changes really necessary? If it's such a minute balance, then it should be questioned as to whether or not it may be worth the adverse results or balancing issues it may create in an attempt to balance such a small thing.

I don't know, maybe it's time to just keep on trucking. I severely doubt CCP really cares what a common player thinks about this game or these changes anymore.


Sadly, I disagree with you. I came back after a two year break. The changes within this last 'season' were the best, most well rounded and necessary I've gotten to witness.

Ships that were never flown are now at it again. Playstyles that weren't valid are there. Personally, the only issue I really have is the proposed Armageddon change (more out of nostalgia for the boat than anything else), and the continuous lack of serious stand-out armor ability that Amarr faction line deserves.

It's all a matter of perspective. Change isn't bad. Even change we don't like for personal opinion reasons isn't bad ... just annoying and sad. But can we all say that we're angry about the changes because of personal reasons, or a ship we used one way can no longer be used that way?

I doubt they'll break anything. For every time they have, it was back up again in a year or two.

If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality. That "griefer/thief" is probably more sane than you are. How screwed up is that?