Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
SubLepton
|
Posted - 2009.06.28 22:20:00 -
[1]
Edited by: SubLepton on 28/06/2009 22:27:06 In the current situation destroyers do not forfill there role the way they should. they are suppose to be frigate killers, but in fact, you see them being used in pvp so rare, and when they are used, there efficiency is low, except for those rear cases when people using them have excellent plan and amazing setups.
First of all, let's look at the balance between destroyers. What is the destroyer people love most? It is the thrasher. I find it stupid that thrasher dominates so much as a pvp destroyer. I tried all 4 destroyers in pvp and realised that thrasher dominates. I spent hours fitting catalysts and coercers, and could barely reach any efficiency close to that of a thrasher. Does that mean that thrasher is overpowered? NO, in my opinion it is the only somewhat worthy destroyer. So let's figure out why: Thrasher: 70pg, 170 cpu, tracking and damage bonus Coercer: 75 pg, 160 cpu, tracking and cap bonus Catalyst: 60pg, 170 cpu, tracking and faloff bonus Comorant: 55 pg, 210 cpu, optimal and tracking bonus
First of all, power grid, Catalyst and Comorant severely lack power grid. Severely. Catalyst has less power grid, same cpu as thrasher. Why? Comorant is a disaster, it cannot fit 7 150mm rails without any additional modules. All other ships in game can at least fit highest caliber guns of there class. Conclusion n1: Bring power grid of ll destroyer more in-line. Increase power grid on Catalyst and Coercer.
Second problem i see are the stupid bonuses. Let's start with a catalyst. We have bonus to falloff, and as a class they get bonus to optimal. So if i shoot rails I will use them in optimal, so the ship bonus is simply wasted. If i use blasters, then the optimal bonus is nearly useless as it gives me only extra 200meters, which is virtually nothing. Conclusion: If it is suppose to be a blaster boat (which it probably is) Change the class bonus to 50% bonus to falloff, and the ships bonus should be changed to bonus to small hybrid turret damage.
Comorant Comorant receives bonus to optimal range, which means you would use it as mini-sniper boat with rails. If you are using rails at the limit of there optimal, you probably will not need the tracking bonus, so it would be of more use if comorant would receive a damage bonus instead.
Thrasher Minmatar frequently fire in falloff even with arties. Both close range and long-range setups for this ship would benefit if class bonus would be switched to bonus to falloff, instead of bonus to optimal.
the third problem I see affects destroyer class as a whole, and that is the 25% ROF penalty. Destroyers are the shortest living ships in game: they are easy enough even for battlecruisers and medium drones to hit, and have effective HP of a frigate with a plate. (i achieved higher effective HP on a punisher then that you get on most destroyers) So if they live so little, at least make those few seconds they do exist on the battlefield worthfull! Let them deal some proper damage! Yes, it will increase damage of most setups by 25%, but I think this will not bring destroyers anywhere close to being overpowered, in my opinion it is currently one of the most underpowered ship class in game, they can neither escape the guns, nor tank them, so let's make there slogan "kill, or be killed". Why that might be good: high-dps ships are good in pvp. Fast high-Dps ships are good in pvp. And destroyers are cheap to loose, that will make them perfect if you need to bring more dps to bear and haven't got much cash on hand. This will also make flying destroyers more exciting, they would unleash large firepower but would be fragile. |
SubLepton
|
Posted - 2009.06.28 22:23:00 -
[2]
Slots: This is the final part of the proposal, and i do not view it as nessesary, and not everybody agrees on this, but i think that this would be the final touch in making desroyers worthwhile ships. All battlecrousers have more slots then ANY crouser in game, this enables them to tank additional damage they recieve due to larger signiture radius. Then why do destroyers recieve LESS slots then there frigate counterparts? Let's have a look at tristan, we have 3 low and 3 med. slots, a total of 6 slots. All destroyers have 5 slots. I believe every destroyer deserves an extra slot. |
Elo Behram
Tulsa Tube Bending GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.06.28 22:29:00 -
[3]
yes to grid and ROF, no to extra slots (destroyers supposed to be glass cannons) |
SubLepton
|
Posted - 2009.06.28 22:41:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Elo Behram yes to grid and ROF, no to extra slots (destroyers supposed to be glass cannons)
1 extra slot would not make them mega-tanks, let's face it. But as I mentioned above, slots aren't something i am conserned about that much. If they are glass cannons, let them be CANNONS.
|
XHolyAvengerX
|
Posted - 2009.06.29 00:22:00 -
[5]
Yes please.
|
Dr BattleSmith
PAX Interstellar Services
|
Posted - 2009.06.29 00:43:00 -
[6]
Destroyers are used in faction war minor plex.
Hard to find a good fleet PvP fitting without adding power or cpu, especially for catalyst.
|
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
|
Posted - 2009.06.29 01:17:00 -
[7]
Extra slot would be good, other stuff also good. The Catalyst really needs a ground up rebuild tbh, it has no direction. ---
Zombie Apocalypse Guitar-Wielding Superteam |
SubTachyon
|
Posted - 2009.06.29 06:55:00 -
[8]
Edited by: SubTachyon on 29/06/2009 06:55:27
Originally by: Alekseyev Karrde Extra slot would be good, other stuff also good. The Catalyst really needs a ground up rebuild tbh, it has no direction.
INdeed, I see people using it with both blasters and railguns. |
Fille Balle
Dissolution Of Eternity Event Horizon.
|
Posted - 2009.06.29 20:48:00 -
[9]
Yup, destroyers are awesome! But, then I tried to fit one, and I thought: aha, you mean destroyer as in destroying the morale of the player that wants to fly it
/Suppport for destroyers that can destroy something other than my morale
|
Uronksur Suth
Sankkasen Mining Conglomerate Libertas Fidelitas
|
Posted - 2009.06.29 20:57:00 -
[10]
/signed
I bought my destroyer to help with NPC rat frigates, but I never noticed that it wasn't nearly as effective as the description of destroyers touted.
|
|
Pater Peccavi
Minmatar Cadre Assault Force
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 01:47:00 -
[11]
Originally by: SubLepton Thrasher Minmatar frequently fire in falloff even with arties. Both close range and long-range setups for this ship would benefit if class bonus would be switched to bonus to falloff, instead of bonus to optimal.
No to this. I use my thrasher in optimal virtually all the time, and having the bonus changed would do severe damage to arty thrashers. Worse quality hits, worse damage at range.
Originally by: hi go Let the human be very annoyed! Another person is very repugnant! |
Yon Krum
The Knights Templar Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 06:23:00 -
[12]
Supported, but only in the general sense that Destroyers need some serious attention. They were fine when the only T2 ship was the Intercepter.
These days they are coffins unless flown extremely carefully (ie, warping out after shooting once or twice).
Major issues include: 1) Sig to EHP ratio is waaay off when compared to frigates and cruisers, let alone BC.
2) DPS is too low to kill a T2 frigate quickly (even if you spend as much on your Destroyer as that frigate costs), yet speed and slots do not permit tackling your target. Alpha is only acceptable on the Thrasher, due to arties with damage bonus, and this is the reason THAT ship is popular.
3) You cannot afford to use a MWD to counteract point #2, and tackle/dps at close range, because it blows your sig up to BS size and you are quickly instapopped. Once you realize you're locked by an enemy HAC/BS and about to be vaporized, your agility is too low to abort your run and escape--you just die.
4) Your range, even with double small-gun range, is insufficient to play escort to larger ships. It takes enormous work to make any destroyer other than the Cormorant shoot out to 30km. The rails, which are used with longer-range ammo for the Cormorant to accomplish this, can be tanked by an interceptor at that range. 30km is the "magic number", because that's the normal, un-overheated point range for the tackling interceptor line.
5) The -25% ROF penalty is supposed to make the ships into "Alpha" creatures, but that doesn't work anymore unless you're using small artillery (which do alpha rather well against frigate-sized targets) with a damage bonus. The penalty accomplishes this by trading cost (more guns) for that alpha. But since most ships have more HP now than when the Destroyers were first introduced, and the proliferation of T2 ships and equipment render the Destroyer so fragile, it just doesn't work and needs to be re-thought.
6) Following some deep thinking about how to accomplish the purpose of the Destroyer class, there needs to be another hull model (or at least another ship) introduced for each race. Destroyer is the only T1 class that has one (1) ship in its category. Even haulers have 2 or more T1 ships (using different models), though the differences are often too small to matter to pilots!
Comments on specific Destroyers:
A) Coercer -- I love this ship. It's sexy-looking, uses lasers, and you can actually sqeeze some DPS (but not alpha) out of it if you make it a complete "glass-cannon". You used to be able to get 30km range from it if you rigged it into a 40-mil ship (which I did), and really surprise arrogant inti pilots, but the locus nerf killed that. Coercer does NOT need another mid-slot. It needs a 60m sig radius, removal of the ROF penalty, reduction of turrets to 6, and movement of one high slot to lows. Could also use about 30 more CPU, but dropping the number of guns would help with this.
B) Cormorant -- Good in its role, which is (very) light sniper. It cannot do anything else, however, and rail alpha at range is a joke. If you attempt to tank it, you sacrifice range and damage and become completely irrelevent, except as 20 seconds of distraction for one (1) enemy cruiser. Cormorant also needs 60m sig radius, removal of the ROF penalty, 6 turrets, and movement of one high slot to low. Fitting should be reviewed.
C) Catalyst -- you can actually get a small amount of damage out of this ship as well, if you go with the "glass cannon" approach. It's actually almost as well-regarded in some circles for this as the Thrasher, because you can MWD, point, and pray. That can get you a kill on a T2 frigate, before someone notices and vaporizes you. This ship needs, again, 60m sig radius, removal of the ROF penalty, 6 guns, movement of 1 high slot to low, and switching of the falloff bonus for a ROF or damage bonus. (Really... falloff for hybrids? WTF?)
<continued>
--Krum |
Yon Krum
The Knights Templar Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 06:36:00 -
[13]
<continued>
D) Thrasher -- universally regarded as the best Destroyer out there because of the damage bonus, slot layout, artillery alpha, and speed + smaller sig radius. In other words, almost everything. This ship needs little help. What should be done is to harmonize with the other changes without nerfing it, or namely: decrease sig radius to 55m, drop the ROF penalty, reduce turrets to 6, and move one high slot to low. Review the fitting stats accordingly. The Thrasher alpha would actually decrease, unfortunately, even with adding another gyrostabilizer, but it would more than benefit from increased DPS.
----
In other points, the Destroyer class as a whole needs a dedicated, T2 anti-light support ship capable of keeping AF and Interceptors off larger BC and BS. It needs to be gun-based, not missile (unlike the interdictors--excepting the Minmatar one, again!), and it needs to be a new class--NOT an "interdictor". Interdictors die instantly because of their super-dangerous role (bubbling) to an enemy fleet. An actual anti-support ship does not need to be saddled with that burden.
--Krum
--Krum |
Yahrr
The Tuskers
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 07:43:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Yahrr on 30/06/2009 07:43:35 Destroyers need love indeed. A lot! It says enough that 99% of the new players are advised to skip the destroyers and to skill towards cruisers instead.
edit to check the support-box
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Imperial Tau Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 10:28:00 -
[15]
Quote: Major issues include: 1) Sig to EHP ratio is waaay off when compared to frigates and cruisers, let alone BC.
They need either there dps increased, so in the short amount of time they do survive they actually do some damage, or effective Hp increase. Since the ships are cheap, i think making them high-dps boats with paper armour would be interesting, therefore i support the idea of getting rid of ROF penalty.
Catalysts and Comorant do need more powergreed, all other ships can fit all high-caliber guns, includiong coercer and thrasher (another destroyers), so why are catalysts and comorant so handicapped? There fore support here as well.
Extra slot would make them more effective. Therefore full support.
Quote: (Really... falloff for hybrids? WTF?)
That's my question as well, i also don't get that.
Yon Krum- most of your ideas correspond with that of the topicks author, except for the author whants to make all destroyers glass canons with high-dps, and you try to adjust there slot layout so that they actually survive for a while, but reduce there dps by reducing guns. Those are 2 different directions, but whichever is chosen would solve the current situation.
Fix Destroyers |
Yon Krum
The Knights Templar Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 13:01:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Maxsim Goratiev
Catalysts and Comorant do need more powergreed, all other ships can fit all high-caliber guns, includiong coercer and thrasher (another destroyers)
Not quite correct, actually:
The Coercer needs substantial fitting mods in order to fit either medium pulse lasers or medium beam lasers (the high-caliber small guns, not the cruiser-sized ones). Mostly it lacks CPU to fit them, though if you use a MWD you run out of grid as well... but if you're fitting a MWD you last a maximum of 30 seconds, so why do it? The Thrasher, otoh, can fit a set of 6x 280mm artillery cannons and still have enough CPU/grid for decent sniping mods (and two salvagers). Its damage when you do this is slightly superior to the smaller-caliber cannons.
I love for the Destroyers to be able to make use of the more powerful tier of small guns--would make sense, after all, since they're supposedly so much larger than frigates! That tier of guns, by the way, is generally only usable by cruisers down-gunning (looking at you, Thorax!), or T2 ships.
Originally by: Maxsim Goratiev
... the [OP] author whants to make all destroyers glass canons with high-dps, and you try to adjust there slot layout so that they actually survive for a while, but reduce there dps by reducing guns. Those are 2 different directions, but whichever is chosen would solve the current situation.
Destroyers really need both. They should be terrifying ship to frigates, and last long enough to cruisers to be able to warp out unless tackled. As it is, they don't.
My suggestions are a bit more subtle... dropping the sig radius to an average of 60 would reduce damage from larger guns by 25%, dispensing with the ROF penalty is a 25% dps bonus, which only offsets the lost damage of reducing guns to 6. BUT! Moving a high slot to a low on each ship enables them to either devote that to a damage mod, or a tanking mod (Cormorant could go with a DCU). It's more flexibility, frankly.
I don't, honestly, think the game needs more glass cannons at the small scale. Destroyers however are so underused and useless that they make the old Stealth Bombers looks like flavor-of-the-month ships! So, if a change DID make them decent cannons, I'd not refuse it--because I love them so.... But I'd hope a T2 space-superiority version would add more survivability along with that firepower.
--Krum
--Krum |
I SoStoned
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 13:57:00 -
[17]
Fully endorsed.
I love destroyers of all races except the lackluster Catalyst (LOL, falloff bonus???). Unfortunately they're easily outclassed by a T1 frigate (I get kills regularly against Thrashers using a plated Rifter).
Signature far too large. Hitpoints far too low. ROF nerf reduces DPS to frig levels.
For the Coercer... need 1 more mid, at the very least. They're the highest raw DPS destroyer going but can't pin anything in place with only 1 mid. Thus... get almost no kills without being in a blob.
|
Arcane Azmadi
First Flying Wing Inc Primary.
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 16:10:00 -
[18]
Supported.
I think it's more important that the slots be fixed to be honest, especially the Coercer and Cormorants mid and low slots respectively. The only ships in the game to be restricted to a single slot in any category are a handful of the really light T1 frigates, so it's frankly ridiculous that ships a whole class heavier than frigates have such strict limits. The Coercer especially can't even fit an AB and a Warp Disruptor at the same time, while at the moment the Cormorant has to use its sole low slot for a Micro Auxiliary Power Core if you want to fit any decent weapons on it.
|
Dibsi Dei
Salamyhkaisten kilta
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 18:35:00 -
[19]
Destroyers are awesome already.
Non-minmatar interdictors however...
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente Imperial Tau Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 18:54:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Dibsi Dei Destroyers are awesome already.
Non-minmatar interdictors however...
