These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#981 - 2013-05-31 21:20:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaarous Aldurald
Dersen Lowery wrote:
ExAstra wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Extending armor and shield repair bonuses to apply to remote reps would bring them much closer to balance with resist bonuses, but would also further empower the current remote rep tactics that are as strong as we feel we can allow them to be.
I would like to inquire about this logic. With the current meta favoring remote repairs over local tanks in 90% of all fights, with the exception being only small gang (where the resist bonus still applies and is still useful and is NOT overshadowed by the local rep bonus), why are you avoiding giving a slight boost to the incoming logistics?


To take this a step further, if the concern is that remote reps are already borderline OP, why not extend the local rep bonus to remote reps, and then, if necessary, adjust the power of remote reps downward? It doesn't make any sense to me that local tanking should take the hit to keep remote reps from becoming OP, especially since locally tanked ships will still be more vulnerable to alpha.

Put the two tanking styles on more-or-less equal footing; then, if the problem is the excessive power of remote reps, then fix that.


I mentioned this a bit ago. The problem is remote reps, and they know it.

But Incursions are pretty much only balanced around the current state of remote reps. Mess with that, and you have to go and rebalance Incursions as a whole. They don't want to do that, so the scapegoat (resists) gets the axe instead.

Then we get half a page of circular logic about how nerfing EHP on popular ships somehow won't increase the popularity of alpha. Like players in this game won't take full advantage of their direct fleet competition getting a nerf.

"Well, they nerfed resists! Now to put down my alpha arty fleet for something less effective, just because!" ... said no FC in history.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Grog Barrel
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#982 - 2013-06-02 01:05:47 UTC
Xander Det89 wrote:
For the love of god can people stop moaning about this as a nerf to the already bad ships, none of the bad ships are bad because of a lack of EHP normally just because they lack good capabilities outside their EHP.


yes guyz, let devz keep beating the dead horses, they are dead anywayz.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#983 - 2013-06-03 16:47:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Dersen Lowery wrote:
ExAstra wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Extending armor and shield repair bonuses to apply to remote reps would bring them much closer to balance with resist bonuses, but would also further empower the current remote rep tactics that are as strong as we feel we can allow them to be.
I would like to inquire about this logic. With the current meta favoring remote repairs over local tanks in 90% of all fights, with the exception being only small gang (where the resist bonus still applies and is still useful and is NOT overshadowed by the local rep bonus), why are you avoiding giving a slight boost to the incoming logistics?


To take this a step further, if the concern is that remote reps are already borderline OP, why not extend the local rep bonus to remote reps, and then, if necessary, adjust the power of remote reps downward? It doesn't make any sense to me that local tanking should take the hit to keep remote reps from becoming OP, especially since locally tanked ships will still be more vulnerable to alpha.

Put the two tanking styles on more-or-less equal footing; then, if the problem is the excessive power of remote reps, then fix that.
Probably due to not wanting to increase the number of ships for which RR can become problematic. If RR on resist ships is an issue as stated then creating more ships with very strong RR only exasperates the issue. So while you help strengthen the local tank bonus to become "competitive" you totally ignore, and infact worsen, another reason for the nerf.

Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
I mentioned this a bit ago. The problem is remote reps, and they know it.

But Incursions are pretty much only balanced around the current state of remote reps. Mess with that, and you have to go and rebalance Incursions as a whole. They don't want to do that, so the scapegoat (resists) gets the axe instead.

Then we get half a page of circular logic about how nerfing EHP on popular ships somehow won't increase the popularity of alpha. Like players in this game won't take full advantage of their direct fleet competition getting a nerf.

"Well, they nerfed resists! Now to put down my alpha arty fleet for something less effective, just because!" ... said no FC in history.
So many questions...
Is RR an issue globally?
- Is RR'ing non resist ships too strong a tactic?
Which part of RR needs changed?
- Just the output?
- Does it need to ignore resists?
- If so do you think fitting resist mods to increase repair efficiency is not intended or exploitative?
If resists are to be considered in RR I'd ask why, if only a few ships become problematic, all of them need nerfed?
- Or is this just the bonused portion?
- And what of local rep effects?
Should local rep bonus differentiation really be a non-factor across all ship classes (remembering this is not just a BS/cap ship nerf and thus not limited to fleet warfare ships)?
Also aren't Rokh's seeing widespread usage in fleets right now?
- How does this not conflict with the idea that arty alpha is > all?
X Gallentius
Black Eagle5
Villore Accords
#984 - 2013-06-03 17:03:54 UTC  |  Edited by: X Gallentius
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

Also aren't Rokh's seeing widespread usage in fleets right now?
- How does this not conflict with the idea that arty alpha is > all?

I assume in massive numbers Hybrid alpha works. Once you get enough people to alpha through your opponents, then rate of fire becomes more important.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#985 - 2013-06-03 17:27:17 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

Also aren't Rokh's seeing widespread usage in fleets right now?
- How does this not conflict with the idea that arty alpha is > all?

I assume in massive numbers Hybrid alpha works. Once you get enough people to alpha through your opponents, then rate of fire becomes more important.

All that would prove is that we are fighting in numbers where alpha vs DPS is rendered irrelevant since the lowest alpha weapon can still be used in alpha. In that case Alpha vs DPS in fleet warfare is irreparably lost.
Ehcks Argentus
X LLC
#986 - 2013-06-03 22:33:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Ehcks Argentus
Wrong thread.
Ordellus
Doomheim
#987 - 2013-06-06 02:49:32 UTC
The resist bonus of these ships is the only thing that's makes passive shield tanking not laughable....I'm concerned that things are being shifted too far into the "go active, go cap non-stable, or go home"
Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
#988 - 2013-06-06 20:44:03 UTC
When are these going be unstickied to give Page 1 back to Player Posts? Odyssey is in and the Feedback and Issues threads are active. Why not replace these with a "Link Sticky" to those two threads?

We all know how lazy we are to go clicking...wait for it...past Page 3 of this Forum section. Blink
Sasha Steel
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#989 - 2013-06-22 00:07:24 UTC
Why my Rattlesnake got resistance nerf but no calibration bonus?
I don't understand the motivation for resistance nerf as "to make it more viable for PVP". Do you seriously believe that navy ships are used for PVP? This nerf is totally ridicules.
Kane Fenris
NWP
#990 - 2013-06-22 11:37:12 UTC
Sasha Steel wrote:
Why my Rattlesnake got resistance nerf but no calibration bonus?


maybe because pirate bs didnt get their rebalanceing yet?