Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Sir Dukey
G0DS AM0NG MEN General Tso's Alliance
1916
|
Posted - 2015.03.13 01:54:00 -
[1] - Quote
1.) Myofibs need a reduction. Instead of 15%, the might be booting jump height by 115%
2.) Large Missiles need buff- they are bad at killing vehicles. They either need their 400 RoF back or 300 RoF with 16 Clip. Or 200 RoF with 20 Clip.
3.) Armor Hardeners need a nerf. (5% would do) Armor tanks are back to 1.7 level with ridiculous rep rates and a 40% hardener on top of that.
4.) LAV's need more slots.
5.) All tanks need more CPU/ PG, with more slots comes more fitting problems. My proto Gunnlogi's low slots are full of proto fitting modules and I still cannot fit a full proto tank with proto gunner slots and proto filled high slots
6.) Is there a reason that a heavy shield booster takes up 40% of all the PG on my Shield tank?
7.)Turrets need to be looked at. All Missile turrets cost way more CPU and PG than railgun and blaster turrets.
8.) Tanks per side on map needs to be looked at. 5 HAV's per side is too much Rattati.
9.) Some of the turret modules are very hard to fit but useless at Standard level.
10.) Hardeners need to be balanced in another way. There shouldn't be a cap but there also shouldn't be a boosted fitting cost. The players that use only one hardener shouldn't be penalized like the rest The Fitting cost of a Hardener is too much, they take up a good 35% of my CPU on my Shield tank. Their CPU and PG needs to go back to the way they were.
Instead of current hardener balanced around CPU/PG, I suggest we balance it around efficiency. What if we made it so that if you activate two hardeners at one, the second hardener will only have 25% efficiency. This would make it so that if you activate two shield hardeners instead of one, your efficiency goes from 40%->50% resistance.
I really dislike being penalized especially since I only use one hardener.
Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
|
|
CCP Rattati
C C P C C P Alliance
18627
|
Posted - 2015.03.13 03:04:00 -
[2] - Quote
some good points here, we will keep evolving this now that Maddies are no longer UP
"As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"
|
|
Alena Ventrallis
Ahrendee Inc. Negative-Feedback
2657
|
Posted - 2015.03.13 03:15:00 -
[3] - Quote
Maddies are just fine now. We die to maxed out AV and large rails. Missiles do need some help though.
Honestly, I'm a proponent of limiting one hardener per vehicle. They should be powerful while up, but I should likewise be very vulnerable while they are down. Eve side, we have things like siege and bastion modules for a module limit on ships, and I believe hardeners are either too weak or too strong when being able to fit multiples. Limiting them to one, while it does take away one small factor of the sandbox, enables us to better balance them, since we don't have to worry about perma-hardened Gunnlogis and the like.
Listen to my muscle memory
Contemplate what I've been clinging to
Forty-six and two ahead of me
|
Gh0st Blade
KnightKiller's inc.
46
|
Posted - 2015.03.13 03:44:00 -
[4] - Quote
By making the module the shield and armor hardener like the after-burner and the fuel injector would allow less people to be able to take so many shots for extended time or for tanks to be briefly indestructable almost for 30 seconds since there is actually a time penalty when both are active.
The hunting is always a challenge
|
Doc DDD
TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback
386
|
Posted - 2015.03.13 04:12:00 -
[5] - Quote
Armor hardener last almost twice as long as shield hardener with same damage reduction.
Shield regulators will never be used in high slots, and are too resource hungry to use even of they were low slots.
2 large rail shots before overheat has really nerfed rails into the redline.
cpu and pg is too low on Havs
invisible small turrets everyone is aware of
shield boosters too resource intensive
av users can cloak up to tank, decloak, and lunar jump back and forth over tank with no chance of turret ever aiming towards infantry player. Promotes jumping out of tank with HMG to shoot at infantry.
haven't tried missiles as I have not heard good things.
Madrugars are far superior at tanking damage to Gunlogis due to lasting power of hardeners and immediate reps of armor.
Dispersion control module as low slot is welcome surprise, but far too resource intensive.
heat sink icon is exact same as damage mod
Heat sink roughly gives rails one more shot before overheat than pre-nerfed rails, doubles number of shots before overheat now. Outperforms a damage mod.
|
Godin Thekiller
Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback
2969
|
Posted - 2015.03.13 08:52:00 -
[6] - Quote
Alena Ventrallis wrote:Maddies are just fine now. We die to maxed out AV and large rails. Missiles do need some help though.
Honestly, I'm a proponent of limiting one hardener per vehicle. They should be powerful while up, but I should likewise be very vulnerable while they are down. Eve side, we have things like siege and bastion modules for a module limit on ships, and I believe hardeners are either too weak or too strong when being able to fit multiples. Limiting them to one, while it does take away one small factor of the sandbox, enables us to better balance them, since we don't have to worry about perma-hardened Gunnlogis and the like.
No. Unless there is a sstem in which I don't have to fit several plates to have tank, I refuse for such a system to exist.
Hell, I'm getting one shotted through my hardeners by proto AV (probably a bug, but still), and a hardener is nothing like a siege module. A Flux one (what you're describing more of) would be fine, but forcing me to se a certain tank style is a double negative.
click me
Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
|
Breakin Stuff
Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
7622
|
Posted - 2015.03.13 09:55:00 -
[7] - Quote
Sir Dukey wrote:1.) Myofibs need a reduction. Instead of 15%, the might be booting jump height by 115%
2.) Large Missiles need buff- they are bad at killing vehicles. They either need their 400 RoF back or 300 RoF with 16 Clip. Or 200 RoF with 20 Clip.
3.) Armor Hardeners need a nerf. (5% would do) Armor tanks are back to 1.7 level with ridiculous rep rates and a 40% hardener on top of that. Armor hardeners need the same duration/cooldown as shield hardeners
4.) LAV's need more slots. Please.
5.) All tanks need more CPU/ PG, with more slots comes more fitting problems. My proto Gunnlogi's low slots are full of proto fitting modules and I still cannot fit a full proto tank with proto gunner slots and proto filled high slots
6.) Is there a reason that a heavy shield booster takes up 40% of all the PG on my Shield tank? Is thereANY possible way this question can be stressed enough? Shield boosters have the worst cost/benefit ratio of any current vehicle module.
7.)Turrets need to be looked at. All Missile turrets cost way more CPU and PG than railgun and blaster turrets.
8.) Tanks per side on map needs to be looked at. 5 HAV's per side is too much Rattati. Rarely see 5 tanks on the board even combining both sides.
9.) Some of the turret modules are very hard to fit but useless at Standard level. Long time problem
10.) Hardeners need to be balanced in another way. There shouldn't be a cap but there also shouldn't be a boosted fitting cost. The players that use only one hardener shouldn't be penalized like the rest The Fitting cost of a Hardener is too much, they take up a good 35% of my CPU on my Shield tank. Their CPU and PG needs to go back to the way they were. hardeners give more EHP than extenders or plates. They should cost about the same or slightly more since it's temporary.
Also- The AScR melts shields wayyyy too fastttttttttttttt. I lost my 640 shields on a Cal Sent (just a level1) to a standard Amarr commando with a Basic Assault ScR in like 1 sec. What can I say? I'm a masochist.
quoted text edited for editorial reasons. No I'm not mocking the OP this time. I partly agree with him.
AV
|
Breakin Stuff
Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
7622
|
Posted - 2015.03.13 09:58:00 -
[8] - Quote
Godin Thekiller wrote:
Hell, I'm getting one shotted through my hardeners by proto AV (probably a bug, but still)
Will test this. If true will try to provide as much detail on when/where/match data when it happened.
Much as I like busting HAV driver balls this is uncool if it's a thing. Hopefully if it's a persistent glitch it can be fixed fast.
AV
|
Sir Dukey
G0DS AM0NG MEN General Tso's Alliance
1920
|
Posted - 2015.03.13 22:19:00 -
[9] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:some good points here, we will keep evolving this now that Maddies are no longer UP Thanks <3
Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
|
Sir Dukey
G0DS AM0NG MEN General Tso's Alliance
1920
|
Posted - 2015.03.13 22:25:00 -
[10] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:Sir Dukey wrote:1.) Myofibs need a reduction. Instead of 15%, the might be booting jump height by 115%
2.) Large Missiles need buff- they are bad at killing vehicles. They either need their 400 RoF back or 300 RoF with 16 Clip. Or 200 RoF with 20 Clip.
