EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2005-06-22 04:16
  • First Forum Visit: 2011-04-07 15:55
  • Number of Posts: 1,498
  • Bounty: 10,268,576 ISK
  • Likes Received: 0

Bloodpetal

Security Status -10.0
  • Tir Capital Management Group Member since
  • The Mockers AO Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • [Rubicon] Mass moving in Fleets in EVE Technology and Research Center

    CCP karkur wrote:
    Neotin Nahrain wrote:
    Dragging people from overview to fleet watch list would REALLY help a fellow null sec and our fast form ups.
    Right now i have to select people types (in my case all logi and dictor/recon) and then do
    Right click + Pilot + Fleet + Add to watch list - 15 times ...

    To be honest, I'm really hesitant to add any sort of dragging to the overview, I feel like we need to think it through a little bit better what it would mean Game Design wise (would that mean I could drag people to chat to call targets? would we want that at all? also, does it hurt overview performance? etc.)


    What you just said inspired an idea.

    Idea : create an alternate "Fleet History" "window" when in fleet that pops up with a visual of the target being called as a GUI item, resembling a locked target (but obviously different) so that there is a nice clear and easy to click indication of the fleet target. Also, for people who want logistics they get a similar thing except for shields being called.

    The problem is that the fleet history place and line entries are like the most horrible UN-immersive part of fleet combat. Who wants to stare at a list of scrolling text entries to find the targets / friendlies they need to rep?

    I understand this is a game design issue - but that would be a solid UI action to tackle. Also, that little window area could be used to drop things such as "warp to" from celestial, targets from the overview lets say, and so on. It would have quick actionables that would facilitate fleet targets/coordination.

    I'll do a mockup.

    Only thing I forgot to add was prioritization. But, it would show range to you (so you can prioritize the prioritized targets for yourself). I didn't bother, but I UNDERSTAND that you can not show the healthbars on all the prioritized targets due to server load issues and scalabiity - so you can remove that. However, I'm confident you can show the other information. Hopefully this gives you some ideas of your own.

    http://i.imgur.com/Z5wPfjS.jpg

  • [Rubicon] Mass moving in Fleets in EVE Technology and Research Center


    Love it.

    You're more infallible than the Pope, you can do nothing wrong!

  • EVE Valkyrie not (necessarily) on PC... in EVE Communication Center

    It's for the Oculus Rift... which is for PC and mobile apparently.

    Guess what? That means console isn't even in consideration.

  • The Somer Blink Boycott Extravaganza: Because Its Easier Than Holding CCP Accountable. in EVE Communication Center

    Agreed. Somer Blink can burn in a trash heap. There's other Lotto sites. Stop supporting these people.

  • [Odyssey 1.1] Warfare Links, Mindlinks, Gang bonuses in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I think these are a great set of changes.

  • [Odyssey 1.1] Command Ships in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Sounds like a great plan overall. It always annoyed the living hell out of me that "Hey, this ship that's 200m ISK is designed to sit out in the middle of nowhere and do absolutely nothing! Welcome to EVE, that's so much fun!!"


    Cheers and great job.

  • [Odyssey 1.1] Local Armor and Shield repair module changes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Sounds great, lets see what happens. Pirate

  • [Odyssey 1.1] Heavy Assault Cruisers in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Comment highlights ::

    Marcel Devereux wrote:

    For the Deimos, can you roll some of that that MWD bonus up into the ship by increasing the recharge and replace it with something else. It is another archaic bonus that looks out of place. Compare the bonuses to the Muninn: double damage bonus (dmg+rof), optimal range bonus, and tracking bonus. Deimos: double damage bonus, fall-off bonus, MWD bonus. Can you replace the MWD bonus with the tracking bonus that is found on the Thorax?


    Agreed. You removed it from the Thorax, I think this should be done here as well and give it something more appropriate.

    Harvey James wrote:
    Also a vaga shield tanking with 4 mids still..... i was expecting another mid here also more cpu might help with cpu hungry ASB's
    also it could do with a little more dps say a 10% damage bonus.


    Agreed. The CPU on the Vaga is laughable for a shield fit. And with 4 mids, what are you going to shield tank exactly? Especially for an active tank. I like the idea, but honestly, it seems like you're "plugging" the vagabond into a shield role, when it maybe should stay much more versatile?


    Akturous wrote:
    Taking a second look at fitting on the Muninn, this thing is still very very bad. You need 2 ACR's to fit 720s and a 1600 plate with a 10mn AB and you get 3120 alpha and 355 dps (not including the changes) with 2 gyros (so lows would be DC, RAR, Explosive and Kin hardener, 1600 plate).

    This is pretty pathetic alpha with close range ammo on a specialist arty platform considering the Loki manages 4.5k alpha and double the tracking with the same fitting. I think the Muninn needs another turret and the fittings to fit a full rack of 720s and a 1600 with AB with 1 ACR, then it might see some use outside of BL novelty/old times sake gangs.


    I haven't liked the Muninn in a long time. It needs a serious review of its whole application. It can't do anything well really, and the only thing it's good at is popping frigates in one shot. That's a really awesome (read: pathetic) use for a HAC.




    Overall, you need to review the hull bonuses and remove archaic ones and add more creative ones.

    Overall, you need to review the viable fittings for these setups.

    Being specialized shouldn't mean "You can only fit this one fitting idea we have in mind, kthxbai!!"

    Being specialized should mean that they have a clear and distinct advantage over OTHER ships, including battleships, at this part of their specialty.

    I'm not seeing that here at all. Can you clarify exactly how each of these ships is specialized and how they're superior to all other ships in that specialty?

  • [Odyssey 1.1] Medium Rail, Beam and Artillery rebalance in EVE Technology and Research Center

    The fact you're reducing tracking BELOW BATTLESHIP SIZED GUNS is pretty indicative of a problem. I understand Signature Resolution plays into this as well, but you're skewing things to an extreme.

    Thoughts ::
    Med Short Turret weapons are more flexible and more adaptable to situations, even "longer" range situations.

    Med Long Turret weapons are being further and further cornered into a small role performance.

    In the modern fleet fight, keeping range is a luxury that you don't really have. The only fleets that dictate range are loki-boosted cruisers with specific kite setups in mind. And even then, with a proper counter cruiser loki-boosted fleet, you nullify that pretty quickly.

    So, Medium Long range weapons fall into an inconvenient squeeze between the larger weapon platforms, such as the Tr3 BCs, which can EASILY reach up to 70km+ with large weapons and not a lot of effort and can dictate range well, while being unable to compete with the shorter range weapon platforms.

    At the end of the day, I really would like the balance team to take a step back before these changes and lay down a very simple idea....

    "What is the purpose of medium long range turrets? How do they fit into the tactical arena?"

    Besides artillery, I have only ever used medium rail-guns on my Arazu/Lachesis because I NEVER want to be close in range with those cruisers, and arguably can always dictate range. And the Zealot can pull it off because it gets a HUGE range bonus for their Beam weapons. Other than that, if you can not guarantee dictating range or increase range to a sufficient amount, then medium long range weapons fail, and even worse after the tracking penalties happen because they can't adapt to the situation as presented.

    So, perhaps you should sit down and re-view your "purpose" for medium long range weapons. Decide on a clear GOAL that they accomplish on the battlefield, and restructure your changes accordingly. Because, right now, I don't think the issue is what the numbers are tweaked at, it's "Besides a few ultra-specific usages, why do we have these weapons?"

  • [Odyssey 1.1] Heavy Assault Cruisers in EVE Technology and Research Center

    God, please, change that Muninn completely. It's still a totally crap layout for a ship like this. How does another low slot make it a better sniper? You nerfed Tracking enhancers. Really you want another mid for another Tracking Computer.

    I really feel like these changes aren't really addressing an overall issue with the HACs.

  • [Odyssey 1.1] Medium Rail, Beam and Artillery rebalance in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I really would like to see more range on Medium weapons. The ranges are pretty sad in general. 10-12 kms is hardly "long range" by todays standards. 20ish would be ideal, in my opinion.

    Thanks for listening.

  • Dev Blog: A New Live Event for July in EVE Information Center

    What was #10 that it was so difficult to accomplish?

  • Doritos sandwich in EVE Communication Center

    X

  • EVE vs Startrek vs Starwars. who would win? in EVE Communication Center

    Frying Doom wrote:
    I would say Star Wars would win, no one else has Star Destroyers.


    Yes, we do.

    Hurricanes. Lol

  • How i can log in test server ? I HATE NEW LAUNCHER !!!!!! in EVE Technology and Research Center

    CCP Atropos wrote:
    Or you could file a bug report and help us to help you.


    Bug report system is down for two weeks. Pirate

    http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/an-update-on-bug-reporting/

    Quote:
    As a consequence of this, we will also be disabling the In Game Bug Reporter (IGBR) located in the Help menu, until Team Superfriends has it ready to work with our new system.

  • Racial ECM jams racial sensor ONLY, not off racials in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Astroniomix wrote:
    Bloodpetal wrote:
    Astroniomix wrote:
    OP why is it that every time you lose to something that you can't figure out how to deal with you come to F&I demanding it be removed?


    How'd those kill rights work out on your Rattlesnake loss? Lol

    http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=11962682

    Better than you apparent inability to deal with ECM.



    I heard Hatful say on your voice comms that this was your alt's freighter that we ambushed and killed? Ah, the good old days. Thanks for bringing back the memories.

    http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=11914405

  • Racial ECM jams racial sensor ONLY, not off racials in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Astroniomix wrote:
    OP why is it that every time you lose to something that you can't figure out how to deal with you come to F&I demanding it be removed?


    How'd those kill rights work out on your Rattlesnake loss? Lol

    http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=11962682

  • Racial ECM jams racial sensor ONLY, not off racials in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Naomi Knight wrote:
    Bloodpetal wrote:
    Naomi Knight wrote:
    This is a ******** idea of a ********.

    Ecm is already way too weak.
    Then why not change weapons aswell , you can only kill amarr ships with projectile guns. If you want to be able to kill other ships fit other weapons.

    ps: why do these stupid ideas always come from low sec noobs?


    ECM being too weak is even more laughable than saying MWD's multi-function is to reduce your capacitor.

    An ALGOS jammed me and another friendly for 8 cycles in a row. Not even a blackbird. And you're calling it weak. Funny stuff.

    yes ecm is weak , oh wait he knew what ships you were in so could refit to counter them hmm , why didnt you dock and counter fit then? you were outplayed thats all ,ecm has nothing to do with it


    Not really. It was a 3 way fight. They were fighting an Amarr fleet of Thorax's and Augorors. And we crashed the party with 2 Scorpions, and a kitchen sink fleet to ***** on them all. The Algos was still getting jams on a Cyclone.

    You're so awesome at pretending to know nothing.

  • Racial ECM jams racial sensor ONLY, not off racials in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Naomi Knight wrote:
    This is a ******** idea of a ********.

    Ecm is already way too weak.
    Then why not change weapons aswell , you can only kill amarr ships with projectile guns. If you want to be able to kill other ships fit other weapons.

    ps: why do these stupid ideas always come from low sec noobs?


    ECM being too weak is even more laughable than saying MWD's multi-function is to reduce your capacitor.

    An ALGOS jammed me and another friendly for 8 cycles in a row. Not even a blackbird. And you're calling it weak. Funny stuff.

  • Racial ECM jams racial sensor ONLY, not off racials in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris wrote:
    Bloodpetal wrote:

    Looking at something that CCP Greyscale has said recently is :: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2530257#post2530257

    Nice try, but you failed to understand the definition of multi-function modules: those that give bonuses while not-active and giving more or other bonuses while active. ECM modules give nothing while they are not active and thus are not subject for linked quote. CCP has dealt with active hardeners being milti-function already and there are not many modules left, only auto-targeter comes to mind. Another one would be MWD with its cap penalty, but you can think of it as fitting requirement.


    Considering a cap penalty for an MWD as "multi-function" is laughable.

Forum Signature

Where I am.