Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
26 PagesPrevious page12345Next pageLast page
 

[Kronos] Blockade Runner Rebalance

First post First post
Author
#41 - 2014-05-17 20:07:41 UTC
Sigras wrote:
Can you tell us what the thought process is behind the mass and agility nerf on the prowler? As it stands there doesnt seem to be much of a reason to use one over a viator.

More mass, slightly slower align time, smaller cargo same slot layout...

It seems to be better in all the ways that dont really matter: resist profile, shield HP, speed


If I calculated correctly, the Prowler gets a very slight reduction in base align time (7.62 sec down to 7.57 sec). The big change is the Viator going from 8.5 seconds down to 7.49 seconds.

Will the new difference in signature radius (Prowler = 105, Viator = 120) make a measurable difference in the speed the ships will get locked up?

The Nosy Gamer - CCP Random: "hehe, falls under the category: nice try, but no. ;)"

#42 - 2014-05-17 20:11:49 UTC
Rosewalker wrote:
Sigras wrote:
Can you tell us what the thought process is behind the mass and agility nerf on the prowler? As it stands there doesnt seem to be much of a reason to use one over a viator.

More mass, slightly slower align time, smaller cargo same slot layout...

It seems to be better in all the ways that dont really matter: resist profile, shield HP, speed


If I calculated correctly, the Prowler gets a very slight reduction in base align time (7.62 sec down to 7.57 sec). The big change is the Viator going from 8.5 seconds down to 7.49 seconds.

Will the new difference in signature radius (Prowler = 105, Viator = 120) make a measurable difference in the speed the ships will get locked up?


You still won't be able to lock them before they cloak, unless your unlucky opponent lags or has very poor coordination.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

#43 - 2014-05-17 20:12:16 UTC
Replaced the useless tanking bonus with +5% warp speed per level. This means that at Transport Ships level 5 they go 7.5au/s.

seems excessive .. inty speed almost on a cruiser hull?? .. i suggest a look at the angel ships for a more reasonable figure

T3's need to be versatile not have T2 resists, OP dps and tank obsoleting T2 ships entirely.

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 highslots for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

Goonswarm Federation
#44 - 2014-05-17 20:15:16 UTC
When a ship doesn't really use damage or tank, distinguishing the different races is tough. While these balance changes are looking good, we basically have 4 copies of the same ship.

To better individualise them, how about a small dedicated special bay for each ship, just like the old Iteron variants got? Something like 2-4k space for PI materials, ammo, ice, fuel blocks, etc differing per race...
Goonswarm Federation
#45 - 2014-05-17 20:17:30 UTC
Harvey James wrote:

seems excessive .. inty speed almost on a cruiser hull?? .. i suggest a look at the angel ships for a more reasonable figure


How many people do you think will train Transport Ships 5 to get that? Most will only have it to 3 or 4.
Spaceship Bebop
#46 - 2014-05-17 20:20:45 UTC
CynoNet Two wrote:
When a ship doesn't really use damage or tank, distinguishing the different races is tough. While these balance changes are looking good, we basically have 4 copies of the same ship.

To better individualise them, how about a small dedicated special bay for each ship, just like the old Iteron variants got? Something like 2-4k space for PI materials, ammo, ice, fuel blocks, etc differing per race...

not really. I fail to see why anyone would want the amarr one. In order to get the 10k cargo you basically have to use your lows and rigs. which leaves you with 2 mids. you can do the same thing with the caldari BR and still have 4 mids to play with. clear winner in my book.

CCP, there are off buttons for ship explosions, missile effects, turret effects, etc. "Immersion" does not seem to be harmed by those. So, [u]please[/u] give us a persisting off button for the jump gate and autoscan visuals.

#47 - 2014-05-17 20:21:08 UTC
wow. a Fozzie ship post that I don't hate!

these changes look good
Pandemic Legion
#48 - 2014-05-17 20:27:45 UTC
CynoNet Two wrote:
Harvey James wrote:

seems excessive .. inty speed almost on a cruiser hull?? .. i suggest a look at the angel ships for a more reasonable figure


How many people do you think will train Transport Ships 5 to get that? Most will only have it to 3 or 4.


Probably me. The less time spent shipping stuff the better.
#49 - 2014-05-17 20:51:38 UTC
i still don't get why every cloaky ship needs too have cyno's????

T3's need to be versatile not have T2 resists, OP dps and tank obsoleting T2 ships entirely.

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 highslots for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

DARKNESS.
#50 - 2014-05-17 20:53:23 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
i still don't get why every cloaky ship needs too have cyno's????

Fuel/Bomb Truck for blops gangs.

I like the changes overall.
#51 - 2014-05-17 20:55:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Rosewalker
Harvey James wrote:
i still don't get why every cloaky ship needs too have cyno's????


The second high allows all four ships to mount probe launchers for use in wormholes. Currently only the Prowler is designed for use in w-space.

The Nosy Gamer - CCP Random: "hehe, falls under the category: nice try, but no. ;)"

Gallente Federation
#52 - 2014-05-17 20:58:22 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
i still don't get why every cloaky ship needs too have cyno's????
Black ops bridging gangs? Seems like a nice utility to have on a ship that may serve as a resupply/fuel holder for B-ops bridging tactics.
Gallente Federation
#53 - 2014-05-17 21:01:42 UTC
Cargohold too puny. Allow them to be able to fit enough to launch and upgrade a customs office ~8000m3, if you won't let the deep space transports do it.

When discussing weaknesses of heavy drones vs fast frigates: baltec1- " A thanatos with a flight of geckos killed a bomber gang while AFK. So yea, they track frigates just fine." https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4678049#post4678049

#54 - 2014-05-17 21:03:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Oxide Ammar
baltec1 wrote:
Could we get rid of that cargo scanner immunity?

Its a rather pointless thing to have on a ship that is always cloaked (and thus, unscannable anyway)


no.

Lady Areola Fappington:  Solo PVP isn't dead!  You just need to make sure you have your booster, remote rep, cyno, and emergency Falcon alts logged in and ready before you do any solo PVPing.

#55 - 2014-05-17 21:05:43 UTC
Another nerf to the minmatar, brought to you by CCP Fozzie.
Gallente Federation
#56 - 2014-05-17 21:07:55 UTC
Nano Sito wrote:
Another nerf to the minmatar, brought to you by CCP Fozzie.

How so?
#57 - 2014-05-17 21:11:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Rosewalker
Priestess Lin wrote:
Cargohold too puny. Allow them to be able to fit enough to launch and upgrade a customs office ~8000m3, if you won't let the deep space transports do it.


All 4 ships currently have over 8000m3 maximum cargo space. Fozzie said all 4 ships will have 10,000+ m3 of cargohold with T1 rigs after the changes.

The Nosy Gamer - CCP Random: "hehe, falls under the category: nice try, but no. ;)"

The-Culture
#58 - 2014-05-17 21:15:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Soleil Fournier
Blockaid runners should be able to.....run blockaids. That seems like a pre-requisite for the ship. But yet they can't do that, and its bothersome that the name/description of the ship does not match up with the practical gameplay of the ship.

2 options for resolution:

1) Rename to 'covert haulers' (or something more cleaver).
2) Rebalance them around running blockaids...which involve beating bubbles.

Thanks
Sanctuary Pact
#59 - 2014-05-17 21:20:31 UTC
Great changes, I'm glad to see increased cargo, especially for Prowler, as he will be able to transport cruisers. Yay!

One suggestion that isn't really related to the balance, but could you please consider using:

"Immune to player cargo scanning."

instead of

"Immune to cargo scanning." in the ship description ?

The current description suggests that the ship is immune to NPC scanning (i.e. illegal goods) which to the best of my knowledge isn't true.
#60 - 2014-05-17 21:24:35 UTC
Sheeana Harb wrote:
Great changes, I'm glad to see increased cargo, especially for Prowler, as he will be able to transport cruisers. Yay!

One suggestion that isn't really related to the balance, but could you please consider using:

"Immune to player cargo scanning."

instead of

"Immune to cargo scanning." in the ship description ?

The current description suggests that the ship is immune to NPC scanning (i.e. illegal goods) which to the best of my knowledge isn't true.


Or make the ability "immune to CONCORD/Customs scanning". That would help booster sales.

The Nosy Gamer - CCP Random: "hehe, falls under the category: nice try, but no. ;)"

26 PagesPrevious page12345Next pageLast page
Forum Jump