These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Nerfing Caldari?

First post
Author
Endeavour Starfleet
#141 - 2012-01-18 13:29:05 UTC
WisdomLikeSilence wrote:
im 8 years in the game and can fly any race well or at max skills (barirng supercaps) for every combat ship, so it no longer makes any difference to me which race they boost or which they nerf: Im not biased toward any of them.

Having said that, the Drake is all too prevalent in fleet makeups. It does everything very well, and requires very little isk to purchase.

If CCP is all about maximising the diversity in the game, then drakes need their enormous tanks downgraded a little.



Ya you arent biased at all. Are you? Roll

Btw while we are at it. Lets give newer players a "get well in half a decade" card while force feeding them moon goo.

Nullsec alliances must be jumping for joy right now. CCP is about to remove one of the biggest nemesis to their recruiting of virtual slaves to defend moon goo. Ability of newer pilots to run PVE or small gang warfare. Sign here and off to the arty training! Cant fly one? Well just use whatever POS we have back at home to rat at 100 percent corp tax to fund our good ole boy logi club.

This is a gift to huge alliances and a slap to the face of newer players. As well as a baseball bat to the face of people who actually do things right in eve and train subskills before ship.

This change does NOT need to happen. CCP leave the drake alone!

Skippermonkey
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#142 - 2012-01-18 13:29:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Skippermonkey
can i point out that reducing the tank and increasing the gank on a drake isnt exactly a nerf

that ship had plenty of tank, it can spare a little bit

also, STFU about nulsec alliances and your batshit insane conspiracy theories

COME AT ME BRO

I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION

London
Center for Advanced Studies
#143 - 2012-01-18 13:30:19 UTC
WisdomLikeSilence wrote:
im 8 years in the game and can fly any race well or at max skills (barirng supercaps) for every combat ship, so it no longer makes any difference to me which race they boost or which they nerf: Im not biased toward any of them.

Having said that, the Drake is all too prevalent in fleet makeups. It does everything very well, and requires very little isk to purchase.

If CCP is all about maximising the diversity in the game, then drakes need their enormous tanks downgraded a little.


Exact same sentiment.
Endeavour Starfleet
#144 - 2012-01-18 13:42:01 UTC
Skippermonkey wrote:
can i point out that reducing the tank and increasing the gank on a drake isnt exactly a nerf

that ship had plenty of tank, it can spare a little bit

also, STFU about nulsec alliances and your batshit insane conspiracy theories


#1 this isn't going to be a "little bit" nerf. Removing the resist bonus will gut its ability to tank anything other than Kinetic. That will destroy its Lvl4 ability right there.

#2 CCP went to the CSM FIRST instead of the community about this load of crap. They need the green light from a bunch of nullsec players before they can even talk to us about it? This should have been posted the moment it arrived as in idea at the office so we could have said it was a terrible idea then instead of now.
Gempei
Marvinovi pratele
Dracarys.
#145 - 2012-01-18 13:42:49 UTC
Hanoch Wheel wrote:
Generally speaking, I think nerfings should be avoided unless ABSOLUTELY necessary, continued mild buffs to the weaker ships are far more interesting, and simulate a wartime economy and march of technology much better

Arrow THIS!
Ursula LeGuinn
Perkone
Caldari State
#146 - 2012-01-18 13:44:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Ursula LeGuinn
In my view, the problem isn't that the Drake is overpowered — it's that most other Battlecruisers are terrible. In fact, a lot of ships in this game are terrible, and are overshadowed by just one or two of the ships in their respective categories. The initial design goal to endow every race's ships with a certain statistic-based "theme" has made EVE incredibly difficult to balance.

If every ship in every category actually excelled at something specific instead of being a useless mess, these balance issues wouldn't be so prevalent. In 2003-2005, when people didn't know exactly how everything worked, didn't have access to every module and there were still years of player trial-and-error to be done, it wasn't a big deal. At this late date, though, every strength and weakness of every ship and module is now starkly apparent to pretty much everyone (though opinions do differ).

There's a developer in this thread claiming that the Drake is easy to train for. It takes two months of training to fly one adequately, three months to fly them fairly well, and at least five or six months (plus implants) to fly them expertly.

Six months is "easy"? You do still want new players to continue subscribing to EVE, right?

"The EVE forums are intended to provide a warm, friendly atmosphere for the EVE community." — EVElopedia

Qarth
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#147 - 2012-01-18 13:51:58 UTC
Yes the Drake is a "little" to good in terms of tank. But then the Caldari Battleships are total ****. Why fly a Raven that sucks total ass when you can fly a Drake that has a fighting chance.

The problem isn't the Drake. It's the amount of useless pieces of crap that fill out the Caldari roster. The entire race is broken as a whole and needs a major overhaul. So before you go swinging the nerfbat at the Drake with Mittens blessing. Fix the ships the Caldari have 1st. Also while you are at it, Fix the freaking Gal ships too and do something about blasters.

Let the Winmatar and Amar languish for a few years as you start working on fixing the "other two" races ships.
Melangell
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#148 - 2012-01-18 13:52:47 UTC
Ursula LeGuinn wrote:
In my view, the problem isn't that the Drake is overpowered — it's that most other Battlecruisers are terrible. In fact, a lot of ships in this game are terrible, and are overshadowed by just one or two of the ships in their respective categories. The initial design goal to endow every race's ships with a certain statistic-based "theme" has made EVE incredibly difficult to balance.

If every ship in every category actually excelled at something specific instead of being a useless mess, these balance issues wouldn't be so prevalent. In 2003-2005, when people didn't know exactly how everything worked, didn't have access to every module and there were still years of player trial-and-error to be done, it wasn't a big deal. At this late date, though, every strength and weakness of every ship and module is now starkly apparent to pretty much everyone (though opinions do differ).

There's a developer in this thread claiming that the Drake is easy to train for. It takes two months of training to fly one adequately, three months to fly them fairly well, and at least five or six months (plus implants) to fly them expertly.

Six months is "easy"? You do still want new players to continue subscribing to EVE, right?


You can be in a drake and find it very useful easily within a couple of months. Yes of course being an expert takes longer but that does not alter the fact you can do loads with it very quickly - and look at things like the 'cane - you need way more skill time just to be able to keep it alive let alone use it for killing things.

However I agree with your other comments the BCs don't seem very balanced and what is more the gap between them and the T2 cruisers seems murky at times. A better approach might be to make tier 2 BCs a bit more expensive, require a few more SPs and bring them all more in line with each other. The tier 1 BCs would then have a useful role too

Skippermonkey
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#149 - 2012-01-18 13:54:44 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:


#1 this isn't going to be a "little bit" nerf. Removing the resist bonus will gut its ability to tank anything other than Kinetic. That will destroy its Lvl4 ability right there.

#2 CCP went to the CSM FIRST instead of the community about this load of crap. They need the green light from a bunch of nullsec players before they can even talk to us about it? This should have been posted the moment it arrived as in idea at the office so we could have said it was a terrible idea then instead of now.


#1 How many other tech 1 battlecruisers can run a level 4 mission solo? The point is their tank is too much for a ship of their size. To be perfectly honest, nobody worth their salt will be upset that a Drake can no longer run a lvl4 mission, you should be running those in a higher quality of ship. I am actually more excited that the Drake will be able to deal more damage

#2 OF COURSE CCP WENT TO THE CSM FIRST, ITS THE REASON THE CSM EXISTS

jeez, you have less brains than a bagel

COME AT ME BRO

I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION

Endeavour Starfleet
#150 - 2012-01-18 14:02:34 UTC
The CSM does not exist to be a good ole boy club to greenlight BS that CCP does. They completely and utterly failed to stop CCP's head dive into incarna and greenlighted this POS despite many in the community that oppose it.

Now we have to do this months later when this could have been put on the shelf months ago and focus put on the CSM talking about stuff that needs to be NDA for now. Drake nerfs are nothing to NDA unless of course you want to try to rush them in before the community can react.
Pattern Clarc
Citeregis
#151 - 2012-01-18 14:05:32 UTC


Raptor (yes, it's still in the database)
Moa (see above)
Egale (everything)
Ferox (lol)
Raven (30% less ehp than most armour bs's)
Rokh (lack of dps)
Pheonix (because citadel torps are awesome)


Instead, the highest priority is a drake nerf...

This will end well.

Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction

Xpaulusx
Naari LLC
#152 - 2012-01-18 14:12:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Xpaulusx
Pattern Clarc wrote:


Raptor (yes, it's still in the database)
Moa (see above)
Egale (everything)
Ferox (lol)
Raven (30% less ehp than most armour bs's)
Rokh (lack of dps)
Pheonix (because citadel torps are awesome)


Instead, the highest priority is a drake nerf...

This will end well.

Yep, point i was trying to make all along not mention people bitching about Falcons, (ECM Nerf on the horizon) thank god im Calmatar. God gave them ears but they do not listen, brain dosen't seem to work either Roll

......................................................

Klown Walk
Black Rebel Rifter Club
The Devil's Tattoo
#153 - 2012-01-18 14:15:14 UTC
I really hope they don´t nerf cyclones.
Skippermonkey
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#154 - 2012-01-18 14:21:58 UTC
What the hell is an egale

:p

COME AT ME BRO

I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION

Gempei
Marvinovi pratele
Dracarys.
#155 - 2012-01-18 14:22:47 UTC
Mutnin wrote:
Why is the Drake so popular? Because it's the only damn useful PVP ship Caldari has out side ECM and smart bombing Rokhs. Fix the other Caldari ships if you want to see less Drakes.

+1
Kingwood
Gone Krabbing
#156 - 2012-01-18 14:24:00 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Skippermonkey wrote:
can i point out that reducing the tank and increasing the gank on a drake isnt exactly a nerf

that ship had plenty of tank, it can spare a little bit

also, STFU about nulsec alliances and your batshit insane conspiracy theories


#1 this isn't going to be a "little bit" nerf. Removing the resist bonus will gut its ability to tank anything other than Kinetic. That will destroy its Lvl4 ability right there.

#2 CCP went to the CSM FIRST instead of the community about this load of crap. They need the green light from a bunch of nullsec players before they can even talk to us about it? This should have been posted the moment it arrived as in idea at the office so we could have said it was a terrible idea then instead of now.


Noone cares about your missions.
Skippermonkey
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#157 - 2012-01-18 14:25:19 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
The CSM does not exist to be a good ole boy club to greenlight BS that CCP does. They completely and utterly failed to stop CCP's head dive into incarna and greenlighted this POS despite many in the community that oppose it.

Now we have to do this months later when this could have been put on the shelf months ago and focus put on the CSM talking about stuff that needs to be NDA for now. Drake nerfs are nothing to NDA unless of course you want to try to rush them in before the community can react.


You know, i think you are about 2 months too late on this whole 'hate on CSM' deal. The current CSM have handled the previously self destructive urges of CCP quite well i think, and we are currently headed towards the most brightest future EVE has known for quite some time.

Also, tell me why you are so mad about them exchanging some of the Drakes tank for gank.

There is literally nothing to complain about here, so stop trying.

COME AT ME BRO

I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION

Endeavour Starfleet
#158 - 2012-01-18 14:27:52 UTC
Kingwood wrote:
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Skippermonkey wrote:
can i point out that reducing the tank and increasing the gank on a drake isnt exactly a nerf

that ship had plenty of tank, it can spare a little bit

also, STFU about nulsec alliances and your batshit insane conspiracy theories


#1 this isn't going to be a "little bit" nerf. Removing the resist bonus will gut its ability to tank anything other than Kinetic. That will destroy its Lvl4 ability right there.

#2 CCP went to the CSM FIRST instead of the community about this load of crap. They need the green light from a bunch of nullsec players before they can even talk to us about it? This should have been posted the moment it arrived as in idea at the office so we could have said it was a terrible idea then instead of now.


Noone cares about your missions.


Oh nullsec alliances care. Lvl4 missions and incursions means newer players have a choice in EVE that isn't being fodder for moon goo. It means their own players can log in alts to avoid BS CTAS.

The Drake was a thorn in their moon goo encrusted side now once this crap goes through they can be removed from the field both on and off. And go back to the KM generating alpha spree.
Vertisce Soritenshi
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#159 - 2012-01-18 14:27:54 UTC
lol...this entire thread is so full of fail. Let's nerf one ship so another ship can take it's place as the OP "in need of nerf" ship. The Drake by itself has gone through what...3 nerfs not including this one now? What is it going to take here to appease people? Make it a starter ship? God...I don't even fly a Drake anymore...I fly my Oracle...I suppose that needs a nerf too though. A nano fit Oracle is pretty rediculous...

Bounties for all! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2279821#post2279821

Endeavour Starfleet
#160 - 2012-01-18 14:30:51 UTC
Skippermonkey wrote:
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
The CSM does not exist to be a good ole boy club to greenlight BS that CCP does. They completely and utterly failed to stop CCP's head dive into incarna and greenlighted this POS despite many in the community that oppose it.

Now we have to do this months later when this could have been put on the shelf months ago and focus put on the CSM talking about stuff that needs to be NDA for now. Drake nerfs are nothing to NDA unless of course you want to try to rush them in before the community can react.


You know, i think you are about 2 months too late on this whole 'hate on CSM' deal. The current CSM have handled the previously self destructive urges of CCP quite well i think, and we are currently headed towards the most brightest future EVE has known for quite some time.

Also, tell me why you are so mad about them exchanging some of the Drakes tank for gank.

There is literally nothing to complain about here, so stop trying.


The CSM does NOT deserve credit for stopping CCP. It was the community doing mass unsubs and protests that did it. CSM went there to say the same thing the forum was saying.

The CSM should be there to present ideas and thought. Not be a traffic light for CCP ideas that could benefit their moon goo and power them through CTAs.

CCP should present their ideas to US the players first. THEN the CSM should remind CCP on what CCP can clearly read on the forums if needed.