These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Proteus] Reduction in Fighter and Fighter Bomber scan resolution

First post First post First post
Author
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#81 - 2015-01-05 23:07:10 UTC
Panther X wrote:
In b4 Grr Goons.

Still awaiting a response on why FBs are getting a scan res nerf of more than 90%. It makes no sense.
Why 90%? Why not 25% or 50% or 66.666667%?

What does the scan resolution in fighter bombers have to do with an exploit that it requires a 90%+ reduction?

Can you at least do the maths fer me and explain the whys and wherefores?


Stay tuned to themittani.com for all of your answers and enjoy the comments thread it spawns.
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
#82 - 2015-01-05 23:08:40 UTC
Is this the birth of a ECM Burst fleet doctrine?
Tykonderoga
A Blessed Bean
Pandemic Horde
#83 - 2015-01-05 23:08:55 UTC
You never answered if you would self destruct all your supers and titans first if you are so ideologically devoted to them being destroyed or made useless.
Lord Takani
The Northerners
Northern Coalition.
#84 - 2015-01-05 23:09:46 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Quote:

Then why aren't you providing that criticism here? Post it, post your ideas, explain them and get a healthy discussion going instead of flaming each other. If you want to flame, go to redit.


This isnt the thread for those things and plans are afoot. This thead is about changes to stop a bad thing from becoming a terrible thing. If NC DOT dont want to be seen as the target of this nerf you are not exactly helping yourselves by dogpiling the thread with the flailing masses.



Again you go on about the NCDOT. Screw the alliance BS, and stop being narrow minded. Our opinion does not count?
Panther X
Destructive Influence
Northern Coalition.
#85 - 2015-01-05 23:10:14 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Panther X wrote:
In b4 Grr Goons.

Still awaiting a response on why FBs are getting a scan res nerf of more than 90%. It makes no sense.
Why 90%? Why not 25% or 50% or 66.666667%?

What does the scan resolution in fighter bombers have to do with an exploit that it requires a 90%+ reduction?

Can you at least do the maths fer me and explain the whys and wherefores?


Stay tuned to themittani.com for all of your answers and enjoy the comments thread it spawns.



LOL Like anyone at TMC can do the maths. Gewns own the CSM's, so it really isn't a surprise.

Here's an idea. Give gewns their own server so they and the RusRus can go live in Utopian Socialist Paradise.

My Titan smells of rich Corinthian Leather...

Haidere
Evolution
Northern Coalition.
#86 - 2015-01-05 23:15:18 UTC
Ladies, you're both pretty. Now let's try and help CCP find a logical, effective fix for this problem instead of flailing away at each other.
Panther X
Destructive Influence
Northern Coalition.
#87 - 2015-01-05 23:16:41 UTC
Haidere wrote:
Ladies, you're both pretty. Now let's try and help CCP find a logical, effective fix for this problem instead of flailing away at each other.


Nah Baltec is full of Mittani branded smug lol

My Titan smells of rich Corinthian Leather...

Panther X
Destructive Influence
Northern Coalition.
#88 - 2015-01-05 23:23:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Panther X
baltec1 wrote:
Panther X wrote:
In b4 Grr Goons.

Still awaiting a response on why FBs are getting a scan res nerf of more than 90%. It makes no sense.
Why 90%? Why not 25% or 50% or 66.666667%?

What does the scan resolution in fighter bombers have to do with an exploit that it requires a 90%+ reduction?

Can you at least do the maths fer me and explain the whys and wherefores?


Stay tuned to themittani.com for all of your answers and enjoy the comments thread it spawns.


Gewns are just happy this is happening after we faceraped them with giant ass sausages in Fountain thanks to fighter assist. So there it is.


...waits for Grr NC DOT flames to pour in.

My Titan smells of rich Corinthian Leather...

Anton Menges Saddat
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#89 - 2015-01-05 23:31:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Anton Menges Saddat
This change is ridiculous and unnecessary.

as for the exploit.... really? who the **** spams launch/recall fighters/bombers ever? i've literally never seen this done.... you do realize the ******* things need to fly to the target and back, right? you're seriously telling me making **** fly back and forth + launch/relaunch gigigives a massive dps boost? i find this incredibly hard to believe.

if that really is the issue though, why not just add a scoop/relaunch delay?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#90 - 2015-01-05 23:38:21 UTC
Tykonderoga wrote:
You never answered if you would self destruct all your supers and titans first if you are so ideologically devoted to them being destroyed or made useless.


Who needs to self destruct them when we have our gift for welping them?
Firefox4312 Yatolila
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#91 - 2015-01-05 23:39:55 UTC
Anton Menges Saddat wrote:
This change is ridiculous and unnecessary.

as for the exploit.... really? who the **** spams launch/recall fighters/bombers ever? i've literally never seen this done.... you do realize the ******* things need to fly to the target and back, right? you're seriously telling me making **** fly back and forth + launch/relaunch gigigives a massive dps boost? i find this incredibly hard to believe.

if that really is the issue though, why not just add a scoop/relaunch delay?


