Player Features and Ideas Discussion

They seem to be working as planned. While it is never pleasant being caught by them while engaged in a fight since I am more than willing to crash someone else's party in the same manner I don't have room to complain.

Don't get it. They are extremely strong, but their applied dps in those fagcamps (sabre, three falcons, 2 nagas) is really low with them using longrangefits/stuff. Putting aside that fighting uphill against prepared people is a pita, shooting from 50+ with large guns is always a smart thing, so you're making it very hard for yourself taking that fight at all. If it's about landing in a gatecamp with sabres/falcons/ABCs, then you just got butt******.

I do not see how any change will make a big difference for what you are complaining about. They hit hard over long range. Fittings just were even more optimized towards supporting that play if the stats were to be cut, also you'd destroy the ships for a lot of smallgang people, as with the reent rise of HACs, ABCs already are losing ground. (ABCs dumpstered by AHACs / CS all over the place)

The difference is that the Rohks will ignore the frigate until it's ~40km away, and then a fleet's worth of Warrior IIs will get dumped on the frigate.

They don't seem overpowered to me. They die fast if they're hit.

If you're not hitting them, you're either outnumbered or your ship is fitted incorrectly for the encounter. Either way, it's not the fault of the ABC.

This game is 30k+ years in the future AND in space. Please stop clinging to archaic 20th century warship terms as a justification to undermine the names chosen in this game to describe a class of ships between cruisers and Battleships.


Now, let me get back on topic... While I don't always agree with prom (especially his old point about how the absolution was based off the harb, lol...) In regards to his analysis on ABCs, he's spot on. These ships have lead to more problems than any other ship in the past 4-5 years. Was even more upsetting is that their presence is significantly effecting the most recent balancing decisions... Take a look at the medium long range weaponry, you will see that it's dps was drastically increased in an attempt to give these weapons a role along side short ranged weapons fit onto abcs. The result is that the relative difference of dps between short and long range weapons in the medium lineup is completely out of wack when compared to small and large weapons.

In conclusion, the problem had far less to do with medium long range weapons, and far more to do with Extremely OP ABCs. CCP is trying to "normalize" effect to that of something that has been proven OP time and time again. The problem with medium long range weapons in the past not being viable had far more do with overbearing ABCs, and far less to do with the weapons themselves. While a modest increase in their effectiveness was most certainly needed to balance them along side their short range medium counterparts, the 30%+ dps that some weapons received just went way too far.

Their specific combination of speed, agility, and range may be OP'd, but the OP (different acronym here :p ) has failed to make convincing arguments to that effect.

Well like it or not, nautical equivalents are used in the game, otherwise we wouldn't be referring to our craft as ships or vessels or indeed using the term cruiser, battlecruiser, battleship or frigate. We'd in actual fact be calling them what they are, (small, medium, large or x-large mobile weapon platforms) so the naval doctrine thing still exists even thirty thousand years into the future, so making comparisons is still valid. As for the rest of your post medium weapons were not fine before the advent of the ABC's and were horribly unbalanced, the cause of which had nothing to do with ABC's as they field battleship sized weapons in a highly limited and restrictive way which more than makes up for the higher dps.