3.) Armor Hardeners need a nerf. (5% would do) Armor tanks are back to 1.7 level with ridiculous rep rates and a 40% hardener on top of that. Armor hardeners need the same duration/cooldown as shield hardeners
4.) LAV's need more slots. Please.
5.) All tanks need more CPU/ PG, with more slots comes more fitting problems. My proto Gunnlogi's low slots are full of proto fitting modules and I still cannot fit a full proto tank with proto gunner slots and proto filled high slots
6.) Is there a reason that a heavy shield booster takes up 40% of all the PG on my Shield tank? Is thereANY possible way this question can be stressed enough? Shield boosters have the worst cost/benefit ratio of any current vehicle module.
7.)Turrets need to be looked at. All Missile turrets cost way more CPU and PG than railgun and blaster turrets.
8.) Tanks per side on map needs to be looked at. 5 HAV's per side is too much Rattati. Rarely see 5 tanks on the board even combining both sides.
9.) Some of the turret modules are very hard to fit but useless at Standard level. Long time problem
10.) Hardeners need to be balanced in another way. There shouldn't be a cap but there also shouldn't be a boosted fitting cost. The players that use only one hardener shouldn't be penalized like the rest The Fitting cost of a Hardener is too much, they take up a good 35% of my CPU on my Shield tank. Their CPU and PG needs to go back to the way they were. hardeners give more EHP than extenders or plates. They should cost about the same or slightly more since it's temporary.
Also- The AScR melts shields wayyyy too fastttttttttttttt. I lost my 640 shields on a Cal Sent (just a level1) to a standard Amarr commando with a Basic Assault ScR in like 1 sec. What can I say? I'm a masochist.
quoted text edited for editorial reasons. No I'm not mocking the OP this time. I partly agree with him.
Armor Hardeners add 300 PG while shield hardeners add 300 CPU to Shield (the main fitting cost). Now compare Shield tank CPU vs Armor tank PG. Shield tank has 900-1200 CPU, compared to armor tank which has 2600-3200 PG. The armor hardeners are diffidently less fitting extensive toward Armor.
Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
|
|
Jason1 Black
FACTION WARFARE ARMY FACTION WARFARE ALLIANCE
8
|
Posted - 2015.03.16 02:50:00 -
[11] - Quote
Sir Dukey wrote:1.) Myofibs need a reduction. Instead of 15%, the might be booting jump height by 115%
2.) Large Missiles need buff- they are bad at killing vehicles. They either need their 400 RoF back or 300 RoF with 16 Clip. Or 200 RoF with 20 Clip.
3.) Armor Hardeners need a nerf. (5% would do) Armor tanks are back to 1.7 level with ridiculous rep rates and a 40% hardener on top of that.
4.) LAV's need more slots.
5.) All tanks need more CPU/ PG, with more slots comes more fitting problems. My proto Gunnlogi's low slots are full of proto fitting modules and I still cannot fit a full proto tank with proto gunner slots and proto filled high slots
6.) Is there a reason that a heavy shield booster takes up 40% of all the PG on my Shield tank?
7.)Turrets need to be looked at. All Missile turrets cost way more CPU and PG than railgun and blaster turrets.
8.) Tanks per side on map needs to be looked at. 5 HAV's per side is too much Rattati.
9.) Some of the turret modules are very hard to fit but useless at Standard level.
10.) Hardeners need to be balanced in another way. There shouldn't be a cap but there also shouldn't be a boosted fitting cost. The players that use only one hardener shouldn't be penalized like the rest The Fitting cost of a Hardener is too much, they take up a good 35% of my CPU on my Shield tank. Their CPU and PG needs to go back to the way they were.
Instead of current hardener balanced around CPU/PG, I suggest we balance it around efficiency. What if we made it so that if you activate two hardeners at one, the second hardener will only have 25% efficiency. This would make it so that if you activate two shield hardeners instead of one, your efficiency goes from 40%->50% resistance.
I really dislike being penalized especially since I only use one hardener.
Also- The AScR melts shields wayyyy too fastttttttttttttt. I lost my 640 shields on a Cal Sent (just a level1) to a standard Amarr commando with a Basic Assault ScR in like 1 sec. Missiles are not bad at killing vehicles, my gunngoli gets screwed over by them with 3800 thousand shield and 900 armor. Do not bufff them.
I love this game but it makes me rage so much.
Star wars battlefront 3 coming out, so excited!!
|
DeathwindRising
ROGUE RELICS
936
|
Posted - 2015.03.16 03:46:00 -
[12] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:some good points here, we will keep evolving this now that Maddies are no longer UP
That's an understatement. Dual rep, dual hardener fits can tank 8 guys running proto AV and rep through it. I've seen it. I've done it.
I don't bother running gunnlogi anymore. Maddy never dies with it's hardeners active |
DeathwindRising
ROGUE RELICS
936
|
Posted - 2015.03.16 03:57:00 -
[13] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:Godin Thekiller wrote:
Hell, I'm getting one shotted through my hardeners by proto AV (probably a bug, but still)
Will test this. If true will try to provide as much detail on when/where/match data when it happened. Much as I like busting HAV driver balls this is uncool if it's a thing. Hopefully if it's a persistent glitch it can be fixed fast. unless you're running a complete STD sh*tfit. what's the circumstances under which this is happening?
I've experienced something like this. But it's not one shot, it's two shot hitting at the same time. I had a plasma cannon kill my maddy by accidentally landing the round behind me. The splash damage hit the weak spot while a forge struck me. I honestly thought it was just the forge gun killing me I thought about it. I had actually backed into the plasma cannon round as it landed behind me.
Packed av nades will kill you if your hardeners are off. Forge guns shoot too slow to kill dual rep maddy with dual hardeners.
Swarms are annoying and combined with av nades and myofibrils they make for op tank hunters. You can't track them as they jump over you repeatedly, but they can hit you perfectly because av nades and swarms are homing and don't require aiming. |
Vesta Opalus
T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K RISE of LEGION
520
|
Posted - 2015.03.16 03:58:00 -
[14] - Quote
DeathwindRising wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:Godin Thekiller wrote:
Hell, I'm getting one shotted through my hardeners by proto AV (probably a bug, but still)
Will test this. If true will try to provide as much detail on when/where/match data when it happened. Much as I like busting HAV driver balls this is uncool if it's a thing. Hopefully if it's a persistent glitch it can be fixed fast. unless you're running a complete STD sh*tfit. what's the circumstances under which this is happening? I've experienced something like this. But it's not one shot, it's two shot hitting at the same time. I had a plasma cannon kill my maddy by accidentally landing the round behind me. The splash damage hit the weak spot while a forge struck me. I honestly thought it was just the forge gun killing me I thought about it. I had actually backed into the plasma cannon round as it landed behind me. Packed av nades will kill you if your hardeners are off. Forge guns shoot too slow to kill dual rep maddy with dual hardeners. Swarms are annoying and combined with av nades and myofibrils they make for op tank hunters. You can't track them as they jump over you repeatedly, but they can hit you perfectly because av nades and swarms are homing and don't require aiming.
Waves of Invincibility is the best design philosophy ever. I mean... Opportunity... yeah. |
Sir Dukey
G0DS AM0NG MEN General Tso's Alliance
1931
|
Posted - 2015.03.16 20:17:00 -
[15] - Quote
Jason1 Black wrote:Sir Dukey wrote:1.) Myofibs need a reduction. Instead of 15%, the might be booting jump height by 115%
2.) Large Missiles need buff- they are bad at killing vehicles. They either need their 400 RoF back or 300 RoF with 16 Clip. Or 200 RoF with 20 Clip.
3.) Armor Hardeners need a nerf. (5% would do) Armor tanks are back to 1.7 level with ridiculous rep rates and a 40% hardener on top of that.
4.) LAV's need more slots.
5.) All tanks need more CPU/ PG, with more slots comes more fitting problems. My proto Gunnlogi's low slots are full of proto fitting modules and I still cannot fit a full proto tank with proto gunner slots and proto filled high slots
6.) Is there a reason that a heavy shield booster takes up 40% of all the PG on my Shield tank?
7.)Turrets need to be looked at. All Missile turrets cost way more CPU and PG than railgun and blaster turrets.
8.) Tanks per side on map needs to be looked at. 5 HAV's per side is too much Rattati.
9.) Some of the turret modules are very hard to fit but useless at Standard level.
10.) Hardeners need to be balanced in another way. There shouldn't be a cap but there also shouldn't be a boosted fitting cost. The players that use only one hardener shouldn't be penalized like the rest The Fitting cost of a Hardener is too much, they take up a good 35% of my CPU on my Shield tank. Their CPU and PG needs to go back to the way they were.
Instead of current hardener balanced around CPU/PG, I suggest we balance it around efficiency. What if we made it so that if you activate two hardeners at one, the second hardener will only have 25% efficiency. This would make it so that if you activate two shield hardeners instead of one, your efficiency goes from 40%->50% resistance.
I really dislike being penalized especially since I only use one hardener.
Also- The AScR melts shields wayyyy too fastttttttttttttt. I lost my 640 shields on a Cal Sent (just a level1) to a standard Amarr commando with a Basic Assault ScR in like 1 sec. Missiles are not bad at killing vehicles, my gunngoli gets screwed over by them with 3800 thousand shield and 900 armor. Do not bufff them.
That's equivalent to saying Flaylock is viable against A Caldari Assault. No, missiles are absolute trash against shields.
Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
|
Derpty Derp
Dead Man's Game
919
|
Posted - 2015.03.16 22:45:00 -
[16] - Quote
Sir Dukey wrote: 2.) Large Missiles need buff- they are bad at killing vehicles. They either need their 400 RoF back or 300 RoF with 16 Clip. Or 200 RoF with 20 Clip.
I'd like to suggest just removing that 4 second wait before reload happens, more missiles will allow you to down anything without reloading, where most other turrets (without mods) force you to wait for heat to cooldown at least once, against a fair tank.
Perhaps changing the ammo mod to allow more shots per reload, instead of more spare shots would work, but with a higher fitting cost, so it's in-line with the other turrets?
Sir Dukey wrote:3.) Armor Hardeners need a nerf. (5% would do) Armor tanks are back to 1.7 level with ridiculous rep rates and a 40% hardener on top of that.
I don't think the armour hardener does need a straight up 'nerf' but instead it needs to affect armour rep, either drops it by 20% per hardener fit, or just a straight 45% when hardener is active.
Sir Dukey wrote:4.) LAV's need more slots.
I think more PG and less CPU would do at first, currently can make a somewhat useful Saga-II by dumping an extender on it, but can only fit enhanced, adding an extra slot with no more PG would be useless, but adding both would allow me to put a booster or something else on it, which could make it a little too good.
Sir Dukey wrote:5.) All tanks need more CPU/ PG, with more slots comes more fitting problems. My proto Gunnlogi's low slots are full of proto fitting modules and I still cannot fit a full proto tank with proto gunner slots and proto filled high slots
No... I have made several beastly tank fits with the Gunnlogi and I don't even have all the available fitting cost reductions. This would be a flat out mistake.
Sir Dukey wrote:8.) Tanks per side on map needs to be looked at. 5 HAV's per side is too much Rattati.
5 v 1 tank is a pain (although can be entertaining if you have enough money to waste.) Limiting tanks per side means no more 5 v 5 tank fights, which although rare are actually really good fun, pure carnage. The issue is purely one of not enough people bringing vehicles on both sides, perhaps there's some way we can split the 'potential' vehicle users onto both teams, so there's less chance of this one sided vehicle match? |
Cody Sietz
Random Gunz
4438
|
Posted - 2015.03.16 22:53:00 -
[17] - Quote
A friend of mine made a really good suggestion.
He said to boost the amount given by Myro mods but add a much higher stacking penalty.
"I do agree with you there though. shudders"
-Arkena Wyrnspire
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |