Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sidus Isaacs
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
98
|
Posted - 2012.04.27 10:21:00 -
[31] - Quote
Jace81 wrote:Proposed drake changes are 5% ROF and Missile Velocity bonus instead of the current 5% kin dmg and 5% Shield resistance bonus
As far as I have read unknown when will be implemented if ever.
Too bad about the resistance bonus going, but this change will actually make the drake even more fun to fly. Free damage selection and more damage projection ftw :) |
Perihelion Olenard
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
21
|
Posted - 2012.04.27 10:41:00 -
[32] - Quote
After this the myrmidon will be the only tier 2 BC with a defensive bonus. Is CCP making the tier 2s and 3s glass cannons with tier 1s being the defensive BCs? It would be interesting if the myrmidon's repair bonus were changed to be a hybrid damage bonus making it an upgraded vexor, but still inferior to the dominix. |
Noisrevbus
112
|
Posted - 2012.04.27 11:32:00 -
[33] - Quote
Perihelion Olenard wrote:After this the myrmidon will be the only tier 2 BC with a defensive bonus. Is CCP making the tier 2s double damage bonus BCs and tier 3s glass cannons with tier 1s being the defensive BCs? It would be interesting if the myrmidon's repair bonus were changed to be a hybrid damage bonus making it an upgraded vexor, but would still inferior to the dominix. The tier 1s would need to be fixed to tank properly and at least deal some damage (prophecy).
Yet another Drake-thread?
Here comes yet another tired counterpoint.
I'm just quoting Perihelion since he's sniffing around the issue, though not pointing to it out loud.
The problem with ships that only have offensive bonuses (especially with some projectability) is that they will quickly turn into a blobber tool. The Drake as it is have a number of weak points ready to exploited in a game of rock-paper-scissor. They also have a couple of strong points, identified by their ship bonuses and how they interact with each other. The Drake is not fast enough, when it needs to be fast. The Drake do not shoot far enough, when it need to shoot far. The Drake do not have damage-selectability enough, when it deals with omnitanks (while the simplicity of the missile accuracy mechanics can also be exploited).
Taking away the bonuses that enable a solid buffer on a brick-like ship to create a ship with less staying power by plugging one or more of these existing weakspots may cause more Drakes to die (or explode in a more rapid pace) but it will not make the ship less popular to bring in numbers or less efficient in an affordable tank-projection role - that makes it so popular in numbers.
The only thing you'll achieve is further skewer their use to the side with numbers to lose. It means that it'll lose ground in small-medium scale fights where it's a more balanced option among many, with natural counters. It will likely gain ground in larger gangs regardless the scale of the fight. In a single-world game where everyone are meant to be able meet everyone the deepest impact any such changes will have, comes at the smaller gang's ability to meet the larger gang. Design trend keep forgetting to have incentives for the smaller to play with the larger.
End result? Less PvP.
It doesn't matter if you speak sov-politics, hitpoint-infrastructure interaction or ship-balance. If everything just boil down to two sides sitting there mindlessly applying damage to each other at all times, the side with numbers will always win and the side without numbers have little to no reason to even attempt interaction. Sadly, this seem to be an ongoing mantra when it comes to design ("we want more beautiful spaceship explosions"). You get less of the day-to-day action, with more reluctancy and stepping-down on all scales. |
Corbin Blair
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
54
|
Posted - 2012.04.28 05:29:00 -
[34] - Quote
Versuvius Marii wrote:I don't get the velocity bonus. A Drake can already hit out to 65-70km as it is. In fact HM are probably the main reason Drakes are so hated compared to other BC(I don't see Hurricanes or Harbingers hitting out to those ranges...) so unless a HM nerf is coming it just makes no sense. Assault missiles. |
Kalli Brixzat
17
|
Posted - 2012.04.28 05:42:00 -
[35] - Quote
Versuvius Marii wrote:I don't get the velocity bonus. A Drake can already hit out to 65-70km as it is. In fact HM are probably the main reason Drakes are so hated compared to other BC(I don't see Hurricanes or Harbingers hitting out to those ranges...) so unless a HM nerf is coming it just makes no sense.
Arty 'Canes can get pretty close to that. It's just not a great fit. 'Canes are meant for A/C's. |
Caldari Citizen 786478786
122
|
Posted - 2012.04.28 06:22:00 -
[36] - Quote
Kalli Brixzat wrote:Myrkala wrote:Currently CCP thinks the Drake is just a little bit too tanky, IRRC they were thinking about removing changing the resist bonus on shields.
Currently you can get something like a 105k ehp HAM fit with a Scram that does around 650 dps... Yup...you can...for the bargain price of 1B isk.
[Drake, DrakePVP] Damage Control II Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Reactor Control Unit II
Experimental 10MN MicroWarpdrive I Large Shield Extender II Large Shield Extender II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Warp Scrambler II
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Scourge Rage Assault Missile Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Scourge Rage Assault Missile Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Scourge Rage Assault Missile Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Scourge Rage Assault Missile Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Scourge Rage Assault Missile Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Scourge Rage Assault Missile Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Scourge Rage Assault Missile
Medium Core Defense Field Extender I Medium Core Defense Field Extender I Medium Core Defense Field Extender I
Hobgoblin II x5
With ZERO leadership bonuses or Implants:
-103k EHP (118k Overheated) -613 DPS (703 Overheated)
All for the bargain basement price of nowhere near 1B isk.
You were saying? |
Tobiaz
Spacerats
350
|
Posted - 2012.04.28 08:47:00 -
[37] - Quote
Sidus Isaacs wrote:Jace81 wrote:Proposed drake changes are 5% ROF and Missile Velocity bonus instead of the current 5% kin dmg and 5% Shield resistance bonus
As far as I have read unknown when will be implemented if ever. Too bad about the resistance bonus going, but this change will actually make the drake even more fun to fly. Free damage selection and more damage projection ftw :)
A ROF bonus to one of the most lag-heavy weapons in the game is bad. Removing the main reason why people fly Drakes: it's tank, so if it gets dropped down in the the rest of the bag of role-less 'meh' BC, that seems quite counterproductive as well, especially when looking at what CCP is trying to achieve with Tiercide. Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!-á Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors! |
Lord Eremet
The Seatbelts
1
|
Posted - 2012.04.28 17:44:00 -
[38] - Quote
Jace81 wrote:Proposed drake changes are 5% ROF and Missile Velocity bonus instead of the current 5% kin dmg and 5% Shield resistance bonus.
That sounds more like a boost than a nerf :P
|
Flurk Hellbron
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
93
|
Posted - 2012.04.29 03:33:00 -
[39] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:The "nerf" as currently proposed will be a hilarious boost to both Drake PVP and PVE. This is what 's gonna happen, Drake is a bigger ship then the Tengu so it should be better. |
Luba Cibre
Global Song Setup
117
|
Posted - 2012.04.29 03:37:00 -
[40] - Quote
Lord Eremet wrote:Jace81 wrote:Proposed drake changes are 5% ROF and Missile Velocity bonus instead of the current 5% kin dmg and 5% Shield resistance bonus. That sounds more like a boost than a nerf :P You're correct. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |