Sunday, April 5, 2015

CSMX - Post #03

Welcome to Easter weekend. It's been quiet. CSMX has their NDA's signed but confluence access will not hit until next week it looks like. CCP's also out on a five day holiday breaking up this week and next week with a bit of quiet time.

It is not too quiet, however. CCP snuck in an o7 show in Wednesday instead of their previous Thursdays. This was on April 1st which caused some people to be disgruntled but the information released was rather true.

First, thank you to Gorski Car for finding the argument that got us battlecuriser warp speed buffs. It also came up a lot during fanfest. This has been a nonstop point of contention and I am thrilled to see some changes. I know that some will ask for the old Hurricane back, but we're not getting that. The warp speed improvements, will I hope, provide some needed quality of use that can get these ships back out a little bit more.

There is also the Entosis Link #2 thread. This is showing changes. There is stront use and module stats that will stop trollceptors from being a thing. CSMX has had several internal discussions about this. The feedback the null sec guys have been getting has been very good and I expect them to hit the ground running with this subject as soon as their access opens the rest of the way.

There is also a T3 Destroyer nerf incoming. I've had a lot of people pounding the drum that they are just to good. Fozzie said it at Fanfest. The nerfs should address some of that. Some feel the Confessor nerf is to strong. They are still allowed in small faction warfare complexes. I will continue to touch bases with Faction Warfare members and see how the state of small complexes is after the changes. I've received a lot of mixed feedback on T3D in small complexes so it is something I have to keep on top of.

I've had a few corp little things brought to me of late. I've punted everyone to CCP Punkturis' thread. It's not that I don't love you, its that she monitors her thread and posting in it is the best way to get there right now.

If you haven't been to the test server and you don't mind going, go. There are a lot of new things. I went and played with SKINs the other day and wrote up a post about them. I like them a lot. It is a more flexible and entertaining system. I'm the girl that scavenges for coins in Diablo to dye my gear. I can see myself making ISK to buy skins to make all of my ships blue if they can be blue.

Module tiericide is also coming to Damage Control Units it looks like. I'm sure that it is there for other modules as well but damage control units are one that will affect most of our PvP fits. Please test them out and give feedback. Or at least, be prepared to change fits and potentially lose ISK as the market changes for some of the more rare types.

The new burner missions are also starting to come out. They will be added as the team has the time so don't be surprised not to see all of them at once. More burners has been requested from the release of the first ones and I'm pleased to see them hitting the test server now. I don't know if they are going to do a hack as they did last time so that people could do only burner missions. I've asked about it.

Things should start picking back up when CCP gets into the office. For now I'm trying to put together a local meet on the 18th of April in the Maryland, Virginia, DC area. I'm also looking to restart my monthly talks on the following Sunday. Corbexx and I will hopefully have a wormhole structure soundboard announced in the next week or so as well.

6 comments:

  1. The Damage Control tiericide sounds pretty ominous.

    I hope that they only intend to adjust the performance of the various DCs and not reduce the breadth of fitting options available by removing the 17 CPU option. I can understand why an Internal Force Field Array shouldn't have the lowest fitting requirement and the highest resists of the meta <5 DCs but removing a 17 CPU option could only make EVE a shallower game, not a better one.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So far, "module tiericide" seems to be universal code for "remove fitting options", so I wouldn't get your hopes up.

      Delete
  2. The opposite side of that coin is that it only costs me 17 CPU to put the same module on my carrier and I get an additional 70,000 EHP. That doesn't
    Seem fair either. Are we going to see DCU in different sizes???

    ReplyDelete
  3. The nerf to the Confessor will still leave the ship a lean, mean murder-machine. Which I'm OK with.

    CCP's plans to make T3-destroyers more expensive to build is the first time I'll get the chance to do some market-PVP of my own: I still had a small ton of BPCs sitting around doing nothing, but now my industry-alt has just enough time to build them all until the patch hits.

    Either I can sell a ton of highly sought-after ships for a sweet profit, or the change goes through and I'll make a really obscene profit when prices adjust to a higher niveau. I can't lose here, it's just different shades of winning. :V

    ReplyDelete
  4. In the context of the frigate and destroyer FW metagame, T3Ds are problematic not only because they are new apex predators (causing the same problems that the Worm and Garmur do today and the Dramiel and Rifter used to) but because the 10mn AB subverts the 'rock, paper, scissors' of the MWD tackler, MWD kiter and AB brawler.

    I used to read stories about pirates in low-sec flying around in Rifters, Taranis' or occasionally AFs or a T1 cruiser such as a Stabber. They'd have stories of ransoming and killing PVE cruisers, BCs and even Battleships. I found those blog posts inspirational but for whatever reasons, things have changed. Today, the normal PVE ship to encounter in low-sec is an Ishtar. DDAs affect drones of all sizes, the hull has bonuses to light drones and because it it is a drone boat it has a lot of room for energy neutralizers; a medium neut will beat a small Nos. The stories have stopped.

    In the context of 'big game hunting' the Svipul is the new ship of choice. It can solo a PVE Ishtar! You don't have to choose between being able to get tackle and then being shut down by the defensive scram, or fitting an AB and being rendered unable to even reach your target. The oversized AB gives you a fighting chance against multiple webs (but an AB cruiser with two webs should still dictate range against a Svipul without a web). Autocannons don't use capacitor and you have the option of a strong cap-less tank. It hits hard, it tanks well and Sharpshooter is invaluable for catching lazy pods.

    Where is the Svipul supposed to fit in the wider context of ship balance? I've heard complaints about Svipuls killing T1 cruisers, even those that are fitted to farm frigate kills (but I doubt many had two webs and an AB and are therefore not truly counter-fitted). I have never heard a complaint about a T3 cruiser killing a T1 BC or the indication that this shouldn't be the case if the game was perfectly balanced. We need to know where the ship should fit in the bigger picture before we can decide whether it is truly overpowered. Is it supposed to beat T1 cruisers? I think it is. ;)

    To conclude, the Svipul might need to be beaten with the nerfbat a little bit but I'd rather see it locked out of Small plexes than severely nerfed because I don't think that it is disproportionately powerful outside of Faction Warfare. If brawlers were in a better state compared to kiters, or Assault Frigates were in a better state in general (and CCP has stated that they intend to buff them) then I don't think that AC Svipuls would seem quite so good.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've seen some of CCP's proposed direction for AFs - I hardly think that "buff" is the appropriate word.

      Delete