DUST Search - Sticky:Hotfix Delta

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Sticky:Hotfix Delta - Final Numbers

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 35 post(s)
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 746	Posted - 2014.09.23 19:52:00 - [211] - Quote Kaeru Nayiri wrote: How about long enough to make sure there is time to clear the area and get points for hacking? If it needs to finish uploading it may not be in time for the pilot to get any cut. Just a thought really. A very good thought, actually. Could it be that the stray WP I sometimes receive for half the match are from uplinks that have been deployed within the timeframe of the transport assist? That would explain that behavior. Can't test this myself though.
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2895	Posted - 2014.09.23 20:03:00 - [212] - Quote Atiim wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: How long does it take infantry from being killed, respawn and walk from a a spawn point, on average? Upon termination, each spawn is about 15s, along with the 5s it takes you to get to the deployment menu (you have to wait for the kill-screen to appear. This is also increased by another 4-8s to select a fitting (which most people do upon death); all in all, as Infantry you're looking at 24-28s to get back into battle (on average). Plus the time it takes to travel from the point of spawn in to the point of contact/battle. This one is much more deeply situational with regards to how long is actually spent doing it but even as an X factor its presence should not be overlooked. 0.02 ISK Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
JP Acuna Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 253	Posted - 2014.09.23 20:09:00 - [213] - Quote The nerf to ADS rof is too harsh. I don't think an Incubus will be effective at all, especially when you add the RoF decrease to small rails. I'm deeply regreting the way i spent my 2 million SP from the event, i didn't know the exact number until now.
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2895	Posted - 2014.09.23 20:13:00 - [214] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Atiim wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: How long does it take infantry from being killed, respawn and walk from a a spawn point, on average? Upon termination, each spawn is about 15s, along with the 5s it takes you to get to the deployment menu (you have to wait for the kill-screen to appear. This is also increased by another 4-8s to select a fitting (which most people do upon death); all in all, as Infantry you're looking at 24-28s to get back into battle (on average). Assuming maximum spawn time. Spawns can also be 3 seconds. This reduces your time to 12-16 seconds. Also you don't have to select a new fit, reducing your time to 8-12 seconds. Shortest time possible is 7 seconds, assuming your trying to get back as soon as possible. That spawn time is a result of waiting on the bleed out screen. The base value spawn time is reduced the longer you wait for a revival so there is no actual time savings made on those spawns. If you have an Amarr logi running certain proto uplinks on the field then you can get quick spawns which reduce the actual baseline but since the logi bonus ceases to function of the player is not active and in the amarr suit usually that will not be the case. There is an AUR/LP proto link which gives a 47.50% reduction to base spawn time, the LP version is the superior type allowing 3 carried and 2 active so even the best uplink in the game will not give you that 3 second spawn time without the Amarr Logi active on the field (and alive at the time of your spawn). So while yes, some spawns are 3 seconds, it is a pretty heavy edge case to be basing an assessment/comparison on the presence of a max skill amarr logi with proto level LP uplinks. 0.02 ISK Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
a brackers Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 50	Posted - 2014.09.23 20:23:00 - [215] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Where was discussion on such a huge Nerf to ADS ROF? The decision was mine and mine alone, a 50% increase in DPS is unprecedented progression of damage in the game, and makes it impossible to balance. I decided to rip the band aid off and we don't need a full named hotfix to inject one or two remedies afterwards. And just to iterate, based on all data and experience, the ADS is far too powerful. It is a huge force multiplier and it does everything well, it transports infantry and uplinks. decimates infantry and vehicles, intercepts RDV vehicle delivery, avoids swarms with ease. The only counter is a mass team shift to AV, and forges, and by then the rest of the ADS team has gone full anti-infantry. Even if you, by some off chance, take it down, the pilot ejects, runs behind a hill and calls in another one. I see that the discussion has swayed from, "it's not OP", to "we all knew and admitted it was OP but this is too much". We will monitor the situation, and if ADS performance stats plummet below an acceptable threshold, our response will be immediate, not based on a hotfix schedule. For now, let's see what happens. Don't forget that Turret damage profiles have also changed in Delta. I take it you have never been in any battle with an ads then. We look op cus we can't die every single match like a mlt tank can. You have forced us to be full proto from the start. We have no cover at all anywhere on any map. We have proved multiple times with numbers in every forum where you ignored our posts then locked the forum and deleted it, that we are ridiculously easy to kill by anyone with anything above any adv av, or two people in mlt. You want us to be hit and run units (enough damage to actually kill anything above a scout but empty our mags really quick so we have to run and reload) which is the exact opposite of the change you have just made Proto dropship pilot The sandbox shooter
voidfaction Nos Nothi 557	Posted - 2014.09.23 20:26:00 - [216] - Quote DeathwindRising wrote: voidfaction wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: I have two questions. 1. Will the plasma cannon projectile speed buff affect the trajectory of the shot? 2. Will the ion pistol overheat until the seizure point on a 'half-charge'? I know you commented that it still overheats but IIRC you mentioned heat changes and the crucial thing is whether or not it seizes with the slightest charge. We experimented with the gravity, it should still have a trajectory, let's see what the PLC community thinks when they give it a spin. Yes, that's the fundamental design of the weapon, we halved the seize duration so even if you overheat, it's not a big deal. So much for the Ion charged shot followed by Bolt finisher as a scout ;-( Thanks for the shorter sieze time. Bolt pisto headshot then ion pistol charge shot? I try to maximize dmg using dmg profile.
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 748	Posted - 2014.09.23 20:50:00 - [217] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: That MinScout who you can never get a bead on and keeps coming back to knife you? Yeah, he spent ages honing his skills getting permascanned and now has a balanced arena in which to hunt. That ADS pilot who constantly gets a kill or two while screaming across at top speed? Honed their skills when just showing your face would have had three people in the redline lock-on and launch volleys that would knock you below half HP. You may want to choose a different example. That PRO MinScout dies to a single shot from a MLT Scrambler Pistol if the prey turns around at the wrong time. Or alternatively to that Thales half way across the map. That PRO ADS won't. On the topic itself I'd like to wait how things turn out. I'll reserve judgment for when I've tested things myself after delta drops.
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2896	Posted - 2014.09.23 20:53:00 - [218] - Quote Mobius Wyvern wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Where was discussion on such a huge Nerf to ADS ROF? The decision was mine and mine alone, a 50% increase in DPS is unprecedented progression of damage in the game, and makes it impossible to balance. I decided to rip the band aid off and we don't need a full named hotfix to inject one or two remedies afterwards. And just to iterate, based on all data and experience, the ADS is far too powerful. It is a huge force multiplier and it does everything well, it transports infantry and uplinks. decimates infantry and vehicles, intercepts RDVs and vehicle delivery, avoids swarms with ease. The only counter is a mass team shift to AV, and forges, and by then the rest of the ADS team has gone full anti-infantry. Even if you, by some off chance, take it down, the pilot ejects, runs behind a hill and calls in another one. I see that the discussion has swayed from, "it's not OP", to "we all knew and admitted it was OP but this is too much". We will monitor the situation, and if ADS performance stats plummet below an acceptable threshold, our response will be immediate, not based on a hotfix schedule. For now, let's see what happens. Don't forget that Turret damage profiles have also changed in Delta. We shall see. I shall abstain from further complaint until I get my hands on the changes. Interested to hear your impressions after a few days of play with the new mechanics o7 ~Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Echo 1991 WarRavens Capital Punishment. 434	Posted - 2014.09.23 20:55:00 - [219] - Quote IS the fitting optimisation skill for the Ion pistol going to be changed for PG now? becuase having it reduce its CPU seems redundant now.
Benjamin Ciscko Fatal Absolution 3142	Posted - 2014.09.23 21:46:00 - [220] - Quote Lower Decloak animation to zero (cloak "nerf") Please elaborate for us simpletons, is it supposed to mean you decloak instantly thus having to actually having to wait a second to fire and giving time for the animation to be heard and a reaction to be given? Am I close? Tanker/Logi/Assault

Thokk Nightshade KNIGHTZ OF THE ROUND 555	Posted - 2014.09.23 21:49:00 - [221] - Quote Sanguine 27 wrote: I know the sniper rifles are getting a zoom nerf from 18 to 15, but this still doesn't seem like enough of a decrease. Also I'd like to see the Tactical variants has less zoom than the standard rifles, as the name 'tactical' sniper rifle suggests it should be used at closer ranges. The proposed clip size and max ammo changes corresponds with this. I think you're backwards on this. The Thales zoom is going from 8 to 15 so I think the lower the number the greater the zoom. So the majority of Sniper rifles are actually getting a zoom BUFF, while the Thales is getting a zoom NERF. Am I understanding this correctly Rattati? I asked you once but it was right before you started your wall of responses so I think you missed it. Just for clarification, I'll ask again. Is that number something along the lines of "degrees field of vision" when zoomed in? At a zoom, you can now only see 15 degrees field of vision instead of 18, hence the smaller number means more zoom? The Thales now has a HIGHER field of vision so it is zoomed less? Thokk Kill. Thokk Crush. Thokk Smash.
