Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI
9806
|
Posted - 2014.03.06 16:17:00 -
[1] - Quote
The nerf to damage mod (3% basic, 4% enhanced, 5% complex) while necessary, goes too far. Higher tier damage mods are not worth the SP and fitting costs it takes to use them any longer; going from 3% at standard to 5% at complex is hardly a difference. We should not have useless modules that aren't worth the SP or fitting cost; all things must have purpose and viability. This nerf will lead to a dual-tanking epidemic. Instead of damage mods, armor tanking will switch to using shield extenders. Dual tanking should never become the dominant strategy, it reduces the importance of the unique damage types (this unintentional effect also will further inflate TTK length beyond what CCP intends). My biggest worry about about the damage mod nerf is the side-effects on AV. It is an indirect nerf to AV. The 1.7 AV is currently ill-equipped to effectively deal with tanks (in fact another tank is more cost-effective and cheaper when you factor how often AV players die), nerfing them even more through damage mods will have awful effects of vehicle/AV balance.
Solutions: While I agree damage mods have been a bit much, I think only the complex damage mods need a nerf; from 10% to 7%. The severe nerf coming in 1.8 is too much, especially considering there are stacking penalties.
Tip the vehicle/AV scale in favor of AV more.
Thanks for reading.
Gû¦Gû+Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum alt Gû¦Gû+
|
Terram Nenokal
Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance
326
|
Posted - 2014.03.06 16:34:00 -
[2] - Quote
Agreed.
Hell, I'd be happy with 3, 4, 6 even. The fitting cost difference isn't worth the 1% bonus of the new mods.
Loving to hate and hating to love Dust 514 since May 2012
|
Aikuchi Tomaru
Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
1902
|
Posted - 2014.03.06 16:48:00 -
[3] - Quote
Giving Complex Damage Mods the same stats like the old Advanced Damage Mods seems a little bit too much indeed.
Sign up for Caldari FW and defeat the evil Gallente Overlords!
|
Hobo on Fire
Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
196
|
Posted - 2014.03.06 16:49:00 -
[4] - Quote
Agreed on damage mods. The changes to proficiency damage factor in as well here for AV weapons; in my opinion, forge guns will need a slight damage buff, swarms (already) need a significant damage buff, in addition to an extended lock-on range, and AV grenades need to either keep 3 available, have their damage increased, or both.
Oh, and plasma cannons need something to not be a joke. |
1st Lieutenant Tiberius
0uter.Heaven
1248
|
Posted - 2014.03.06 17:12:00 -
[5] - Quote
+1 Agreed
The Sinwarden
|
Draco Cerberus
BurgezzE.T.F General Tso's Alliance
804
|
Posted - 2014.03.06 17:59:00 -
[6] - Quote
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:TLDR Solutions:
While I agree damage mods have been a bit much, I think only the complex damage mods need a nerf; from 10% to 7%. The severe nerf coming in 1.8 is too much, especially considering there are stacking penalties.
Tip the vehicle/AV scale in favor of AV more.
Thanks for reading. Indeed, this seems more reasonable due to the upcoming skill nerf as well as the LogiBro changes but if this is the result of CCP actually getting on a server to test these changes there may be a very good reason why.
LogiGod earns his pips
|
Iskandar Zul Karnain
Hellstorm Inc League of Infamy
2600
|
Posted - 2014.03.06 18:10:00 -
[7] - Quote
Agreed.
They probably won't to do anything about it so enjoy dual-tanker DDR 514 while it lasts.
Hellstorm Inc., Executive Director
Amarr Victor
|
Dustbunny Durrr
ReD or DeaD
138
|
Posted - 2014.03.06 18:20:00 -
[8] - Quote
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:The nerf to damage mod (3% basic, 4% enhanced, 5% complex) while necessary, goes too far. Higher tier damage mods are not worth the SP and fitting costs it takes to use them any longer; going from 3% at standard to 5% at complex is hardly a difference. We should not have useless modules that aren't worth the SP or fitting cost; all things must have purpose and viability. This nerf will lead to a dual-tanking epidemic. Instead of damage mods, armor tankers will switch to using shield extenders. Dual tanking should never become the dominant strategy, it reduces the importance of the unique damage types (this unintentional effect also will further inflate TTK length beyond what CCP intends). My biggest worry about about the damage mod nerf is the side-effects on AV. It is an indirect nerf to AV. The 1.7 AV is currently ill-equipped to effectively deal with tanks (in fact another tank is more cost-effective and cheaper when you factor how often AV players die), nerfing them even more through damage mods will have awful effects of vehicle/AV balance.
Solutions:
While I agree damage mods have been a bit much, I think only the complex damage mods need a nerf; from 10% to 7%. The severe nerf coming in 1.8 is too much, especially considering there are stacking penalties.
Tip the vehicle/AV scale in favor of AV more.
Thanks for reading.
I do agree that 1% extra damage isn't justified by the extra module cost and hefty fitting requirements, but I'd be more in favor of 3-4-6 rather than 3-5-7 (while not linear, it will help with short TTK just a touch).
Also, yeah AV already sucks and thread exists to show just how much weaker AV is getting from the already weak position it is in. |
Mishra's Dragon
Dark Side Alliance
18
|
Posted - 2014.03.06 18:22:00 -
[9] - Quote
I agree with this dude! I'm having enough problems taking out a tank with proto Ishikone Assault Forge Gun with 2 complex damage mods (it takes at least 4 shots even with proficiency 4) and now they're lowering my damage mods from 10% to 5%? This is just outrageous! :(
Join the Dark Side Alliance, we have cookies and milk~ Mishy the Sentinal loves logi attentions <3
|
Charlotte O'Dell
Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance
2020
|
Posted - 2014.03.06 20:38:00 -
[10] - Quote
Well said
Charlotte O'Dell is the highest level unicorn!
|
|
Cross Atu
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
1968
|
Posted - 2014.03.06 20:42:00 -
[11] - Quote
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:The nerf to damage mod (3% basic, 4% enhanced, 5% complex) while necessary, goes too far. Higher tier damage mods are not worth the SP and fitting costs it takes to use them any longer; going from 3% at standard to 5% at complex is hardly a difference. We should not have useless modules that aren't worth the SP or fitting cost; all things must have purpose and viability. This nerf will lead to a dual-tanking epidemic. Instead of damage mods, armor tankers will switch to using shield extenders. Dual tanking should never become the dominant strategy, it reduces the importance of the unique damage types (this unintentional effect also will further inflate TTK length beyond what CCP intends). My biggest worry about about the damage mod nerf is the side-effects on AV. It is an indirect nerf to AV. The 1.7 AV is currently ill-equipped to effectively deal with tanks (in fact another tank is more cost-effective and cheaper when you factor how often AV players die), nerfing them even more through damage mods will have awful effects of vehicle/AV balance.
Solutions:
While I agree damage mods have been a bit much, I think only the complex damage mods need a nerf; from 10% to 7%. The severe nerf coming in 1.8 is too much, especially considering there are stacking penalties.
Tip the vehicle/AV scale in favor of AV more.
Thanks for reading. As another poster said I could see 3,4,6. The solution here however isn't actually to change/stop the fix to damage mods. Most of the problems you describe are totally legitimate problems, but they need to be addressed directly not continue to use damage mods as a crunch/band aid.
As to mod cost in fittings and ISK, that's a big issue with all of these changes, the entire equipment line is getting nerfed (several parts already having been nerfed at least once previously) and thus far I've seen no word about a reduction to the cost in fittings, SP, or ISK to employ those mods. In all cases, damage mods, equipment, et al substantial reduction in tactical value should at minimum trigger a review of the cost in SP/ ISK, and fittings that is required to use the item in question.
Regarding TTK, it needs to go up and I'm not sure I agree about the worry it will go too far. That being said I do agree that no single build method should stand as the only viable option, be that dual tanking, damage mods, or something else. We need more viable competition for high slot mods because even ignoring the general state of both mod types the current binary 'yes/no' choice between damage mods or shield extenders is less than idea... quite a bit less than ideal in fact.
0.02 ISK Cross
EDIT: Ooops, forgot to mention AV specifically. On this I completely agree with you, the scale needs to be tipped a bit more toward AV, not where it was in 1.5 of course but more so than it is now.
SupportSP Rollover & an improved Recruting System
|
Luk Manag
of Terror TRE GAFFEL
330
|
Posted - 2014.03.06 21:28:00 -
[12] - Quote
I'm having a hard time justifying a 5% mod when 4% or 3% would do about the same dps . When I go from 5% to 4%, I just apply the same reasoning and drop it down to 3%. Then I consider the TTK... will that 3% matter? Probably not, I should just focus on defense because I can get a fair bit more than 3% extra shield hp per model (no stacking penalty).
I know some people like to mix doctrines, a little extra firepower, a little extra defense, and maybe a boost to recovery, but even with stacking penalties, I prefer to go all-in. I don't want to just hide from STD scanners in my 'stealth' fit, I want to hide from STD and ADV. I want maximum hp, or minimum recovery times too... so I can respond to a specific situation. With this nerf, max DPS situations will be reserved for the new Commandos. What's more, I'll need a Caldari Commando for sniping AND a Minmatar Commando for my ACR. That's a lot of SP.
There will be bullets. ACR+SMG
|
TheEnd762
SVER True Blood General Tso's Alliance
442
|
Posted - 2014.03.06 22:21:00 -
[13] - Quote
+1. Either don't nerf them at all, or not so severely. |
Mordecai Sanguine
What The French Red Whines
511
|
Posted - 2014.03.06 22:27:00 -
[14] - Quote
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:The nerf to damage mod (3% basic, 4% enhanced, 5% complex) while necessary, goes too far. Higher tier damage mods are not worth the SP and fitting costs it takes to use them any longer; going from 3% at standard to 5% at complex is hardly a difference. We should not have useless modules that aren't worth the SP or fitting cost; all things must have purpose and viability. This nerf will lead to a dual-tanking epidemic. Instead of damage mods, armor tankers will switch to using shield extenders. Dual tanking should never become the dominant strategy, it reduces the importance of the unique damage types (this unintentional effect also will further inflate TTK length beyond what CCP intends). My biggest worry about about the damage mod nerf is the side-effects on AV. It is an indirect nerf to AV. The 1.7 AV is currently ill-equipped to effectively deal with tanks (in fact another tank is more cost-effective and cheaper when you factor how often AV players die), nerfing them even more through damage mods will have awful effects of vehicle/AV balance.
Solutions:
While I agree damage mods have been a bit much, I think only the complex damage mods need a nerf; from 10% to 7%. The severe nerf coming in 1.8 is too much, especially considering there are stacking penalties.
Tip the vehicle/AV scale in favor of AV more.
Thanks for reading.
NO. Totally disagree. As i said like ten thousand time since there's no more proficiency it's the ONLY way to increase damage. Everybody is now with the SAME damage (exept commandos). So 5% damage is a HUGE changement.
When there was diffrent proficiency for everyone YES it was too low to be noticed. But now 5% more damage is already winning a duel.
For AV things , wait the Dev blogs about Vehicules balance before complaining about damager for AV purpose.....seems logic.
|
Racro 01 Arifistan
501st Knights of Leanbox INTERGALACTIC WARPIGS
191
|
Posted - 2014.03.06 22:34:00 -
[15] - Quote
sicne the dmage mods are being nerefed they could at least make the damage mod skill. reduction to fitting and 2% increase to damage mod effectivness per level. |
medomai grey
WarRavens League of Infamy
439
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 00:24:00 -
[16] - Quote
I like the slated changes for damage mods. Complex damage mods are one of the major culprits behind next to non-existent TTK. Wasn't everyone complaining about how TTK was too short? CCP is finally addressing the issue and now people are getting upset about the fix?
You can't please some people.
Blatant Dust_514 recruiting in the silliest of places. :P
|
Dunce Masterson
Savage Bullet
28
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 01:06:00 -
[17] - Quote
the planned change to damage mods would be fine IF they all require the same PG/CPU as the current basic.
another solution would be to limit damage mods to 1 per suit. |
The-Errorist
550
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 03:05:00 -
[18] - Quote
+1, this is the best solution for balancing damage mods. |
The-Errorist
550
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 03:44:00 -
[19] - Quote
medomai grey wrote:I like the slated changes for damage mods. Complex damage mods are one of the major culprits behind next to non-existent TTK. Wasn't everyone complaining about how TTK was too short? CCP is finally addressing the issue and now people are getting upset about the fix?
You can't please some people. A lot of those people who where saying that TTK was too low, were new players who didn't have much experience playing a higher TTK game. Also TTK was really low in Uprising 1.0 due to really poor hit detection. Hit detection has improved a lot since then and CCP did a 10% across the board damage increase at the same time, creating the problem of TTK being too low. In addition to all that, the poor weapon balance & the CR and RR exacerbated the problem (1.8 doesn't even fix that either). |
medomai grey
WarRavens League of Infamy
440
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 04:19:00 -
[20] - Quote
The-Errorist wrote:Alot of those people who claim that TTK is too low are new players who don't have much experience playing games with higher TTK. Wouldn't new players with little experience playing FPSs with higher TTK not notice the short TTK issue at all? Please explain how this works. I really don't understand how that works?
The-Errorist wrote:Also TTK was really low in Uprising 1.0 due to really poor hit detection. Hit detection has improved a lot since then and CCP did a 10% across the board damage increase at the same time, creating the problem of TTK being too low. In addition to all that, the poor weapon balance & the CR and RR exacerbated the problem (1.8 doesn't even fix that either). This is true, but I don't get what point you're trying to make by referring to it?
I've been told that people prefer fake smiles over the honest expressions of their fellow men. : )
|
|
Deltahawk Durango
Subsonic Synthesis RISE of LEGION
143
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 04:35:00 -
[21] - Quote
even 2-4-6 would work...if the fitting costs aren't reduced accordingly, i'll be running a single STD mod on my fittings...
I don't believe in an eye for an eye...
I believe in two eyes for an eye!
|
The-Errorist
550
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 04:35:00 -
[22] - Quote
medomai grey wrote:The-Errorist wrote:Alot of those people who claim that TTK is too low are new players who don't have much experience playing games with higher TTK. Wouldn't new players with little experience playing FPSs with higher TTK not notice the short TTK issue at all? Please explain how this works. I really don't understand how that works? The-Errorist wrote:Also TTK was really low in Uprising 1.0 due to really poor hit detection. Hit detection has improved a lot since then and CCP did a 10% across the board damage increase at the same time, creating the problem of TTK being too low. In addition to all that, the poor weapon balance & the CR and RR exacerbated the problem (1.8 doesn't even fix that either). This is true, but I don't get what point you're trying to make by referring to it?
Don't assume that new players to dust have little experience playing FPSs.
In the past TTK was higher, people complained about it and CCP overdid decreasing TTK. |
Kitt 514
True North.
134
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 04:59:00 -
[23] - Quote
Think about it this way:
The three biggest shooter franchises (arguably) are:
COD Battlefield Halo
Two have very low ttk's, one has a relatively high TTK.
I think enough people have played halo that they understand high TTK isn't such a bad thing.
However, going back to fanfest-build-esque damage profiles would be terrible.
I distinctly emptying my AR into someone's back, hitting every shot, and have them kill me while reloading. |
The-Errorist
550
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 05:13:00 -
[24] - Quote
Kitt 514 wrote:Think about it this way:
The three biggest shooter franchises (arguably) are:
COD Battlefield Halo
Two have very low ttk's, one has a relatively high TTK.
I think enough people have played halo that they understand high TTK isn't such a bad thing.
However, going back to fanfest-build-esque damage profiles would be terrible.
I distinctly emptying my AR into someone's back, hitting every shot, and have them kill me while reloading. Have you forgotten how messed up hit detection was at beta? Damage mods being weaker back then than compared to now, wasn't the sole reason why the TTK was so high back then. |
Billi Gene
496
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 05:16:00 -
[25] - Quote
CCP are giving themselves headroom to balance later on.
with these changes if they go live, fitting a proto weapon (the most expensive addition to any suit in terms of isk and fitting cost) will now be mandatory if you want to achieve low TTK.
Risk vs Reward.
People have been pointing out the horrid NPE, increasing average TTk via lower damage profiles is the easiest way to achieve this.
I agree on the AV stealth nerf, but i also think(hope)that tank spam will cost more in 1.8, now that CCP have their data. Maybe we'll also get lucky and see balance sweeps for HAV weaponry.
my 0.2 isk >.<
Pedant, Ape, Troll.
My Beard makes Alpha's sook :P
|
medomai grey
WarRavens League of Infamy
440
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 06:00:00 -
[26] - Quote
The-Errorist wrote:Don't assume that new players to dust have little experience playing FPSs. What?! You were the one who stated that new players were complaining about short TTK because they weren't used to games with higher TTK; a statement that doesn't make any sense. And your justification to your claim is now a contradiction to said claim? You aren't making any sense!
The-Errorist wrote:Also the aiming was harder and aim assist was broken, leading to a higher TTK. While adjusting to aiming in Dust, it increased feeling of it tooking to long to get a kill.
In the past TTK was higher; people complained about it and CCP overdid decreasing TTK. I don't recall anyone complaining about TTK in the time period your referring to. What happened was that the skill tree changed and as a result some bonuses were deleted. One of those bonuses was a passive damage boost to all weapons. People complained about losing that bonus and so CCP gave a percent blanket buff to weapons. They weren't complaining about short TTKs at the time, at least not the majority of the player base.
I've been told that people prefer fake smiles over the honest expressions of their fellow men. : )
|
Mordecai Sanguine
What The French Red Whines
520
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 10:36:00 -
[27] - Quote
Have you became stupid people ?
Making the Damagers a low PG/CPU mod would make able to fitting lot of plates in the other slots or/and ton of other things. Making even more Dual-tankers suits.
Damagers is going to be fine. Stop whining. |
Banjo Robertson
Bullet Cluster Legacy Rising
84
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 14:57:00 -
[28] - Quote
Yeah, I'm not against the change to damage mods. I would like to see the cpu/pg reduced accordingly, and maybe they could reduce the SP multiplier of the skill, but other than those two things the low damage is alright with me. |
Cross Atu
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
1979
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 15:12:00 -
[29] - Quote
Another thing to keep in mind, is that the Min Assault is going to be getting a racial bonus to the effects of damage mods. +25% at level 5, meaning that every percentage higher you push the mods themselves expands the value of that specific medium frame over all other medium frames. At some level it becomes "the" medium frame to run and that's not where we want to be. I can't comment on what that threshold is, no one can clearly yet because the sheer volume of changes in 1.8 dashes the context on the rocks of uncertainty. Which brings me back to my common refrain, CCP, small granulated changes more often are better practice than huge pendulum swings every few months.
~Cross
SupportSP Rollover & an improved Recruting System
|
Mishra's Dragon
Dark Side Alliance
18
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 15:22:00 -
[30] - Quote
Cross Atu wrote:Another thing to keep in mind, is that the Min Assault is going to be getting a racial bonus to the effects of damage mods. +25% at level 5, meaning that every percentage higher you push the mods themselves expands the value of that specific medium frame over all other medium frames. At some level it becomes "the" medium frame to run and that's not where we want to be. I can't comment on what that threshold is, no one can clearly yet because the sheer volume of changes in 1.8 dashes the context on the rocks of uncertainty. Which brings me back to my common refrain, CCP, small granulated changes more often are better practice than huge pendulum swings every few months.
~Cross Just where in hell does it say anything about Min Assaults getting a boost on damage mods? Cuz I don't see it anywhere on the official DEV post... Hell, here's the ******* link, I'd like you to point it out to me. DEV Link
Join the Dark Side Alliance, we have cookies and milk~ Mishy the Sentinal loves logi attentions <3
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |