Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
23 PagesFirst pagePrevious page212223
 

[March] Balance Tweaks: Fighters, Supercarriers & Burst Projectors

First post First post First post
Author
The-Culture
#441 - 2017-03-20 09:54:59 UTC
Tested this new patch with my supercarrier.

Nothing really changed. And it was expected more or less having 1 Haven being done in 5:30. Most of the time NPC targeted my fighters but it is too fast for them to do any significant damage anyway.

So this change mainly targeted carrier pilots. And i'm still not convinced that they needed it What?

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"

Gallente Federation
#442 - 2017-03-20 12:10:17 UTC
So following yesterdays fight in CHAQ-2 I have to say that fighters (specifically heavy fighters) are just too easy to kill now. I think the Light Fighters are probably balanced appropriately, but the heavies should probably be given a bit more HP per fighter or maybe a higher base speed. We were burning through poor TC's Heavy Squadrons before they were even able to get in range to do damage.

So far the /r/eve focus has been on "nerf T3s" bit this seems like more of a red herring, the fact is that while the sig changes were definitely needed for fighters in general, heavy fighters now fall over as a result.
#443 - 2017-03-20 14:50:03 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
Tested this new patch with my supercarrier.

Nothing really changed. And it was expected more or less having 1 Haven being done in 5:30. Most of the time NPC targeted my fighters but it is too fast for them to do any significant damage anyway.

So this change mainly targeted carrier pilots. And i'm still not convinced that they needed it What?


Doesn't seem to have even affected Carriers much beyond multi-box/AFK capability. So far I've seen no change from people ratting Blood Raiders, Sansha, Guristas, Rogue Drones, and Serpentis. Haven't been able to find a video or person who does Angels though and there's been some concern raised over their TPs and Webs. If anyone has a video with the changes I'm curious if the concerns with Angels have been as overblown as those with other factions.
#444 - 2017-03-20 15:41:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Trevize Demerzel
Cade Windstalker wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
Tested this new patch with my supercarrier.

Nothing really changed. And it was expected more or less having 1 Haven being done in 5:30. Most of the time NPC targeted my fighters but it is too fast for them to do any significant damage anyway.

So this change mainly targeted carrier pilots. And i'm still not convinced that they needed it What?


Doesn't seem to have even affected Carriers much beyond multi-box/AFK capability. So far I've seen no change from people ratting Blood Raiders, Sansha, Guristas, Rogue Drones, and Serpentis. Haven't been able to find a video or person who does Angels though and there's been some concern raised over their TPs and Webs. If anyone has a video with the changes I'm curious if the concerns with Angels have been as overblown as those with other factions.



Angels are fine. If anything the patch made me more conscience of efficiency and my ticks have gone up.

It only made it a little hairy when swapping heavy fighter types to deal with a dread with both subcaps and a dread trying to alpha your fighters, but I've already adopted to that as well.

I'm finding this is mostly a nerf to PVP and heavy fighters. PVE is very much a keyboard/click fest, been playing a lot with the new fighter assignable hotkeys.

-

Get Off My Lawn
#445 - 2017-03-20 17:54:03 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
Tested this new patch with my supercarrier.

Nothing really changed. And it was expected more or less having 1 Haven being done in 5:30. Most of the time NPC targeted my fighters but it is too fast for them to do any significant damage anyway.

So this change mainly targeted carrier pilots. And i'm still not convinced that they needed it What?


Doesn't seem to have even affected Carriers much beyond multi-box/AFK capability. So far I've seen no change from people ratting Blood Raiders, Sansha, Guristas, Rogue Drones, and Serpentis. Haven't been able to find a video or person who does Angels though and there's been some concern raised over their TPs and Webs. If anyone has a video with the changes I'm curious if the concerns with Angels have been as overblown as those with other factions.


I'm mono account, and i can't often use my 2 hand for some IRL problem. I'm affect. And before patch you can't afk carrier so stop think people want AFK. But befor epatch yes you can give order to you're fighter to attack nex target before they die, or you can have 1 000 ms ping without loose 2 fighter.

When we read you we understand : you don't hvae play carrier before update and not after.
SOLAR FLEET
#446 - 2017-03-21 02:43:43 UTC
Trevize Demerzel wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
Tested this new patch with my supercarrier.

Nothing really changed. And it was expected more or less having 1 Haven being done in 5:30. Most of the time NPC targeted my fighters but it is too fast for them to do any significant damage anyway.

So this change mainly targeted carrier pilots. And i'm still not convinced that they needed it What?


Doesn't seem to have even affected Carriers much beyond multi-box/AFK capability. So far I've seen no change from people ratting Blood Raiders, Sansha, Guristas, Rogue Drones, and Serpentis. Haven't been able to find a video or person who does Angels though and there's been some concern raised over their TPs and Webs. If anyone has a video with the changes I'm curious if the concerns with Angels have been as overblown as those with other factions.



