EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2011-07-14 04:38
  • First Forum Visit: 2011-10-06 09:23
  • Number of Posts: 1,430
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 0

Endeavour Starfleet

Security Status -3.6

Last 20 Posts

  • [Odyssey 1.1] Dominix bonus change in EVE Technology and Research Center

    CCP RIse again will you please consider dropping this plan for 1.1? WIll you please stop treating drone boats like they are turret boats?

  • [Odyssey 1.1] Dominix bonus change in EVE Technology and Research Center

    DP Lip wrote:
    right.... sentry's drones dominated the tournament and this nerf is good Pirate


    Tournaments have nothing to do with how things happen day to day on TQ. That is why using ANY data from those crap tourneys to balance anything in EVE is a bad idea from the very start.

  • [Odyssey 1.1] Dominix bonus change in EVE Technology and Research Center

    CCP Rise wrote:
    Quote:
    I don't think this is a needed change. It's not soul crushing, and I'm not going to rage about it, but clearly you are targeting how powerful sentry drones are with their massive tracking and range.


    You're right that there's some distinct disadvantages to using drones (and sentries especially), but think about all the ways the ship is already accounting for that. The biggest one is that it gets more bonuses to its primary weapons than a missile or turret based ship would. This one bonus is giving +50% optimal AND +50% tracking; imagine a Megathron or Maelstrom with that kind of bonus. Drone disadvantages are also balanced by things like having a free top rack that you can use to get even more damage or pick up tons of utility or the ability to switch weapon sizes and damage types freely.



    You are comparing a ship that has to stand still to do its DPS and hope to recover the drones with Turret based ships?! Ships that NEVER have to worry about their DPS perma removed from them with a well planned AOE attack?

    Why should I as a player accept this from you CCP RIse? Hell if you got a problem with NPC posting alts just say so and I will reveal my main characters. Why? Because it is worth it if it stops this horrifying start to a likely long chain of nerfs.

    Again why is development time being spent on this unwanted and unwarranted nerf when there are far better changes that could be done in time for 1.1?

    Will you please remove this change from plans for 1.1?

  • [Odyssey 1.1] Dominix bonus change in EVE Technology and Research Center

    What feedback where they getting to start? Where were the countless topics saying "OMFG DAT DOMI TOO GOOD NERF IT NAO!!!111"

    Who asked them to make this change? Especially when there have been countless topics to do something about the ability to AFK while cloaked, Logi UI issues and lack of Killboard, Drone UI, etc..

    We were idiots when we thought the first nerf to the Drake was going to be anything but a long line of blame the Drake for everything. And now we want the Domi to be that again? I think not. Stop the nerf to an already balanced ship now and it won't be further nerfed later.

    This is an unwanted, pointless change that further punishes those who bother to train to actually fly these ships. On a ship that is already balanced.

    It is a complete waste of development resources when far more important changes need the time now.

  • [Odyssey 1.1] Dominix bonus change in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Tyberius Franklin wrote:
    Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
    Sigras wrote:
    ^^
    So you would rather have the old CCP back where they would just balance change something and forget about it for 3-6 years?

    (cough)Eos(cough)


    The Domi is balanced with a 10 percent bonus. There are so many other ships in the game that need a balance pass and the Domi is not one of them. Especially when removing their DPS is EASY compared to removing DPS of a turret or missile ship.

    So yes It could have stood that way for 3-6 years and been fine. Only fools were complaining about the domi and it is saddening to see CCP accepting the arguement of fools instead of focusing development time on aspects of the game that need changing now. (Logistics need so much development time)

    Logistics aren't even up on the table yet and I severely doubt that this is taking any real amount of time save looking over the usage and effectiveness of the ship on TQ, which is what they should be doing anyways. The revised bonus leaves you at 87% of the effect in range and tracking you had before and the ship was useable even before that bonus was applied. A single Omni tracking link more than makes up the loss.

    Edit: Math Fail, I compared lvl 5 of the current to lvl 4 of the revised, you're actually getting ~92% range


    This is indeed not taking any real time. Not any proper time at all looking at the realistic use of this ship as opposed to a stupid tournament.

    The nerfs have to stop now. You let this change go through on this already balanced ship. And it will be Drake 2.0 The Domi will be the cause of all EVE Online's ills and then CCP will be more than happy to nerf it again and again.

    The Domi is being turned into a scapegoat. And I do not accept that.

  • [Odyssey 1.1] Dominix bonus change in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Sigras wrote:
    ^^
    So you would rather have the old CCP back where they would just balance change something and forget about it for 3-6 years?

    (cough)Eos(cough)


    The Domi is balanced with a 10 percent bonus. There are so many other ships in the game that need a balance pass and the Domi is not one of them. Especially when removing their DPS is EASY compared to removing DPS of a turret or missile ship.

    So yes It could have stood that way for 3-6 years and been fine. Only fools were complaining about the domi and it is saddening to see CCP accepting the arguement of fools instead of focusing development time on aspects of the game that need changing now. (Logistics need so much development time)

  • [Odyssey 1.1] Dominix bonus change in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Goldensaver wrote:
    Man, so many tears in this thread. At this rate there'll be enough to fill my stores. I'm actually quite appreciate of this change. It brings them more in line but still leaves them with advantages over turrets.


    In my opinion you have not spent the time training to use the ship properly. You simply do not understand how easy it is to remove a Domi's ability to do DPS. And neither does CCP in my opinion.

    Instead of actually putting in the development time to fix drone UI weaknesses, change NPC aggro so that drones aren't primaried by them right off the bat. Or you know making changes to the game that are actually wanted "Like Logi on killmails" They decide to simply nerf the Domi and done with it?

    For someone like me who actually had patience. Who actually bothererd to wait until I had the skill to make use of this ship. Why should I find this change acceptable? Why should I accept CCP comparing drones to turrets?

  • [Odyssey 1.1] Dominix bonus change in EVE Technology and Research Center

    CCP Rise wrote:
    We are going to put a small change in for 1.1:

    Dominix's drone tracking and optimal range bonus lowered from 10% per level to 7.5% per level.

    This brings the bonus in line with all other damage application bonuses we give, such as turret tracking bonuses or missile explosion velocity/radius bonuses. The Dominix hasn't been oppressively powerful but it is extremely strong and there is no need for the over-allocation with regards to this bonus.

    In case some of you think this is a reaction to the way the Domi performed in the alliance tournament, I can tell you that we will never make balance decisions based on that environment. The tournament certainly highlighted the strengths of sentry drones and damps, which are both powerful on TQ as well, but it removed many of their drawbacks and so it is not an effective way to assess balance or power in normal EVE.


    How about NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Drones have MANY disadvantages. They are the only weapon system that can be removed from the player using them and you are comparing them to turrets? What is wrong with CCP these days?

    Please say you will not implement this. This is yet another HUGE nerf to those who bothered to focus their training and you are basically telling newer players to not bother focusing their skills because they are just going to be nerfed anyway.

    Seriously what is the point of playing this game when you are doing things like this CCP Rise? You took a giant step forward with the changes to industral craft yet with this change the game is running backwards.

    Why are you spending valuable development time nerfing ships you have JUST recently fixed? Why should the players find this acceptable?

    Don't do this. Please say this is not happening.

  • [Odyssey 1.1] Jump Clone skills *Updated with Advanced Infomorph Psychology* in EVE Technology and Research Center

    While I am glad to see this change. This is far too little of a reduction and does little to combat the larger issue. These timers prevent PVP and while less than an hour per jump would lead to all sorts of issues. In my opinion setting the bar at 12 hours at lvl 5 would be a far better balance and can be done now. If things really go wrong with this. You can nerf it later tho with the proper data in hand rather than guesses that it would be abused.

  • [Odyssey 1.1] Tech 1 Industrials, Round 2 in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Insidiousbag wrote:
    I find the changes to the T1 haulers quite good but i do have one question.

    Why has the Hoarder unpacked volume changed?

    None of the other haulers have had this treatment.


    Mineral compression.

  • Cloak Recalibration - Dealing with afk cloaking without nerfing the cloak in EVE Technology and Research Center

    That is right he went active just before the attack. I want to deny that pilot the use of the overpowered ability to go AFK while cloaked to pick the moment of his attack on his own sweet perfect time. If that pilots wants to be able to attack as such. They need to be balanced in having to remain at the client while cloaked in an enemy system.

    If he goes AFK for a long period of time and figures he is too good to do the minigame. The cloak fails and I probe him down. Defeat him and next time he does not decide to AFK.

  • Escort Carriers in EVE Technology and Research Center

    RIght now the last thing the game needs is more ships. However far down the line after all the current ships have been rebalanced. I say this is an interesting idea worth considering. Especially if Supers and Titans eventually get removed from the game.

  • Titan Doomsday Idea in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Titans and Supers need to be removed from the game. Not given another ability that will surely be nerfed down later.

  • Cloak Recalibration - Dealing with afk cloaking without nerfing the cloak in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Nikk Narrel wrote:
    Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
    To answer. What I want in relevance to the topic is if that pilot is AFK he fails to do the minigame thus eventually the cloak fails. Afterwards I would probe them down. Defeat the ship then as the pilot is not there to warp the pod off. I would then proceed to pod the pilot thus removing the pilot from the system.

    I am not going to show mercy to a pilot trying to have an effect on the enemy without being at the client. It's the pod express and maybe then that pilot will decide to go on roams or other PVP activities.

    This cannot be permitted to be exclusive to cloaking, without some means to balance also being included.

    Apply the rule across the board, or not at all.

    No AFK boosting, station sitting, POS sitting, or anything unless they are also challenged by this mechanic.


    Those are completely different game mechanics. And CCP has already said they are going to make boosts on grid in the future so that is not even relevant.

    Got a problem with someone sitting in a POS? Bring your fleet and defeat the POS. As for stations. Take over the station and they can only undock once.

  • Cloak Recalibration - Dealing with afk cloaking without nerfing the cloak in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Sipphakta en Gravonere wrote:
    Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
    Sipphakta en Gravonere wrote:
    What is the problem with someone AFKing while cloaked in space? I don't see how any afk player can cause any harm.


    They can't be probed down. Leaving the player free to sleep, go to work or class, go to the movies etc.. While defenders in system have no real chance to do anything against them.


    What harm does a afk player in a system do? He can't relay intel, he can't attack you, he can't open a cyno, nothing. I don't see the problem.



    My old corpmates said the same thing until the AFK pilot went active without warning several hours later and hotdropped them. If I can probe down an AFK pilot that has been cloaked for very long. I can deny that pilot's ability to attack on his sweet time. If he can't be bothered to check his client every so often then I want the ability to attack.

    The idea presented in the start of the topic is a fair way to make that happen without doing a change that would greatly affect active cloaking play (Such as cloak fuel) What it would do is remove the incentive to stay in a system cloaked while AFK. And would stop this proliferation of alts designed for that one task with the aid of dual training with PLEX.

    Thinking about it. The idea presented is superior to mine which was presented a while back. Mine was a bit too complicated and would require more art assets.

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

    So again CCP Fozzie with this change to links for 1.1 and overall 1.1 being a large change. Will you and CCP also take the time to bring balance to the overpowered ability to go AFK while cloaked? That should be the priority to be fixed over link changes that harms incursion groups and encourages alpha.

    When will we get a straight answer about cloaking? If we are getting them for links and HACs why not modules?

  • Cloak Recalibration - Dealing with afk cloaking without nerfing the cloak in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Maximus Aerelius wrote:
    Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
    [ -snipped-

    Quote:

    Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
    They can't be probed down. Leaving the player free to sleep, go to work or class, go to the movies etc.. While defenders in system have no real chance to do anything against them.


    Do anything against...someone who isn't there? Interesting. Please elaborate on what you need AKA want to do to someone that isn't doing anything to you because they are not there?


    Didn't see this @Endeavour Starfleet or just couldn't come up with an answer?


    Did not see it.

    To answer. What I want in relevance to the topic is if that pilot is AFK he fails to do the minigame thus eventually the cloak fails. Afterwards I would probe them down. Defeat the ship then as the pilot is not there to warp the pod off. I would then proceed to pod the pilot thus removing the pilot from the system.

    I am not going to show mercy to a pilot trying to have an effect on the enemy without being at the client. It's the pod express and maybe then that pilot will decide to go on roams or other PVP activities.

  • Cloak Recalibration - Dealing with afk cloaking without nerfing the cloak in EVE Technology and Research Center

    TheGunslinger42 wrote:
    Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
    Sipphakta en Gravonere wrote:
    What is the problem with someone AFKing while cloaked in space? I don't see how any afk player can cause any harm.


    They can't be probed down. Leaving the player free to sleep, go to work or class, go to the movies etc.. While defenders in system have no real chance to do anything against them.

    There have been suggestions on how to remove the incentive to go AFK. From AFK indicators to cloak fuel. Or better ideas like the one suggested in this topic that does not seriously harm active cloak players.


    So you want the ability to be able to kill people who by definition are literally incapable of offering any kind of fight at all, even when you already have the home field advantage because you have the POS, stations, and manpower in system?

    while they're cloaked or afk they are no threat to you or anyone. They can't do anything. Demanding the ability to do stuff to them is horrifically imbalanced, and suggests you simply want "i win" buttons.

    The only issue with cloaked or afk players is that you aren't sure what they're doing. You want to remove uncertainty, and as a result risk, for yourself.


    The only people who the change would seriously affect are those who are used to cloaking in an enemy system and being unable to be probed down 23/7. For the other folks who actively play using the cloaking device. This will have very little effect thus is balanced by removing the incentive to go AFK.

    And yes if they are not at their client to fight back despite being in an enemy system then they deserve to be defeated in my opinion. The very issue here is the incentive to go AFK.

  • Cloak Recalibration - Dealing with afk cloaking without nerfing the cloak in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Sipphakta en Gravonere wrote:
    What is the problem with someone AFKing while cloaked in space? I don't see how any afk player can cause any harm.


    They can't be probed down. Leaving the player free to sleep, go to work or class, go to the movies etc.. While defenders in system have no real chance to do anything against them.

    There have been suggestions on how to remove the incentive to go AFK. From AFK indicators to cloak fuel. Or better ideas like the one suggested in this topic that does not seriously harm active cloak players.

  • Cloak Recalibration - Dealing with afk cloaking without nerfing the cloak in EVE Technology and Research Center

    TheGunslinger42, If you consider it a nerf having to spend a few seconds recalibrating your cloak to keep it going so be it. It is a change that needs to be made and you having to do a simple action pales in comparison to the massive effects players making use of the overpowered ability to go AFK while cloaked have on the game.

    Yes if this happens your fleet of AFK cloaking characters (My opinion) will be nerfed because if this happens I suspect you won't be willing to sit at your client and recalibrate 4 or more clients every once in a while. Your ability to leave those clients on while going to work, sleep, school, movies, etc.. being nerfed is what I and other people are asking for. And calling players "Carebear Scum" Wont change that. I heard the same thing when CCP buffed CONCORD.

    TheGunslinger42 wrote:
    Pro-tip for the bad players and cowards everywhere: If you don't want cloakers to "profit" from "doing nothing" then don't give them what they want. Don't stop what you're doing and cower in fear. Don't pay them if they're asking for isk. Don't give them what they want. Don't cry to CCP because YOU repeatedly and without fail crumble to the pressure of a single guy who may not even be at the keyboard.

    CCP cannot patch your cowardice



    Just in case anyone is wondering if this works. I heard the same thing from my old corpmates a few hours before the neut in system hotdropped them with a covert ops fleet. And that was before the addition of plex to dual train meaning more cloaking alts being trained up.

    They call you (The player reading his crap) "Bad players" while they constantly show up to these topics to defend their overpowered ability to go AFK while cloaked. Something that is not just bad gameplay. It's not gameplay at all despite the effects it can have.