gotta look at I from the real reason why they want to do it, they don’t care about ratting their nerfing the NSA cause someone wined about carriers being able to lock small ships too quickly.
2 Likes
Minus 50% of players
2 Likes
Oh I agree that the reason isn’t ratting, but the person I was responding too seemed to care about that the most
Every change I’ve noticed in this spring thread is about balancing in easier kills for sub caps on big ships, it’s quite clear just by reading it. you should just change this forum post from spring update, to sub cap love, since that’s all this is. and when you “balance” in all these changes, and sub caps are mowing down capitals in droves, your gonna have to a capital love update in the fall to make them viable again.
1 Like
I literally said this four posts up.
apologies I must have missed it.
Rorquals as mining ships went from high risk /High Reward to High risk Low reward. A slightly Buffed Boosted Hulk that costs 7-8b, not seeing that be a thing. Rorqual Booster is still very good.
BTW: You move exhumers through null in the SMA of the Rorqual. You clone jump the pilots to the Rorqual Clone Vat.
2 Likes
Why the nerf to the Vexor Naxy Issue?
Vexor Navy Issue
- Bonus to Drone Max Velocity removed
- Signature radius increased to 145 (was 135)
The Vexor is a drone boat, and as such it has drone bonuses.
The Vexor didn’t get any larger, so why increase the signature radius?
If you are going to remove the high tech and complex additional computers and sensors built into the Vexor so the ship no longer has the power to boost max drone velocity then it would make sense that the ship would gain additional CPU and Power Grid since it is no longer running those specialized computer systems.
Please reply with the reasoning for this nerf - The VNI is not overpowered and drones are well balanced.
Leiron
2 Likes
independence sites I know what your talking about, but they hardly ever spawn, (that I have seen) outside the drone regions, and when they do the loot drops are so pathetic, it would take months of doing strictly independence sites to even get enough drone components for one manufacturing run. believe I’ve had blueprints for months, and haven’t been able to gather enough mats to do even one run.
It is not reasonable, thus no reason will be provided.
How will the fighter changes and carrier changes effect the burner missions with the fighters? Are all these changes going live on pvp/pve or are the burner missions on a special AI system?
Cheers, Leiron
2 Likes
Imagine being so retarded and out of touch that you think fighters can apply well to 100mn cruisers, which means pretty much every cruiser fleet comp.
Legit hope CCP goes bankrupt soon.
1 Like
So after looking through this dev blog I must say that I am somewhat disappointed - not so much about what is in the dev blog but more about what is not in the dev blog, i.e. ECM is not mentioned at all.
After the original ECM change in October 2018 and the “meh” ECM balance pass in November 2018 CCP stated that they wanted to continuously balance ECM and the ECM ships but there are no news at all after 4 months - I guess CCP should have collected data by now to see the impact of the ECM change. I had hoped after several months to see how CCP intends to reiterate on ECM like it was originally stated.
To me it seems that CCP may have put the balance work on the ECM changes on the backburner or simply has no idea about how to balance ECM or the ECM ships. Either way CCP seems to have failed to do what they said they wanted to, i.e. continuously balance ECM. Unfortunately, the predictions from the original threads that ECM was nerfed an forgotten seem to be true.
I would like to see some data on ECM pre- and post ECM change, but there has also only been silence from CCP in this regard.
I hope to see some data soon on the usage of ECM and ECM ships in order to see the impact of the ECM change - but maybe CCP is not interested in showing this…?
Either way I hope that CCP will at least indicate whether we should expect some iterations on the ECM changes any time soon.
1 Like
You do realize they don’t have to come up with lore reasons for balance right?
A capacitor that works being chief among them. The Abaddon needed more cap, and more cap Regen. That’s all it needed. That’s all it’s ever needed.
Botters.
1 Like
The one issue that CCP refuses to actually do anything about and actually broke meaningful engagements in 0.0 is skill injection. The ability to skill inject into a Titan in almost less time than it takes to scratch your backside, has broken Cap Ship and Subcap warfare. It has basically made any Cap Ship accessable to anyone to train in a very short time as long as you have the isk. Skill injectors should have stopped being useful at all somewhere around crusier or battleship training. The balance changes for Rorqs and Cap ships that are proposed in essence will only effect smaller entities in EVE not the Larger ones, which is really where they should be aiming, and it will not really effect the larger entities because they already have a critical mass of Cap Ships and Mineral Stocks and they could loose ships for the next 12months without mining and still only be drawing down on what they have stockpiled. IF the Aim is to minimise botting, spend more time weeding out botters.
When you start pandering to the I want it now crowd they were bound to break the game in a big way, which is probably the only thing CCP has actually managed to do successfully over the last 5 years.
2 Likes
Balance implies that there was thought put into this change. The only real difference will be that a vni can no longer run off a kiting frig with a flight of warriors. You will see stupid losses to perhaps even condors because of this change. Your only hope would be that they just didn’t bring/couldn’t carry enough ammo to take you down. That is what this change enabled.
2 Likes
Mining in EVE was always scalable because of the nature of it, you can scale multiple barges as well as multiple rorqs because of the low input needed to mine.
As for now a 10 bil rorqual setup averages around 100 mil/h in a belt if you take into consideration that you not just cherry pick gneiss/arkonor and leave. That comes after months of training to set it up and many more months to perfect it and way more months to proper tank.
On the other hand we have the Hulks, which require less training and for 300 million or so you get around 50-60 mil/h and you can warp of instantly in case of trouble.
After changes? Rorqs will get around 80 mil/h while Hulks will get around 70…
Where is the fairness in all that? Not to mention they are miles apart from similar training. One is a few million skill points in one direction one is in another.
As I stated, Mining is scalable, in every aspect you might think of…
3 Likes
while I doubt this is the reason at all, or that it will be the end result of the change, even it this is what happnes I would see no issue with a shtfit vni dying to frigs
1 Like