Hand Fap Kirkinen Risk Control Caldari State 45	Posted - 2014.09.23 22:08:00 - [222] - Quote Derrith Erador wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Where was discussion on such a huge Nerf to ADS ROF? The decision was mine and mine alone, a 50% increase in DPS is unprecedented progression of damage in the game, and makes it impossible to balance. I decided to rip the band aid off and we don't need a full named hotfix to inject one or two remedies afterwards. And just to iterate, based on all data and experience, the ADS is far too powerful. It is a huge force multiplier and it does everything well, it transports infantry and uplinks. decimates infantry and vehicles, intercepts RDVs and vehicle delivery, avoids swarms with ease. The only counter is a mass team shift to AV, and forges, and by then the rest of the ADS team has gone full anti-infantry. Even if you, by some off chance, take it down, the pilot ejects, runs behind a hill and calls in another one. I see that the discussion has swayed from, "it's not OP", to "we all knew and admitted it was OP but this is too much". We will monitor the situation, and ADS performance stats plummet below an acceptable threshold, our response will be immediate, not based on a hotfix schedule. For now, let's see what happens. Don't forget that Turret damage profiles have also changed in Delta. If it's based on making sure that it performs well, then yes. But I can tell you that nerfing both ROF and ABs are going to kill it. If you could at least make the ROF bonus a 7%, then further nerf it if it proves problematic, then I could accept that. But I am 90% sure that these numbers will plummet the craft beyond useable, which is why I'm raising this much hell about it. aww poor derrith he will no longer be able to go easy mode and one hit everyone in PC. Thats all right you can join us in the nerfed club along with the AR's and assaults.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 798	Posted - 2014.09.23 22:29:00 - [223] - Quote ROF Nerf Impact on DPS XT-1 Small Missiles Charlie ROF: 50; 0.83/sec; 9.6 sec until reload Delta ROF (unchanged) Charlie Python 5: 75; 1.25/sec; 6.4 sec until reload Delta Python 5: 57.5; 0.96/sec; 8.3 sec until reload Direct DPS Charlie/Delta: 379.2 Charlie Python 5: 568.8 Delta Python 5: 436 Splash DPS Charlie/Delta: 297.9 Charlie Python 5: 446.9 Delta Python 5: 342.6 Small Missiles seem fine for the most part. Personally, I'd much rather look at the Small Missiles themselves more than Python: reducing damage, increasing ROF marginally and increasing clip size would be a better way to make Missiles useful on other vehicles but also make them more skill dependant, requiring multiple impacts to kill most suits rather than the current high damage splash (which is what truly makes people cry foul about the ADS, and most specifically about the Python.) - This idea has been mentioned before, I might add. 20GJ Particle Cannon Charlie ROF: 120; 2/sec; 8 before overheat Delta ROF: 92; 1.53/sec; 6.13 before overheat Charlie Incubus 5: 180; 3/sec; 12 before overheat Delta Incubus 5: 105.8; 1.763/sec; 7.05 before overheat DPS/Damage Before Overheat Charlie: 868.4/3473.6 Delta: 665.8/2661.65 Charlie Incubus 5: 1302.6/5210.4 Charlie Incubus 5/ADS 5: 1432.86/5731.44 Delta Incubus 5: 765.6/3061.11 Delta Incubus 5/ADS 5: 842.16/3367.22 Currently, due primarily to the broken hit efficacies, the Incubus rips through shield vehicles and somewhat struggles with armour (apply a .77 multiplier for the Shield DPS; .68 multiplier for Armour DPS for any Charlie number: Delta numbers are a .9 for Shields and 1.1 for Armour.) With the proposed ROF changes, a L5 Incubus is getting a single extra shot before it overheats. This is, essentially, worthless. It must also be reminded that DPS figures are always contingent on landing all shots: it applies to all DPS statistics, obviously, and not just ADSs, but I raise the point because of the difficulty in targeting and maintaining your target whilst flying. Against an enemy dropship, you usually get a single good pass before they begin evasive manoeuvres - landing all of your shots in that 4 second overheat window against a dropship is about a 70% odds, give or take for pilot skill (attacker and defender.) When the target is moving or otherwise wary of you/other anti-vehicle weaponry, landing all shots is difficult. An HAV, for example, is a difficult target because of the mechanisms available for ground attack manoeuvres: using first person view is viable in an aerial engagement but rarely applicable to a strafing run. Even more to the point, HAVs have much greater responsiveness with regards acceleration - we've all seen an HAV 'yoyo' about the place. The point being that landing all sots against a ground target is even harder. So, with the proposed changes, an Incubus with Small Railgun is going to have to apply it's full DBO repeatedly to threaten any vehicle, which is no easy task once the enemy is alerted. Quite frankly, the ROF nerf is too much and impacts upon the Incubus's ability to perform its role (primarily AV using the Small Railgun) far more greatly than the Python's anti-infantry ground attack role is affected. Alt of Halla Murr.

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 7902	Posted - 2014.09.23 22:51:00 - [224] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: ROF Nerf Impact on DPS XT-1 Small Missiles Charlie ROF: 50; 0.83/sec; 9.6 sec until reload Delta ROF (unchanged) Charlie Python 5: 75; 1.25/sec; 6.4 sec until reload Delta Python 5: 57.5; 0.96/sec; 8.3 sec until reload Direct DPS Charlie/Delta: 379.2 Charlie Python 5: 568.8 Delta Python 5: 436 Splash DPS Charlie/Delta: 297.9 Charlie Python 5: 446.9 Delta Python 5: 342.6 Small Missiles seem fine for the most part. Personally, I'd much rather look at the Small Missiles themselves more than Python: reducing damage, increasing ROF marginally and increasing clip size would be a better way to make Missiles useful on other vehicles but also make them more skill dependant, requiring multiple impacts to kill most suits rather than the current high damage splash (which is what truly makes people cry foul about the ADS, and most specifically about the Python.) - This idea has been mentioned before, I might add. 20GJ Particle Cannon Charlie ROF: 120; 2/sec; 8 before overheat Delta ROF: 92; 1.53/sec; 6.13 before overheat Charlie Incubus 5: 180; 3/sec; 12 before overheat Delta Incubus 5: 105.8; 1.763/sec; 7.05 before overheat DPS/Damage Before Overheat Charlie: 868.4/3473.6 Delta: 665.8/2661.65 Charlie Incubus 5: 1302.6/5210.4 Charlie Incubus 5/ADS 5: 1432.86/5731.44 Delta Incubus 5: 765.6/3061.11 Delta Incubus 5/ADS 5: 842.16/3367.22 Currently, due primarily to the broken hit efficacies, the Incubus rips through shield vehicles and somewhat struggles with armour (apply a .77 multiplier for the Shield DPS; .68 multiplier for Armour DPS for any Charlie number: Delta numbers are a .9 for Shields and 1.1 for Armour.) With the proposed ROF changes, a L5 Incubus is getting a single extra shot before it overheats. This is, essentially, worthless. It must also be reminded that DPS figures are always contingent on landing all shots: it applies to all DPS statistics, obviously, and not just ADSs, but I raise the point because of the difficulty in targeting and maintaining your target whilst flying. Against an enemy dropship, you usually get a single good pass before they begin evasive manoeuvres - landing all of your shots in that 4 second overheat window against a dropship is about a 70% odds, give or take for pilot skill (attacker and defender.) When the target is moving or otherwise wary of you/other anti-vehicle weaponry, landing all shots is difficult. An HAV, for example, is a difficult target because of the mechanisms available for ground attack manoeuvres: using first person view is viable in an aerial engagement but rarely applicable to a strafing run. Even more to the point, HAVs have much greater responsiveness with regards acceleration - we've all seen an HAV 'yoyo' about the place. The point being that landing all sots against a ground target is even harder. So, with the proposed changes, an Incubus with Small Railgun is going to have to apply it's full DBO repeatedly to threaten any vehicle, which is no easy task once the enemy is alerted. Quite frankly, the ROF nerf is too much and impacts upon the Incubus's ability to perform its role (primarily AV using the Small Railgun) far more greatly than the Python's anti-infantry ground attack role is affected. I would think that removing the 70% efficiency against vehicles on small rails could be a start. Again, the ROF bonus was just not a good bonus, and especially bad for lower SP pilots. Let's think outside of the box and not fight for keeping it. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

jace silencerww Inner.Hell 48	Posted - 2014.09.23 22:54:00 - [225] - Quote THANK YOU FOR SCREWY UP THE BOLT PISTOL! with so little ammo (24) and 4 clip size you turned a fairly balanced sidearm into junk. I want my sp back. even maxing the carry ammo skill for 932,780 sp you get a grand total of 30 yay 6 whole rounds! with this change can you at least get rid of the charge up?
Atiim 12434	Posted - 2014.09.23 22:54:00 - [226] - Quote I assume that Assault Dropships (like the dropsuits) are supposed to have the ability to extend their engagement times with targets, so I'd say give it a clip size bonus as opposed to a RoF skill. If need be, we could just bump up the RoF to compensate for the loss of the bonus. The 1st Matari Commando -HAND
Echo 1991 WarRavens Capital Punishment. 438	Posted - 2014.09.23 22:56:00 - [227] - Quote Would really like to know if the ion pistol fitting optimisation is gonna change to a pg reduction. Cos I don't want wasted SP
DeathwindRising ROGUE RELICS VP Gaming Alliance 550	Posted - 2014.09.23 23:01:00 - [228] - Quote jace silencerww wrote: THANK YOU FOR SCREWING UP THE BOLT PISTOL! with so little ammo (24) and 4 clip size you turned a fairly balanced sidearm into junk. I want my sp back. even maxing the ammo skill for 932,780 sp you get a grand total of 30 yay 6 whole rounds! with this change can you at least get rid of the charge up? Hahaha you're an idiot if you think it's screwed up
jace silencerww Inner.Hell 48	Posted - 2014.09.23 23:22:00 - [229] - Quote DeathwindRising wrote: jace silencerww wrote: THANK YOU FOR SCREWING UP THE BOLT PISTOL! with so little ammo (24) and 4 clip size you turned a fairly balanced sidearm into junk. I want my sp back. even maxing the ammo skill for 932,780 sp you get a grand total of 30 yay 6 whole rounds! with this change can you at least get rid of the charge up? Hahaha you're an idiot if you think it's screwed up The only problem before was the range damage drop off % it was way too much and quick. I used them a lot on my atl. with this I will no long run them. 30 shots with max ammo skill with 4 in the clip. that is a joke. yes reload and damage was buffed but I could do with out it. just to have the 6 and 36 ammo again.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 799	Posted - 2014.09.23 23:23:00 - [230] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: I would think that removing the 70% efficiency against vehicles on small rails could be a start. Again, the ROF bonus was just not a good bonus, and especially bad for lower SP pilots. Let's think outside of the box and not fight for keeping it. Those numbers (ie, the Delta ones) include the updated profile change. Despite the profile change the Small Railgun loses substantial power versus vehicles yet retains plenty of killing potential versus infantry, ironically. Perhaps my wording was bad, but I did say that the ROF change to Pythons isn't bad, but that's mostly because they rely a hell of a lot less on the ROF increasing DPS than they do on the overly powerful baseline small missiles, which is why I mentioned that in the paragraph after the XT-1 numbers. My feeling is that the Incubus has been overly affected by the nerf to ROF because of the simultaneous nerf to the small railgun ROF. Honestly, and not, 'fighting to keep it' as it were, I think the Incubus's ROF bonus should be higher than the Python's. I don't see any specific reason to keep the exact numbers the same for them both: similarly, I don't see why we need to have identical bonuses either: drop suits do not, after all. So what I would suggest is that the Incubus receives 5% ROF and 5% reserve ammo for Railguns/Blasters (which makes the Incubus much more of an AV weapon with rails, and the blaster more viable than other vehicles, which balanced slightly the inability to aim with it - essentially giving a Blaster Incubus area saturation to make up the disparity in aiming potential) while the Python receives some bonus that reflects how you want the Python to operate. And herein lies the million pound question (no, it's not should Scotland be an Independent country): What roles do you see the ADS inhabiting? Is it the same for both ADS that we have, or does each operate differently, like the difference between a CalAssault and a GalAssault? Alt of Halla Murr.

SponkSponkSponk The Southern Legion Final Resolution. 1076	Posted - 2014.09.23 23:48:00 - [231] - Quote zzZaXxx wrote: Sinboto Simmons wrote: I can't seem to find the release date, revealed yet? I would imagine soon. Hopefully Wednesday. Generally, Dust patches are released on Tuesdays (or, if it's the second patch in a week, on a Thursday) Dust/Eve transfers
Derrith Erador Fatal Absolution 2684	Posted - 2014.09.23 23:50:00 - [232] - Quote Atiim wrote: I assume that Assault Dropships (like the dropsuits) are supposed to have the ability to extend their engagement times with targets, so I'd say give it a clip size bonus as opposed to a RoF skill. If need be, we could just bump up the RoF to compensate for the loss of the bonus. The 8 clip size is plenty, and increasing the clip size as a skill for ADS, if done wrong, will make our reload speed useless. This idea will kill the python competitive wise, as: 1) as stated before, 8 in the clip is plenty, increasing clip size will do next to nothing for us, especially if we have good reload speed. 2) increasing the ROF on the raw turret will render python useless as the incubus will have much more tank and instant armor regen, even the fact that most meta AV gets more proficiencies against incubus is negligible seeing as all it takes in a good portion of PC matches to avoid av is to duck behind a building. The preacher of Betty White, may her pimp hand guide me.
Zindorak 1.U.P 938	Posted - 2014.09.24 00:26:00 - [233] - Quote Where are the rifle changes im curious to see the AScR and AR changes Pokemon master! I suck at Tekken lol
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1803	Posted - 2014.09.24 00:31:00 - [234] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Derrith Erador wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: What makes you state that this is done on a whim, I have done my best to explain in detail and facts why we believe these changes are necessary? Now it's, "it shouldn't be 3%, it should be 5% or even 7%". That 7% proposal never came from the pilots during the multiple Delta threads and discussions. Pretty sure, if the Delta proposal had been 5%, the ADS community would say it should be 7% or 9%. We were waiting for counter proposals and they never came, and I understand why, but that's siege mentality, that we as a community could do without. Simply, the ADS community as a whole, refused completely to take part in the feedback discussions. No give and take. I would much rather want veteran players come forward and admit that some things need balancing, and that they try to influence the smartest and best ways to do so instead of defending the status quo, tooth and nail. Someone said, let's see how Delta goes, we will look at the numbers, you collect your feedback and let us know, a single ROF change can be done during any TQ downtime, any workday. The underlined part is kind of where I lost it, Rattati. I have been preaching multiple times about balancing the ADS vs AV. Made my own thread too. I even made a thread before the final numbers stating that the AB cooldown is way too high, right here. It's a little insulting saying the ADS community hasn't put forward any numbers when I've been risking looking more and more like some crazy crackpot (I am, but too much ATM) trying to make ADS decently useful, but not OP. I'm reasonably certain that you haven't heard much from the ADS community because nobody has seen hide nor hair of Judge, he may have shown himself during MY downtime once midnight rolled around (I fell asleep around page 8, it was midnight over here). I read both of those threads when they were written, and took note of them. I was actually missing facts from those threads to influence any decision. We truly want ADS's to be a vibrant part of the battle, just not at the cost of everyone else's happiness. That's why after Delta it will be harder to pop tanks, and sometimes an ADS will have to flee and wait 26 seconds to come back. That's the long and short of it. Here's my issue. You are setting things up for ADS to act in a certain way, then taking away their ability to act as you planned. If ADS are supposed to do strafing runs, a high rate of fire makes that possible, especially since you haven't made any comment on turret stabilization at all. A lower rate of fire means we have to hover in order to apply our DPS, which is the exact opposite of a strafing run. This is the problem I have, I have no idea what you expect me to do as an ADS pilot. I even made a thread asking you and the CPM to tell me and the ADS community what you envision us doing on the battlefield. All I see are huge number changes without discussion, an increase in our counters ability to hit us, and a Nerf to an incubus' main weapon the small rail, meaning it is now less effective at AV and will serve better as AP, which is the exact opposite change you wanted. So I ask again, what role are ADS supposed to fill? What is my job on the battlefield? Am I an infantry slayer? A vehicle slayer? A transport DS with an extra gun? What exactly do you picture me doing when I say I fly ADS? Listen to my muscle memory Contemplate what I've been clinging to Forty-six and two ahead of me
B-F M Ghosts of Dawn General Tso's Alliance 44	Posted - 2014.09.24 01:19:00 - [235] - Quote jace silencerww wrote: THANK YOU FOR SCREWING UP THE BOLT PISTOL! with so little ammo (24) and 4 clip size you turned a fairly balanced sidearm into junk. I want my sp back. even maxing the ammo skill for 932,780 sp you get a grand total of 30 yay 6 whole rounds! with this change can you at least get rid of the charge up? Comment removed. GöÇGòñGòªn++ Ghosts of Dawn // now recruiting. n++GòªGòñGöÇ
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 1803	Posted - 2014.09.24 01:46:00 - [236] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Kallas Hallytyr wrote: ROF Nerf Impact on DPS XT-1 Small Missiles Charlie ROF: 50; 0.83/sec; 9.6 sec until reload Delta ROF (unchanged) Charlie Python 5: 75; 1.25/sec; 6.4 sec until reload Delta Python 5: 57.5; 0.96/sec; 8.3 sec until reload Direct DPS Charlie/Delta: 379.2 Charlie Python 5: 568.8 Delta Python 5: 436 Splash DPS Charlie/Delta: 297.9 Charlie Python 5: 446.9 Delta Python 5: 342.6 Small Missiles seem fine for the most part. Personally, I'd much rather look at the Small Missiles themselves more than Python: reducing damage, increasing ROF marginally and increasing clip size would be a better way to make Missiles useful on other vehicles but also make them more skill dependant, requiring multiple impacts to kill most suits rather than the current high damage splash (which is what truly makes people cry foul about the ADS, and most specifically about the Python.) - This idea has been mentioned before, I might add. 20GJ Particle Cannon Charlie ROF: 120; 2/sec; 8 before overheat Delta ROF: 92; 1.53/sec; 6.13 before overheat Charlie Incubus 5: 180; 3/sec; 12 before overheat Delta Incubus 5: 105.8; 1.763/sec; 7.05 before overheat DPS/Damage Before Overheat Charlie: 868.4/3473.6 Delta: 665.8/2661.65 Charlie Incubus 5: 1302.6/5210.4 Charlie Incubus 5/ADS 5: 1432.86/5731.44 Delta Incubus 5: 765.6/3061.11 Delta Incubus 5/ADS 5: 842.16/3367.22 Currently, due primarily to the broken hit efficacies, the Incubus rips through shield vehicles and somewhat struggles with armour (apply a .77 multiplier for the Shield DPS; .68 multiplier for Armour DPS for any Charlie number: Delta numbers are a .9 for Shields and 1.1 for Armour.) With the proposed ROF changes, a L5 Incubus is getting a single extra shot before it overheats. This is, essentially, worthless. It must also be reminded that DPS figures are always contingent on landing all shots: it applies to all DPS statistics, obviously, and not just ADSs, but I raise the point because of the difficulty in targeting and maintaining your target whilst flying. Against an enemy dropship, you usually get a single good pass before they begin evasive manoeuvres - landing all of your shots in that 4 second overheat window against a dropship is about a 70% odds, give or take for pilot skill (attacker and defender.) When the target is moving or otherwise wary of you/other anti-vehicle weaponry, landing all shots is difficult. An HAV, for example, is a difficult target because of the mechanisms available for ground attack manoeuvres: using first person view is viable in an aerial engagement but rarely applicable to a strafing run. Even more to the point, HAVs have much greater responsiveness with regards acceleration - we've all seen an HAV 'yoyo' about the place. The point being that landing all sots against a ground target is even harder. So, with the proposed changes, an Incubus with Small Railgun is going to have to apply it's full DBO repeatedly to threaten any vehicle, which is no easy task once the enemy is alerted. Quite frankly, the ROF nerf is too much and impacts upon the Incubus's ability to perform its role (primarily AV using the Small Railgun) far more greatly than the Python's anti-infantry ground attack role is affected. I would think that removing the 70% efficiency against vehicles on small rails could be a start. Again, the ROF bonus was just not a good bonus, and especially bad for lower SP pilots. Let's think outside of the box and not fight for keeping it. ROF is the best way to make strafing runs possible. Accurate hits on targets while moving with no turret stabilization makes the technique worthless. We apply damage through volume of fire, not through slow accurate hits. We are machine guns, not snipers. On this logic I request the return of the ROF. Listen to my muscle memory Contemplate what I've been clinging to Forty-six and two ahead of me
XxGhazbaranxX Eternal Beings Dark Taboo 1715	Posted - 2014.09.24 02:06:00 - [237] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: I would think that removing the 70% efficiency against vehicles on small rails could be a start. Again, the ROF bonus was just not a good bonus, and especially bad for lower SP pilots. Let's think outside of the box and not fight for keeping it. OK I think it is time to accept that CCP will not change their minds so lets help them think outside the box or, inside the box that is dust 514 and it's already established mechanics. SOLUTION STEP 1: PUT THE SKILLS WHERE THEY COUNT At 3%, this bonus is not going to get the community or the pilots anywhere so lets start off by looking at their counterparts; the weaponry skill tree. When we open this up we find that the percentage increase to this tree is in increments of 5% so, in the least, the percentage that we must augment these weapons potential per level is 5%. This would keep the tree in line with weaponry. But this is an ADS skill tree not gunnery!! Well you are completely correct. We must take this bonus away from the ADS and give it to the turret skill in question. This way, no matter what the vehicle you will have a percentage to its raw power output. Skill Tree Small Blaster operation = 5% turret rate of fire per level Small railgun operation = 5% turret damage per level Small missile operation = 5% turret damage per level As you may notice in the above, the changes are to raw damage output on the rail and missiles and RoF on the blaster. This is due to the fact that RoF will barely affect these two weapons but with the blaster the effect would be more noticeable. This bonus will also benefit the community in general and not the ADS pilots. Training into gunner would be useful again for gunners instead of relying on the pilots skill. SOLUTION STEP 2: EASE OF USE SHIP BONUSES The skills in the ADSs kit should reflect the type of gameplay that it's designed for. For arguments sake lets say its for AV/AI support fire. Not meant to dominate but not meant to be completely useless; so what bonuses and in what amounts could we add to these vehicles for them to be usefull? Again here we have to look to a skill tree that reflect the isk/sp investment that they entail to keep things fair. In this we will look at the Dropsuit category of the skill tree. Here we can see that they also give bonuses in increments of 5% and not three; so the bonuses should not be lower than 5% at any point. We can also notice that they have 2 bonuses per level; one for fitting and another is racial specific that enhances one aspect of a weapon but not it's power. I can also conclude that it could be safe to leave the bonuses at 10% on ADS simply because of the isk/skill barrier and that these bonuses will in no way affect damage output but will increase ease of use. Potential Bonuses: GALLENTE ASSAULT DROPSHIP BONUS: Primary: 10% reduction to small Blaster Spread and 7% Small railgun distance level. Here you can notice that the emphasis is on utility and not on raw power; merely ease of use and since the spread is HUGE on the front turret that 10% dispersion is warranted and by no means overpowered. Distance on the railgun will permit the pilots to engage from farther away helping them maintaining line of site of the targets a lot easier. Since overall DPS of the turret is going to be nerfed considerably I believe that Being able to sustain fire from lets say a higher diver at a target or a longer first person view push would greatly effect the way the pilots engage in the Battlefield. Secondary: 3% reduction to fitting cost of hybrid turrets CALDARI ASSAULT DROPSHIP BONUS: Primary: 7% bonus to splash radius of missiles per level. The idea here is that since ADS will now be more vulnerable they will be able to have mechanics that will help them engage in a gameplay style that adheres to drive by scenarios. By increasing the blast radius of missiles they would go from 2.5 splash radius to 3.3 meters splash radius. This will help utility but not raw power output. By comparison the splash radius of the PLC is 3.5 and that of the mass driver is 4.4 at proto level. Secondary: 3% reduction to fitting cost of small missile turrets ***IMPORTANT NOTE: since the primary and secondary skills are supposed to be 5 and 5 in the skill tree I simply subtracted 2 from the secondary bonus and left it at 3 and added it to the main bonus and set it at 7. The net result is the 10% devided increase in stats that a regular dropsuit would get. The only exception is the small blaster spread that is set to 10% because if you look at this video you will see how horribly huge it is on the front turret. TL;DR remove any bonus that would modify damage from the ADS skill tree and place it under their respectful turret tree. You get the bonus if you skill the turret. Make it 5% to be in line with the counterpart gunnery skills. Create utility bonuses, primary and secondary, that would permit a certain amount of ease of use but not power to the ADS. These are two and are in line with the assault dropsuit tree to keep sp investment parity between items (suits and ships). Distance bonus for rails, splash radius for missiles and spread reduction for blaster on their respective ships. Both get a bonus to fitting as is the custom on the assault dropsuits. Subtracted 2% from fitting bonus and gave it to the utility bonus to better help utility and avoid fits that are too powerful. Plasma Cannon Advocate Dust 514 Survivor
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 801	Posted - 2014.09.24 02:21:00 - [238] - Quote Range on the railgun is pretty much irrelevant beyond what we have now,because at longer ranges you need a finer degree of control, which piloting simply lacks due to drift and thrust interfering with aiming unlike how infantry movement can be an aid to aiming. Edit: though the principles are solid. Alt of Halla Murr.
XxGhazbaranxX Eternal Beings Dark Taboo 1716	Posted - 2014.09.24 02:36:00 - [239] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Range on the railgun is pretty much irrelevant beyond what we have now,because at longer ranges you need a finer degree of control, which piloting simply lacks due to drift and thrust interfering with aiming unlike how infantry movement can be an aid to aiming. Edit: though the principles are solid. At least me; I have found that being farther away actually helps when it comes to shooting ADSs and tanks since their hitbox is pretty huge but that might be just me. Any ideas on what we can add to help utility but not power on the rail? Plasma Cannon Advocate Dust 514 Survivor
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 1319	Posted - 2014.09.24 05:08:00 - [240] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Where was discussion on such a huge Nerf to ADS ROF? The decision was mine and mine alone, a 50% increase in DPS is unprecedented progression of damage in the game, and makes it impossible to balance. I decided to rip the band aid off and we don't need a full named hotfix to inject one or two remedies afterwards. And just to iterate, based on all data and experience, the ADS is far too powerful. It is a huge force multiplier and it does everything well, it transports infantry and uplinks. decimates infantry and vehicles, intercepts RDV vehicle delivery, avoids swarms with ease. The only counter is a mass team shift to AV, and forges, and by then the rest of the ADS team has gone full anti-infantry. Even if you, by some off chance, take it down, the pilot ejects, runs behind a hill and calls in another one. I see that the discussion has swayed from, "it's not OP", to "we all knew and admitted it was OP but this is too much". We will monitor the situation, and if ADS performance stats plummet below an acceptable threshold, our response will be immediate, not based on a hotfix schedule. For now, let's see what happens. Don't forget that Turret damage profiles have also changed in Delta. And this is where you've failed me rattati. I primarily played this game for its vehicles, and arguably you have treated them worse than the removal of content that happened in 1.7, you have consistently removed their very role in the game, all large turrets are now supposed to be for AV, dropship QoL changes are postponed, and on completely unilateral whims you smash vehicles with the nerf hammer in both damage and survivability while simultaneously buffing anti-vehicle players. Every hotfix has moved closer and closer to the status quo of 1.6 where vehicles were expensive coffins. And I am sick of it, I want my diversity and utility back, you are gutting the role of being a vehicle specialized individual worse than 1.7 did. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.