Don’t you have to answer the question of how many people you intend to balance it around? Is the balance intended for 1 assault frigate versus another ship? 2 assault frigates? 10 assault frigates? 256? That’s kind of what we were discussing.
Wow. A man asks us to stop derailing the thread, and your response is to be a douche at him? And I thought I was an egotistical jerk.
I think the AF changes are going to need time to really get put through their paces before we’ll have any idea of how well-balanced they are. As for Upwell 2.0… that’s likely not going to help much at all. Low-power mode is nice, but the defensive benefits of fighting on a citadel are still going to be a bit out of line. That’s not just going to be true in places like Delve, either. We’re expecting to make citadels even stronger on the defense, overall.
2 Likes
I wasn’t derailing the thread and I resent your accusation that I was. If you think you’re derailing the thread, then don’t respond. That’s what I do.
In order to “balance” Assault Frigates, don’t you need to know how many of them will be assaulting a target and what target and how many targets they will be assaulting? Is that question not right on topic? I’m sure right now, they are already perfectly balanced for the scenario they were intended for. When people say things aren’t in balance, it is often more to question “Why that scenario?” than to question “Why that kind of performance IN that scenario?”.
1 Like
Nice fit btw, iv thrown up your fit into eft with the appropriate 4200 81 taranis as reference.
its not 160dps :] its 217 but that’s with perfect skills so maybe missile level 5 projection skills made a huge difference.
hmm so taranis goes 4200( 6050 overheated) while the cerb goes 1744 (2480) the difference in speed is 6050 - 2480 = 3570
If we start from your fits lock range 118k (if you chuck 1 lock range mod while flying backwards you could technically hit a burning inti from 150k away 
but won’t add that into the equation.)
118 000 / 3570 = 33 seconds to burn in range while being shot.
Inti hp vs kin = 3910 / 217 = 18 seconds to die to rapid lights
Each cerb can kill 2 inti’s before reload, not even going to mention an orthrus becuase it will take a hell of a lot longer for an inti to burn in range of an orthrus.
5 cerb fleet with great piloting would take more than 10 inti’s to tackle how many fleets have more than 10 inti’s? especially against 5 pilots, and the cerb is really slow so its the weapon system not the ship that is broken in this case, a group of 5 orthrus will wreck any fleet if flown perfectly, unless that fleet has over 100km range which rules out most frigates/desi/cruiser except for other missile ships and maybe rails, medium arty barely scrape at that range.
The explosion radius of those missiles is 19.8 (perfect skilled taranis is 81, 0 damage mitigation being done except for speed) Even with implants and drugs you cant even get a 10mn afterburner inti to get that low on sig, I feel the explosion radius on rapid lights needs to be a lot higher.
If a weapon system is great vs any tackle then it’s illogical for it to be great at shooting big ships as well but that’s not the case its just great at everything, the reload alone is not enough I feel it would be better to give it a normal reload and then lower its dps a lot so its used for anti tackle instead of just for everything, Either that or up the explosion radius so that it doesn’t decimate all small stuff.
2 Likes
What was this “international $” in say 1820? Can we say for sure that “1.9 international $” was some kind of poverty level then?
It would be interesting to know how did authors measured this level for every year of this graph.
The punchline here is: “If I lower the bar enough I can say less people live in poverty”.
Let’s be real here, what is the bare minimum cost of living in a given country accounting for housing, upkeep, food and clean water?
This number fluctuates and it becomes a tangled mess. If you instead set the standard to “how much can $5 a day buy in this country and should we say earning less than $5 is generally considered rockbottom poverty” then you will get a MUCH higher number of people. Like verging on 50% of the worlds population levels of poverty.
I actually found missions in Eve boring. Light up red targets until they are gone. If you’re going to do pve ccp are better off to sell a pve version of eve and strictly have pvp only.
What if CCP used NPC fleets to re-intact battles of old like BOB day’s, where you would fly in a NPC fleet and battle like player’s did back then, and by playing the game you get immortalized by npcs eventually if you where a great alliance :], would help newer players follow the history of eve as well. Better if CCP hired the old guys for some voice acting. https://soundcloud.com/empiresofeve this kind of stuff is great to listen to but would be even better if CCP used it for PVE my 2cent :]
1 Like
IMO there are 3 general types of mmo pve player:
-
#1. The “I don’t really like PVE but I need the isk/gold/credits so lets figure out the fastest way to do it” types aka the ruthless min/maxers
-
#2. The “I want PVE to immerse me in the story and keep me interested in that story while giving me a challenge I can overcome and thus feel good about afterwards” types aka the adventure seekers
And
- #3. The “let me see how many different ways I can break this content with the most obscure and underused game items, weapons and vehicles as I can and let the fact that I also get game-money for doing it be a bonus” aka the Engineers.
I’m a 3 of course. EVE PVE is a perfect fit for 3s, for people who like to tinker. i’ve got many versions of anomaly and deadspace Machariels that I use along with other ships like Rattlesnakes. Sure, I’m make more with carrier and If I got a super carrier it would be monstrous isk. But I don’t like capital ship ratting and hate using fighter squadrons for anything except maybe pvp.
People who are ones who sometimes wish it were ‘more fun’. But it’s the #2s who are perpetually unhappy, And it’s the #2s who always drive the “improve PVE” rhetoric on the forums. And it’s those vocal #2s who CCP are trying to please with all this “interesting PVP and enhance AI”.
The problem is that it doesn’t work. EVE just isn’t a good platform for that kind of thing and all this “better” pve tends to also kill ships, something that people in the #3 category don’t care for and the #1s won’t tolerate at all.
CCP should realize that they can’t please everyone and that when it comes to PVE, they should stick with what is proven to work.
4 Likes
Even if they’re raised by wolves.
They are now part of the pack.
–Gadget says Woof.
1 Like
Um…
One pre-human ape had a mutation that allowed it to walk upright.
It eventually died.
But before it did, it had to pass the mutation to its spawn through nasty ape sex (a group activity).
Then that ape baby needed to be raised (as ape babies also suffer from being helpless at birth).
Then that mutated ape baby would need to survive long enough to engage in more nasty ape sex creating another (or more if siblings) mutated ape baby. This continued until eventually multiple ape babies are born with the mutation and are raised by other apes (with or without the mutation).
So, yeah. Even if one pre-human figured out (or was ‘blessed’ with) walking - without a group, walking would have ended with that ape’s death - no ape books yet.
–Gadget leaves you with the best mental pictures
1 Like
Emphasis added.
Thanks for playing. 
But group sex huh…
Anyway all Hail to Lord! If you believe human civilization was born from apes you shoukd not watch anything other than planet of apes…
…without a group, walking would have ended with that ape’s death…
…without a group…death…
–Gadget plays to win
3 Likes
Why is this thread still open lol? you guys are way off topic xD monkies and group sex??
If it takes 2 people to walk (successfully), then only half as many people will walk.
If it takes 2 people to mine veldspar (successfully), then only half as many people will mine veldspar successfully.
If it takes 2 people to gank miners (successfully), then only half as many people will gank miners (successfully).
If it takes yourself and 36,000 henchmen to hold a region of null security space (successfully), then only when you acquire 36,000 henchmen will you successfully hold a region of null security space.
If only people who are successful at something continue to play the game, then requiring more people to do anything successfully, be it walking, group sex, or mining veldspar, actually reduces the number of people who will play the game. Is that off topic?
YES! Becuase everyone is successful at something and that something changes as they learn/explore more, but this is far from your original argument that actually made sense awhile back:
This is still on topic 2 people to mine veldspar is not xD.
And to get back to it there are many scenario’s its being compared to at the same time:
1.Solo (pirate frigates are arguably better for solo)
2.Fleet (T3D usualy has more range and damage and buffer)
3.Being blobbed. (T3D might be better becuase 10mn ab is great for avoiding being pinned down.)
4.Pve (Assualt frigs might actually be better (some of them) because of their low sig)
5.Getting passed gate camps in low/null. (T3D Hecate has 1.7 align time without any mods on)
1 Like
The derail seems to be so great that the locomotive has become a Zeppelin, the carriages become holiday homes, and the track become a nice bridge to Valhalla.
2 Likes
This is why I’m just letting him blather himself into utter drivel.
2 Likes