Angels are fine. If anything the patch made me more conscience of efficiency and my ticks have gone up.

It only made it a little hairy when swapping heavy fighter types to deal with a dread with both subcaps and a dread trying to alpha your fighters, but I've already adopted to that as well.

I'm finding this is mostly a nerf to PVP and heavy fighters. PVE is very much a keyboard/click fest, been playing a lot with the new fighter assignable hotkeys.


Angels not normal!!!
Red Dream Citizens
#447 - 2017-03-21 11:46:22 UTC
Best solution imo for capital ratting would be to simply add new anomaly type (or tweak sanctums) so they have less small ships and have more capital ships. It does not even need to be worth much more income per tick than havens now - just require less clicking overall because the way it is now is really too much. Many people are playing eve because it does not require so many clicking and running around like other games.
Not to mention that would be fun to have more really big ship fights - I came to this game for this.
Goonswarm Federation
#448 - 2017-03-21 14:56:42 UTC
Vladebor wrote:
Best solution imo for capital ratting would be to simply add new anomaly type (or tweak sanctums) so they have less small ships and have more capital ships. It does not even need to be worth much more income per tick than havens now - just require less clicking overall because the way it is now is really too much. Many people are playing eve because it does not require so many clicking and running around like other games.
Not to mention that would be fun to have more really big ship fights - I came to this game for this.


If it's too much clicking, you can always do something else than carrier/super ratting...
Get Off My Lawn
#449 - 2017-03-21 22:11:59 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Vladebor wrote:
Best solution imo for capital ratting would be to simply add new anomaly type (or tweak sanctums) so they have less small ships and have more capital ships. It does not even need to be worth much more income per tick than havens now - just require less clicking overall because the way it is now is really too much. Many people are playing eve because it does not require so many clicking and running around like other games.
Not to mention that would be fun to have more really big ship fights - I came to this game for this.


If it's too much clicking, you can always do something else than carrier/super ratting...


Yes but if we want play game with you must do a lot of apm we don"t play to eve.
We we have sign for play we have sign for an other accessibility of game. So if ccp want to change it they can ... they mist paid (and not only give back money of time who yu have on account).
FREE GATES COALITION
#450 - 2017-03-22 07:57:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Xantia Naari
Prior to the patch I didn't carrier rat at all. I had just moved to null and was a bit worried that my skill investment regarding carriers would be a waste after the patch. My skills are low so I use t1 fighters, but after learning how to use the keys, I have not lost a single fighter.

Reading the last pages of comments I see the nerf hit those who multi box while carrier ratting and those who are too dumb to learn how the keys work. I guess Heavy fighters might need more HP but I have no first person experience about them.

So overall I'm happy. Exploit is nerfed and skill at playing the game is boosted. Two birds with one rock. Now, those who "deserve it" will get bore bucks for their isk.

Good job CCP! Big smile

There are two kinds of children that play in sandboxes. Those who build castles and those who kick them down. It's a symbiosis.

Caldari State
#451 - 2017-03-22 09:51:21 UTC
multiboxing carrier wasnt possible before the patch

Now its exacly one click more to kill each rat AND still at a greater risk of losing fighters.

Where the guy who designed this got the idea that forcing players to click every 3-5 seconds is "engaging gameplay" is beyond me. Maybe he played much Diablo lately an liked it.

#452 - 2017-03-22 10:48:29 UTC
Brings up a good point.

If the goal was to make carrier ratting more of a challenge it should be done with challenging content and not making the challenge more of a click fest. Making the user click faster isn't a "challenge". If the goal is to make carrier ratting more engaging then make some new ratting sites with harder things to kill. ie other caps.

And ya the heavy fighters could use more HP. In PVP they are way to easy to alpha off the field.

-

Goonswarm Federation
#453 - 2017-03-22 15:30:49 UTC
Trevize Demerzel wrote:
Brings up a good point.

If the goal was to make carrier ratting more of a challenge it should be done with challenging content and not making the challenge more of a click fest. Making the user click faster isn't a "challenge". If the goal is to make carrier ratting more engaging then make some new ratting sites with harder things to kill. ie other caps.

And ya the heavy fighters could use more HP. In PVP they are way to easy to alpha off the field.



You expect people to run harder sites when the current ones exist?
Goonswarm Federation
#454 - 2017-03-22 15:33:56 UTC
Dictateur Imperator wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Vladebor wrote:
Best solution imo for capital ratting would be to simply add new anomaly type (or tweak sanctums) so they have less small ships and have more capital ships. It does not even need to be worth much more income per tick than havens now - just require less clicking overall because the way it is now is really too much. Many people are playing eve because it does not require so many clicking and running around like other games.
Not to mention that would be fun to have more really big ship fights - I came to this game for this.


If it's too much clicking, you can always do something else than carrier/super ratting...


Yes but if we want play game with you must do a lot of apm we don"t play to eve.
We we have sign for play we have sign for an other accessibility of game. So if ccp want to change it they can ... they mist paid (and not only give back money of time who yu have on account).


What breach of contract have they done for you to think you should get reimbursement from them?
#455 - 2017-03-22 16:47:32 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Trevize Demerzel wrote:
Brings up a good point.

If the goal was to make carrier ratting more of a challenge it should be done with challenging content and not making the challenge more of a click fest. Making the user click faster isn't a "challenge". If the goal is to make carrier ratting more engaging then make some new ratting sites with harder things to kill. ie other caps.

And ya the heavy fighters could use more HP. In PVP they are way to easy to alpha off the field.



You expect people to run harder sites when the current ones exist?



Sure! If the Fun / Risk / Reward balance is good. Most certainly.

-

Goonswarm Federation
#456 - 2017-03-22 16:51:32 UTC
Trevize Demerzel wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Trevize Demerzel wrote:
Brings up a good point.

If the goal was to make carrier ratting more of a challenge it should be done with challenging content and not making the challenge more of a click fest. Making the user click faster isn't a "challenge". If the goal is to make carrier ratting more engaging then make some new ratting sites with harder things to kill. ie other caps.

And ya the heavy fighters could use more HP. In PVP they are way to easy to alpha off the field.



You expect people to run harder sites when the current ones exist?



Sure! If the Fun / Risk / Reward balance is good. Most certainly.



So what you are asking for is "buff carrier/super rating" since those harder site would need to be more lucrative to get run.
#457 - 2017-03-22 18:10:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Cade Windstalker
Trevize Demerzel wrote:
Brings up a good point.

If the goal was to make carrier ratting more of a challenge it should be done with challenging content and not making the challenge more of a click fest. Making the user click faster isn't a "challenge". If the goal is to make carrier ratting more engaging then make some new ratting sites with harder things to kill. ie other caps.

And ya the heavy fighters could use more HP. In PVP they are way to easy to alpha off the field.


The current Carrier ratting isn't particularly more of a click fest than the old one, it adds about one click per ship kill more, which is telling your Fighters to orbit the next target before the last one died. That's something like a ~25% change, give or take. The main things that you need to do now are be paying attention and do a little advanced planning with your Fighters, having the next thing locked up and killing the smaller ships first.

Frostys Virpio wrote:
Trevize Demerzel wrote:
Sure! If the Fun / Risk / Reward balance is good. Most certainly.



So what you are asking for is "buff carrier/super rating" since those harder site would need to be more lucrative to get run.


Doesn't have to be Carrier/Super ratting, CCP have already said they want the end-game of Null PvE to be more group focused. Content that requires a group to be run is inherently harder to because you need to organize the group, and you need people you can rely on.

Case and point is Incursions. They make almost as much as a mediocre Carrier Ratting pilot per hour but you need to rely on 39 other pilots knowing what they're doing, especially the Logi, or you can quite easily lose your ship, and that's without factoring in player interference. Create something like that in Null but make it permanent local content instead of a roving spawn system and you could quite reasonably dial up the risk, rewards, and general difficulty of the PvE for pilots in Null without throwing the whole game's economy out of whack.

Besides it doesn't need to be a huge difference in payouts. Players will always gravitate towards the highest possible payout so long as the Risk/Reward balance isn't obviously out of whack.
Get Off My Lawn
#458 - 2017-03-22 23:13:52 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Dictateur Imperator wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Vladebor wrote:
Best solution imo for capital ratting would be to simply add new anomaly type (or tweak sanctums) so they have less small ships and have more capital ships. It does not even need to be worth much more income per tick than havens now - just require less clicking overall because the way it is now is really too much. Many people are playing eve because it does not require so many clicking and running around like other games.
Not to mention that would be fun to have more really big ship fights - I came to this game for this.


If it's too much clicking, you can always do something else than carrier/super ratting...


Yes but if we want play game with you must do a lot of apm we don"t play to eve.
We we have sign for play we have sign for an other accessibility of game. So if ccp want to change it they can ... they mist paid (and not only give back money of time who yu have on account).


What breach of contract have they done for you to think you should get reimbursement from them?


Not contract, but legal, change game accessibility is a breach in law in near all country. Exemple for you to understand better : sell car to people who don"t have leg ... and after 3 month said "finnally no we change you must have leg for this car".
It 's a terrible exemple, but at basis this kind of law is for this thing.
#459 - 2017-03-23 01:33:29 UTC
Horrible changes to fighters. If fighters are going to be eaten up at this rate by NPC's they need to be priced as ammo.
#460 - 2017-03-23 03:01:55 UTC
One of the "many tests" must not have included NPCs that could web...
23 PagesFirst pagePrevious page212223
Forum Jump