|
ullerrm posted:Rorqual: They're aware that it's lackluster atm. Redesign is in early stages; no promises at this stage. No kidding. I used to compress ice in remote locations with a Rorq. I needed a small POS to keep the Rorq in it while compressing. Now I just drop the compression module and the Rorq moves ore to it. Maybe they should let the Rorq compress ores on a station undock at a cost of heavy water with every use.
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 19:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 21:04 |
|
|
xilni posted:Any news of Rorqual or Marauder changes? They both seem quite lackluster at the moment. Marauders were redone less than a year ago? They are mission grinding ships now and are quite good at it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 19:56
|
|
|
BigPaddy posted:Marauders were redone less than a year ago? They are mission grinding ships now and are quite good at it. Some of them are definitely better than others, though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
The new Glass cannon turrets would be a boon on long range ships like Apocs in PVE settings where everything is supposed to die before they get into their optimal range anyways. Now the question is how well would they be for things like structure grinds?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 21:12
|
|
|
SugarAddict posted:The new Glass cannon turrets would be a boon on long range ships like Apocs in PVE settings where everything is supposed to die before they get into their optimal range anyways. Now the question is how well would they be for things like structure grinds? Glass cannons only come in short range variants from what I've seen.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 21:13
|
|
|
So I used to use the gently caress out of battleclinic for load outs whenever i came back to eve from a long break. Was searching though some fits for some quick pve to get back in the flow of things (all my other ships where left in 0.0) but the fits only have like 3-4 votes tops. What is everyone using now? Or should I just say gently caress it and only use EFT. Looking for pve fits, L4, burners, maybe some wh fits, and whatever this faction warfare stuff is, really need to read more about that. Beanage fucked around with this message at 21:22 on Oct 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 21:19
|
|
|
Slashrat posted:Glass cannons only come in short range variants from what I've seen. 'Short range' is a kind of vague term when pulse apocs can hit out to over 90 km and navy omens can zap tacklers at 45.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 21:21
|
|
|
Anybody that doesn't dual tank and mix guns is a fool. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 21:22
|
|
|
Cannon_Fodder posted:Anybody that doesn't dual tank and mix guns is a fool. If I have a damage control does that mean I'm dual tanking?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 21:24
|
|
|
Beanage posted:If I have a damage control does that mean I'm dual tanking? no it means you are TRIPLE TANKING 
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 21:31
|
|
|
Glory of Arioch posted:no it means you are TRIPLE TANKING Boss mode unlocked.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 21:32
|
|
|
uh zip zoom posted:Pardon my ignorance, but what game is that? As someone who has played Sins of a Solar empire WAY too much I can confirm the above posters post on the last page
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 21:38
|
|
|
Siets posted:So why are glass cannon turrets being added to the game in the first place. They feel sort of... just like a random idea. That's kind of the stated point of it. They want to throw in some random poo poo that they don't know fully how it will affect the meta (because they admit they are worse at it than the body of players), but it will do something!
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 21:50
|
|
|
darnon posted:That's kind of the stated point of it. They want to throw in some random poo poo that they don't know fully how it will affect the meta (because they admit they are worse at it than the body of players), but it will do something! It's called Stochastic Patching, and I'm glad they're going with it. It was absurdly hubristic on CCP's part to think they could make well thought out changes and build on the game in a logical manner, in a way that the community wouldn't metagame to hell and back. Best to throw poo poo at the wall; see what sticks, let what doesn't slide off. ----------------
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 22:10
|
|
|
Narciss posted:It's called Stochastic Patching, and I'm glad they're going with it. It was absurdly hubristic on CCP's part to think they could make well thought out changes and build on the game in a logical manner, in a way that the community wouldn't metagame to hell and back. Best to throw poo poo at the wall; see what sticks, let what doesn't slide off. The problem is when said poo poo on the wall takes years to slide down until it ultimately rots and mutates into something other than poo poo and CCP forgets about it completely. That is until the players prop up a threadnaught complaining about the mutant fungi monster growing on the wall that is ruining the bathroom for everybody. See: AoE doomsdays and sentry drones. It took them years to remove the former and they still don't know what the gently caress to do about the latter.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
Narciss posted:Best to throw poo poo at the wall; see what sticks, let what doesn't slide off. Sounds rather like most of your troll attempts.  I'm not sure where this will fit in the meta; however, I'm pretty confident that it's going to not make a huge change. It's going to add a little bit of variety for people who want to try random crap on small scales. Won't affect how most Goons play, either positively or negatively. Clearly, such concepts are inherently terrible; everyone should be doled out the exact same amount of Crispy Enjoyment Nodules at all times. PICK UP THAT CARGO CAN, CAPSULEER edit: On a sharper note, this process is hardly new. CCP has been doing this for years -- namely, experimenting with the sandbox by tossing in modules in limited quantities via BPCs in the droptables, see what the player base responds to, and crank up the drop rate on the modules that the players like. In some cases, players have responded extremely positively to it, and it became a dominant meta -- i.e. MJDs and ASB/AARs. In some cases, players didn't care, they buffed it, and now it's interesting without being dominant -- i.e. Reactive Armor Hardeners, or Ascendancy hardwires. In some cases, it was poo poo and they forgot that it exists -- i.e. Target Spectrum Hardeners. ullerrm fucked around with this message at 22:33 on Oct 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 22:17
|
|
|
I think that the glass cannons will be really good for certain kinds of cloaky bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 22:32
|
|
|
While sitting at one of the pubs with Fozzie, I mentioned that some of the older content that was taken out long ago could be restructured with the current code they're working with to do some (old is) new things with it. He joked that Python mines might work if they were remote detonate based (triggered by single action from player) rather than proximity detonate based (pinging server repeatedly for trigger). A guy can dream, ya know?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 22:37
|
|
|
Sixx Spades posted:While sitting at one of the pubs with Fozzie, I mentioned that some of the older content that was taken out long ago could be restructured with the current code they're working with to do some (old is) new things with it. He joked that Python mines might work if they were remote detonate based (triggered by single action from player) rather than proximity detonate based (pinging server repeatedly for trigger). Space mine fields? I like.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 22:51
|
|
|
Yeah, I could dig some space satchel charges. Drop a drag bubble and a grip of space satchel charges on a gate, then wait for idiots to come in.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 22:57
|
|
|
Glory of Arioch posted:Yeah, I could dig some space satchel charges. Drop a drag bubble and a grip of space satchel charges on a gate, then wait for idiots to come in. this combined with that dscan inhibitor could be funny of course they probably wouldn't let them be used in highsec where they would be the most fun
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:11
|
|
|
Before I forget, I also got confirmation from Fozzie that decloaking using moon probes is legit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:14
|
|
|
Kuvo posted:this combined with that dscan inhibitor could be funny But you COULD drop them on an ESS.  
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:18
|
|
|
Sixx Spades posted:Before I forget, I also got confirmation from Fozzie that decloaking using moon probes is legit. Wait what?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 00:37
|
|
|
pugnax posted:Wait what? Things we figured out months ago in Theta but weren't sure if it was safe to use.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 03:13
|
|
|
Vegas: Foxfour(?) mentioned dropping the clone upgrade mechanic as something they wanted to do. Rise wants to (eventually) add a hardcore mode to the game wherein you have a set number of skillpoints, all of your kills/stats are tracked, and you suffer PERMADEATH. A pubbie in the game design round table would not loving shut up about wanting to get reimbursed for all of the time he spent improving his blueprints or whatever. I am an obnoxious drunk. Normal Barbarian fucked around with this message at 03:37 on Oct 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 03:35
|
|
|
scandoslav posted:Rise wants to (eventually) add a hardcore mode to the game wherein you have a set number of skillpoints, all of your kills/stats are tracked, and you suffer PERMADEATH. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 03:44
|
|
|
scandoslav posted:Vegas: Pubbies are just as insufferable in real life as they are on eve-o/in-game  ?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 03:45
|
|
|
Sixx Spades posted:Between that and glass canons, it's a good time to be in Miniluv. making GBS threads all over hardcore streamers, all day erry day
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 03:56
|
|
|
scandoslav posted:
That's actually neat, multiplayer roguelike of your nightmares.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 04:18
|
|
|
ullerrm posted:Yep. BPCs for them will drop from some new exploration content that they're adding. What we know so far: This is odd, and seems like kind of a waste of coding/balancing effort when there are still entire ship classes that haven't been properly balanced yet. The whole setting resists to zero (a random resist? specific to each gun type? in a certain order?) is something that only about a half-dozen ships in the entire game, all frigates, can utilize without facing certain death. If speed were a bit more manipulable, especially for larger ships, this might be a viable if very strange idea, but I don't see anything other than frigates ever using these. Marauders cost way too much to risk zeroing out your resists and being alphaed by two Tornados. I suppose this is great for people who do nothing but gank single jammed/damped ships, but a complete waste of effort for the rest of the game. Not a very positive indicator of CCP's metagame/balance awareness.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 07:15
|
|
|
mikey posted:This is odd, and seems like kind of a waste of coding/balancing effort when there are still entire ship classes that haven't been properly balanced yet. The whole setting resists to zero (a random resist? specific to each gun type? in a certain order?) is something that only about a half-dozen ships in the entire game, all frigates, can utilize without facing certain death. If speed were a bit more manipulable, especially for larger ships, this might be a viable if very strange idea, but I don't see anything other than frigates ever using these. Marauders cost way too much to risk zeroing out your resists and being alphaed by two Tornados. They already said the modules are going to be priced similarly to Faction stuff though, right? Is so, the pricing alone should be enough of a deterrent that you won't see very many cheap frigates running full sets of these guns, let alone seeing much ganking with them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 07:18
|
|
|
Otacon posted:They already said the modules are going to be priced similarly to Faction stuff though, right? Is so, the pricing alone should be enough of a deterrent that you won't see very many cheap frigates running full sets of these guns, let alone seeing much ganking with them. That's my point. This is an almost-useless addition to the game, because so few ships will use it. Cloaking T3s/blackops that are only used for 100% safe ganks, and maybe Garmurs and Slicers? It's not a meaningful choice for 99.9% of situations in Eve. Why are they wasting design and QA time on something like this?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 07:21
|
|
|
mikey posted:It's not a meaningful choice for 99.9% of situations in Eve. Why are they wasting design and QA time on something like this? Yes, because clearly CCP can only do design and QA for one thing at a time. Clearly, absolutely zero thought, planning, or work can go into recon balancing or T3 balancing or sov or force projection, because the entire CCP dev team was focused on glass cannon turrets.  There's only thing worse than armchair game designers like me -- and that's armchair project managers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 07:36
|
|
|
 Of course this doesn't mean they're stopping other balancing work, but not every idea (or implementation) is worth the time spent doing coding and content and QA, and this seems like one of those. I like go-fast shooty shooty ships, so the idea of being able to eke out more damage at the cost of tank is a good one, but this implementation is overly limiting. They should have found a somewhat less prohibitive penalty system for these weapons so that they could be a meaningful choice for more hulls and situations.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 07:42
|
|
|
mikey posted:
If that's the case, then they'll just iterate on it. Like I said a page or so ago, CCP did the exact same process with the Inferno modules. They released the modules in a form that's underpowered, or has limited applications, in the form of BPCs. They saw what players did with them, then expanded on the successful ones as they see fit -- as well as nerfing them if they end up being too good. It worked out fine for ASBs and MJDs, and to a lesser extent for the RAH. The worst case, really, is that these become the new Target Spectrum Breaker. At least these don't have new effects needing to be implemented in code; it's database rows. (e: And fwiw, that's precisely why the TSB is junk -- it has a custom-coded effect that is buggy as gently caress.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 07:50
|
|
|
Did they actually significantly change ASB/AAR attributes? I wasn't playing or paying attention to the game when those were first added.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 07:57
|
|
|
mikey posted:Did they actually significantly change ASB/AAR attributes? I wasn't playing or paying attention to the game when those were first added. AARs haven't been changed since their introduction to my knowledge but ASBs had their capacity nerfed (they used to hold 13 charges but now only have 9) and their cycle times increased.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 08:16
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:AARs haven't been changed since their introduction to my knowledge but ASBs had their capacity nerfed (they used to hold 13 charges but now only have 9) and their cycle times increased. They also buffed the SASB/MASB by introducing navy versions of the smaller charges. Was a lot less powerful when navy cap boosters were only 150/200/400/800.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 09:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 21:04 |
|
|
Got this email from one of my old Corps. "Recently we have actually had several new deaf players join. They have had a few issues with adapting and trying to find ways to participate without being able to use voice comms." I know I have been on fleets that had some deaf players (Down Trolls, I said deaf, not stupid) and would like to contact some of them to see if they could provide some tips to these folks. Any leads would be great. Thanks Burlinton fucked around with this message at 14:06 on Oct 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 13:49
|
|