I’m going to bump this because I feel like it got lost and might not pick up any responses as a result.
Then I’ll just own multiple rorqs. It’s not like I don’t already. Really, you’re introducing extremely niche mechanics here for a niche case. Not only does it create a terrible precedent, but it’s also only addressing symptoms. Get at the root problems.
There’s really no reason this kind of ewar (because yes, that’s still electronic warfare) couldn’t apply to all ships.
It is the curse of the developer that when it buffs a ship, it affects no almost no one, and when it nerfs one it affects lots of people. People are smart and abuse what is strong. The game is still good, you can still fly whatever it is you flew before, except now some other ships are relatively a bit stronger than before. Change is good, boredom is not, and these changes were by and large foreseeable.
People forget that, for example, the Naglfar and Phoenix used to be complete crap and unused; they buffed them and now people enjoy them. The Caracal Navy is right now the least killed faction cruiser by some margin, it’s so awful, so they buffed it; maybe not how we would like them to have buffed it but at least now you can take 'em out for a spin again.
This is the cycle, get used it - life goes on.
2 Likes
You don’t want to apply it to all ships. You’re trying to make sub caps a viable option in a capital fight.
You do realise the Triglavian ships are effected by the Remote Repair “balance” too, and as I understand it, so are the t1 and t2 Triglavian logi ships that were released not long ago.
So a key feature of an Armour tanking faction has been “balanced” by CSM/CPP.
Remember all Triglavian ships have shield HP equal to the next sized down class of ships, so they are completely reliant on their armour tanking and repair capabilities. And anyone that flies these ships knows with it’s issues for mounting lowslot repairers, they need remote armour repairs to balance the damage they receive, or they have to downgrade or sacrifice modules to maintain a good tank.
1 Like
But it’s fun and if you have tons of them, they all will be locked at some time, think creative and it would be complete new mechanic, not such nonsense like other stuff here
Of course you want it to be something that can apply to all ships. if you’re looking at hacking subcapitals in a capital fight, you have already lost your damned mind. What, you’re gonna have 500 enemy ships, one at a time?
where’s the dislike button?
It’d be a bad new mechanic. And again: it wouldn’t actually fix anything. If someone gets shot, you don’t give them a band-aid to deal with the bleeding. You deal with the cause. You deal with the fact that they got shot.
Address the causes of the problems, not the symptoms.
1 Like
/r/eve.
1 Like
I welcome these changes with open arms.
Can now fit a burst on my beam harbinger. thanks
Because continuing to feed CCP money and putting up with heavy-handed nerfs that chip away at the little bit of fun that this game actually gives you while playing it somehow hardens you up and makes you tough and adaptable, right?
It’s a game for crying out loud and it should be at least a little bit enjoyable to spend time on and not feel like a damn chore all the time. Let’s be frank, this game by itself is anything else than fun to play, what makes it worth spending time on is the community you are in while playing it, not the game itself and may God have mercy on CCP if there is ever another spaceship themed MMORPG released.
1 Like
@Brisc_Rubal I do have to question the logic behind some of they “balance” changes.
Like the ECM one and many others, they haven’t been complete thought through, most same to be a blanket change, not thought of their effects on other related items, and when really good suggestion are given by the community, these are more or less completely ignored, even when some do the same thing CSM/CCP want, but with a better flow on effect to other items effected by the change.
Who comes up with these ill conceived methods for these balances you put through, as who ever it is has no sense of the big picture of the effect they are about to apply to the gameplay and community.
Over the last year there have been many complaints about how some of these “Balances” have been put into effect and many very intelligent solutions have been put forward by the community, but no-one on the CSM takes these and puts it forward to CCP.
This seems very strange when you consider CSM is meant to be there for the community and putting community ideas and suggestions to CCP to make the game more enjoyable for everyone, but this doesn’t seem to be true lately. It’s more an us vs them situation.
Now this isn’t a personal attack on you or the CSM, but a question I think many within the community have been wondering for awhile, and considering how often CSM get hammered over these balances CCP has put in place, sighting CSM as being the one who have suggested them, seems CSM need the support of the community more than ever lately.
So interested in hearing your thoughts.
3 Likes
Agreed, instead of designing mechanism that repairs less and less each cycle is not smart and requires continuous calculations made to determine the next repair amount value.
Plus, also makes it less useful to repair or cap transfer which is one step to make this game more about shooting stuff then actual fleet combat.
Nerfing remote repair and cap transfer in this way is going to make the game worse, fleet combat less interesting, and many many unhappy pilots.
CCP, you really should re-think the strategy and go with adjusting repair/transfer amount based on signature radius which is not only more balanced but adds a unique element. I really get tired of changes made to aspects which does not require any change – instead please go improve something that is broken, like Bounties.
2 Likes
Im sure this is a great update for all those who have been playing, but for a new player who just spent a bunch of money getting into a gila and VNI to try and make some isk….what a waste of money. Learned a lesson though, never spend money to get somewhere in this game. There are other games out there
4 Likes
yip, making the repair “targeted” ship sig radius increase with each RR on it, would counter the benefit of multiple RR a ship.
something as simple as 1% increase sig radius of the ship being repaired, so if 5 RR are on a single ship it’s Sig increases by 5%,
10 = +10%,
20 = +20%
etc…
or if you really want it to hurt, make if 1.75% increase.
5 rep = +8.75%
10 rep = +17.5%
20 rep = +35%
etc…
we all know the old tanking rules;
The Key to Tanking
There are two ways to minimize your incoming damage - moving fast and being small.
The smaller and faster you are, the less damage you take from all primary weapon systems (with a couple of exceptions, such as smart bombs - these don’t care how small or fast you are).
When you fit armour plates and armour rigs, this makes you slower and less agile.
When you fit shield extenders and shield rigs, this makes you bigger.
If you do both, you get slower and bigger - thus, you take a lot more damage.
simple solution, it still allows small fleets the support of logi ships, but makes player think twice about gang rep’ing a Tanking ship with heaps of fast cycling small Rep’er instead of larger rep’ers.
Oh boy did the Rorqual section of this balance update blog land at the wrong time for me.
Malcanis’ Law “Whenever a mechanics change is proposed, that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.”
I’ve been slow-training a Rorqual alt since last August, and I finished the train about three days ago. And had just finished putting the fit on the hull today. Just in time to find out that the ship I’d spent 150days (and about all my accumulated isk) getting into, just became twice as easy to kill, and will also now take 25% longer to recoup my investment and start making a profit.
Maybe I’m just salty, but it feels like the ladder is being pulled up behind the older, wealthier players.
I know that the ISK faucets have been out of control, as well as the mineral supply being far too high, but I think that these changes don’t address those issues as directly as they could.
It seems to me that dropping ore and pirate anomaly respawn rates/density to limit total supply, would help more than nerfs to the rate at which that supply is acquired.
TL:DR
I just got my Rorqual (and it’s so new, I haven’t even mined with it yet), and while I don’t mind the reduction in local tank, the increased risk to my excavators, and the slower mining speed make my new ship I was so excited about, feel like a scam.
ccplease change ore anom respawn time, to limit total supply, rather than limiting the rate at which that supply is acquired by players.
It’s easy enough for a wealthy player to spin up a new Rorqual to retain the same isk/hour income. (which means that supply will not go down), If instead the total amount of ore available to be mined per day was limited, (and the time of day for the respawn could be controlled vie the IHub, to prevent timezone issues) then the mineral supply could be carefully adjusted. (of course this would nuke delve, as the player density is much higher than any other region, so there would be vocal opposition to such a change).
4 Likes
agreed . look at what they did to tengu’s, drakes a golems.people stopped using them. it seems that the korean guys that bought eve want to bring back the sub cap fleets and i have no problem with that. but don’t nerf fax’s and titans and caps in general to force everyone to go back to it.
1 Like
My full tank HAW Avatar is doing 2.6k DPS. So you wanna say that dreads are runing about 900dps?
And don’t tel me that they unsieged dps is so(no one counting dread with out siege)!