The issue is that in theory it's possible. But in practice, it's pointless, because you're screwing your own damage a lot of the time (Unless you can magically get all the supers on both sides to be at 0 on each other, and ignore collision, so that you don't bump away) it's impossible. This is CCP's bandaid for bad coding on their end, because they'd rather not go out of their way to fix it. It's easier to change variables rather than change an entire line of code.
Anton Menges Saddat
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#92 - 2015-01-05 23:41:21 UTC
Primary This Rifter wrote:
I'm not entirely sure what the reasoning is for this change even having read the OP, but I'm pretty confident it has nothing to do with nerfing FB effectiveness against subcaps.

yup the 'reasoning' is so ludicrous that i can't take it in good faith.
Anton Menges Saddat
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#93 - 2015-01-05 23:48:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Anton Menges Saddat
Firefox4312 Yatolila wrote:
Anton Menges Saddat wrote:
This change is ridiculous and unnecessary.

as for the exploit.... really? who the **** spams launch/recall fighters/bombers ever? i've literally never seen this done.... you do realize the ******* things need to fly to the target and back, right? you're seriously telling me making **** fly back and forth + launch/relaunch gigigives a massive dps boost? i find this incredibly hard to believe.

if that really is the issue though, why not just add a scoop/relaunch delay?


The issue is that in theory it's possible. But in practice, it's pointless, because you're screwing your own damage a lot of the time (Unless you can magically get all the supers on both sides to be at 0 on each other, and ignore collision, so that you don't bump away) it's impossible. This is CCP's bandaid for bad coding on their end, because they'd rather not go out of their way to fix it. It's easier to change variables rather than change an entire line of code.

yup. the reasoning is pants on head ******** and doesn't make sense. i personally feel like i'm being fed a load of bullshit here in regards to the true reasons for this drastic nerf. attempting this 'exploit' only lowers your actual damage output.....
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
#94 - 2015-01-05 23:57:11 UTC
Kewl. So bombers will have 15-20 seconds locking time on caps/supercaps. Great Idea!

Too bad my super-cap-pilot-in-training is almost done training ... can I get bombers V reimbursed please? I want to train ishtar now instead
Red Teufel
Calamitous-Intent
Feign Disorder
#95 - 2015-01-06 00:08:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Red Teufel
There is little to no risk to the carrier who is performing skynet. Especialy in a cyno jammed system. At most these changes just means if you are in an ishtar or anti frig you may have a chance to get away. Skynet is too broken. Waiting till it is used too much like isboxer is a bad move for the health of NS/LS space pvp. Right now we mostly avoid tackling carriers because of how OP the fighters are. Its just a content deterent.

FYI over the last few weeks almost every null roam we have run into skynet.
Tykonderoga
A Blessed Bean
Pandemic Horde
#96 - 2015-01-06 00:12:05 UTC
The reason behind this nerf is because certain developers hate supers and capitals and don't have the courage to just get rid of them. Stop doing half measures and get it over with. Stop being dishonest about a mythical exploit as well.

Finally, it is as if no one at CCP plays the game. Oh, I know, because they don't actually play the game and it has been on autopilot for years. Just sell out to EA and I think the game would be better. Just sell out to the Perpetuum people and the game would be better.
Paynus Maiassus
Silvana Innovations
Greater Solitude Commonwealth
#97 - 2015-01-06 00:20:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Paynus Maiassus
It seems this change is primarily just to eliminate an exploit. It doesn't look to me like fighters or fighter bombers will be significantly negatively impacted. I think this change is alright although I would want to say that I am definitely not in the camp that thinks fighters and fighter bombers need a significant nerf. This nerf to reduce an exploit is fine, but anything further I would not support. Fighters and fighter bombers lack the utility of sentries and as pretty much everyone is saying here, sentries are really the only drone problem.

Carriers could use a rebalance so that a triage fit can consist of more than a billion capacitor modules. Sentries could use a rebalance, possibly by limiting their use on carriers and Ishtars and make them the battleship weapon they were intended to be. Given the problems with battleship fighting these days they'd go back to making drone boats viable for PvE and have limited PvP use.

But fighters and FBs are not in need of a nerf, other than to perhaps reduce this exploit, which I never considered using until I read this thread.

And Fozzie, I hope you guys all had a merry Christmas and new years and are all rested and ready to get back to the breakneck release pace. Wonderful work CCP has been doing. Looking forward to more and more module rebalances with the coming releases and please don't forget to add the new rendering to the T3s, stations, and POS structures. This game is getting out of control gorgeous. Frankly, once the new sov package comes in, if it works as intended, I would be content with just adding the physical rendering to everything in the game and rebalancing all the modules until it's time for the star gates. This game is really getting to where I want it to be.
M1k3y Koontz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#98 - 2015-01-06 00:23:50 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Yet another exploit tied to the drone system. Is it about time to start yelling "Death to Drones!" as much as we yell "Death to all Supers!", perhaps?


Death to all Drones!

And Ishtars.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.

d0cTeR9
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#99 - 2015-01-06 00:33:32 UTC
-1 Poorly designed 'tweak'.

CCP time to properly fix carriers and supercarriers instead of gimping assets that have been paid for (in billions of Isis), ages ago.

Start by:
Nerfiing the Ishtar.
Introducing the new hull for the mega.

Then you can take a look at caps and super caps.

Btw, motherships, yes that's what they are actually called, already go hit so much, less fighters deployed (meaning less fighters to assign, doesn't matter they got a 100% bonus! pop 1 = 2 dead now!), can't deploy normal drones, can't even dock to resupply...

Fozzie I want my beer back from Fanfest a few years ago -_-

Been around since the beginning.

Dar Saleem
VDD Logistics
#100 - 2015-01-06 00:41:57 UTC
Haidere wrote:
Ladies, you're both pretty. Now let's try and help CCP find a logical, effective fix for this problem instead of flailing away at each other.


You make the assumption CCP actually listen to us.

They don't. Their pathetic response to any difficult problem is just to go and nerf it. I used to think fozzie was different, but in the end hes fallen into the CCP mindtrap of nerf everything