Destroyer costs 4 times the price of a rifter IN many intances it can loose to a rifter. It gets instapoped by anything bigger then a frigate. Sure they are fine. Fix Destroyers |
|
Fox Blade
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 21:31:00 -
[21]
Good ideas.
|
ITTigerClawIK
Galactic Rangers Galactic-Rangers
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 22:33:00 -
[22]
Edited by: ITTigerClawIK on 01/07/2009 22:32:50 i remember the first time i hopped into a destroyer those many years ago, first time was an absalute failure as i tryed to tank the thing, then i went for the glass cannon approch but found that frigs could still tank the thing long enough to take my own destroyed out before then and then of course there are the T2 Frigs that tank way harder and will survive longer and generaly have more DPS. the 25% ROF reduction should be removed , there is no need for it at all but tbh Dessies need a major overhaull and reworking when the only thing the one thing they excell in more than anything else is... a salvage ship, may as well swap the bonuses out for something for the salvager
Sig space reclaimed in the name of me -courtesy of Tiggy ([email protected]) |
Joshamee Gibbs
Dark-Rising
|
Posted - 2009.07.02 08:51:00 -
[23]
Supported -------------
http://podlogs.com/enteringspace/ |
Scoop EMP
|
Posted - 2009.07.02 09:08:00 -
[24]
supported
|
Bunzan Cardinal
Ouroboros Incorporated
|
Posted - 2009.07.02 09:28:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Pater Peccavi
Originally by: SubLepton Thrasher Minmatar frequently fire in falloff even with arties. Both close range and long-range setups for this ship would benefit if class bonus would be switched to bonus to falloff, instead of bonus to optimal.
No to this. I use my thrasher in optimal virtually all the time, and having the bonus changed would do severe damage to arty thrashers. Worse quality hits, worse damage at range.
i agree with the above. Besides that i support destroyer changes, i hated getting killed by anything bigger then a frigate, the ship(my thrasher) had very low versatility. Not to mention you dont get the full affect out of MWD's since destroyers arent frigates.
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.07.02 12:44:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Scatim Helicon on 02/07/2009 12:46:08
Agreed, destroyers are pretty worthless as anything other than L1 mission runners and salvaging boats.
As others have said, there's no reason for the ROF penalty to exist (destroyers are the only ship with an innate hull penalty, right?), the sig radius is slightly too high, and the hull optimal bonus, while useful for some fits, is particularly unfair for the catalyst which in most other respects seems to be designed as a blaster platform.
I'd suggest dropping the universal 50% turret optimal hull bonus for a 50% tracking hull bonus, and dropping all the Tracking Speed destroyer skill bonuses for alternatives more tailored to the individual ship. I'd also consider upping the base velocities slightly - as these ships would no longer be designed as extreme range frigate-snipers they'd need some other way of keeping their targets in range.
As a personal thing, I'd like to see the Catalyst reconfigured into a droneboat too but that's just me.
|
Yon Krum
The Knights Templar Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.07.03 02:59:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Scatim Helicon
... and the hull optimal bonus, while useful for some fits, is particularly unfair for the catalyst which in most other respects seems to be designed as a blaster platform.
Hmm, you're right. My comments above neglected the larger falloff range of the blasters, even though I was attempting to suggest the Cat become a better blaster-boat. Would suggest instead to give it either a double 50% falloff bonus (which is better than a single 100%, btw), 25% damage, or 25% ROF bonus, so it suffers less when fighting in falloff. In other words, balance like the Thrasher.
Originally by: Scatim Helicon
I'd suggest dropping the universal 50% turret optimal hull bonus for a 50% tracking hull bonus, and dropping all the Tracking Speed destroyer skill bonuses for alternatives more tailored to the individual ship. I'd also consider upping the base velocities slightly - as these ships would no longer be designed as extreme range frigate-snipers they'd need some other way of keeping their targets in range.
As a personal thing, I'd like to see the Catalyst reconfigured into a droneboat too but that's just me.
Unfortunately, your main point here would be a disaster. One of the major issues that all small ships have (and not just in solo play) is the range + speed + damage advantage that the interceptor has. If you, as a Destroyer, are going up against T1 frigates this is not so much of an issue--you have the range bonus and tracking to deal with a relatively slow-moving frigate at about 24km, and they die fast enough that your anemic damage will drive them away in short-order.
Not so with interceptors. First, you will never be able to influence the fight due to speed, as even the slowest interceptor is going to be 4x the MWD speed of a Destroyer. Second, it is very hard to get enough range, damage, and tracking into one place on the ships to even drive an interceptor away. The Cormorant is the one ship that can reliably do this, with rails and a sniper fit.
Meanwhile, since your Dessie tanks like wet cardboard, the (often also small) damage the interceptor is doing will kill you first. God forbid they're using a ship with a range bonus to points, and orbiting you at 30km. It's extremely hard to get small guns out that far... trust me, I've tried.
If anything, Dessies could use even MORE optimal range, IMO.
----
On to your second idea, and a related point: I'd love to see Destroyers split into two main, base ships--a ranged ship (more or less like we have now), and a tackling ship, both of which are optimized to taking out or driving off frigates of various sorts. The ranged version would be better at taking on interceptors, and the tackling version better at handling assault frigates, and both would do fine versus T1 frigates. Both would be able to tank to one degree or another, based on racial characteristics.
I'd love to see the Catalyst turned into the "tackling" Destroyer variant, optimized for blaster work and possibly even having a scrambler range bonus. That would free up the "ranged" Gallente ship to be a drone-boat with drone speed and MWD speed bonuses, drone damage, and an active tanking bonus. A kind of mini-Myrmidon, but really designed to get drones out there fast and have them stick to the target without spending all their time in MWD-mode.
Anyway, I'm glad to see people agreeing that the Destroyer needs some serious love. It's a beautiful ship--even though with weapon grouping we don't see that seductive, full row of guns anymore. :)
--Krum
--Krum |
Opan santel
Fatal Error.
|
Posted - 2009.07.03 15:09:00 -
[28]
i would love some dessy love supported! ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally by: CCP Navigator Steak serving robots are the best robots.
|
BoinKlasik
Senkei Jin
|
Posted - 2009.07.04 10:15:00 -
[29]
Id love to be actually able to use my 70km (or was it 90?) snipeorant.
signed Wahh I broke my signature that I broke before and then it was fixed. |
Nico Minoru
Weird Cat Research
|
Posted - 2009.07.04 14:54:00 -
[30]
moar firepower
moar hulls!!! hey, how about more than just a single freaking dessy???
|
|
Trinity Nova
Unaccompanied Souls
|
Posted - 2009.07.05 17:26:00 -
[31]
I support Thrasher love.
When I see a destroyer I see a target.
Even though I'm in a Rifter, I should at least hesitate a little but I don't. Solo Corp: Unaccompanied Souls |
van Uber
Swedish Aerospace Inc Southern Cross Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.07.05 18:30:00 -
[32]
|
Marked Ugler
|
Posted - 2009.07.05 19:25:00 -
[33]
I Think a topick with 25 supports deserves some CSM attention.
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente Imperial Tau Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.07.09 20:01:00 -
[34]
bump Fix Destroyers |
Dr BattleSmith
PAX Interstellar Services
|
Posted - 2009.07.11 03:07:00 -
[35]
bump
|
Bomberlocks
|
Posted - 2009.07.12 18:46:00 -
[36]
I was completely lost in the beginning of my eve career. I didn't skill train, I didn't use the free implants from the n00b missions, I didn't even mission. I made all my initial isj by ratting in hisec belts, and I only started missioning after getting my thrasher, but the thrasher proved to be the one ship that, at that low level, could really do all I wanted. I could go ratting in losec and with T2 arties and t2 ammo, and sensor boosters and an ab could orbit cruiser rats at 40kms, and could salvage the rest no problem
The wake up call came as soon as I started playing against real players or higher level missions. The thrasher got thrashed.
With an alt I eventually tried a coercer, and promptly ran out of cap, and then a catalyst and ran out of grid. The cormorant makes a good salvager as it has a larger bay than the thrasher, but that's about it.
The destroyers need to be in all aspects between frigates and cruisers. They need one less turret and one more mid/low slot (there were there is currently only two). They need to lose the 25% rof penalty. and they need the sig radius reduced a bit. A T2 combat version would be nice as well.
|
Gaogan
Solar Storm Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2009.07.12 19:32:00 -
[37]
I like the idea of dropping the rof penalty while dropping to 6 guns and gaining another low/mid slot. That also takes care of the fitting problem on the catalyst. I would however, prefer a 3rd mid slot to a 4th low slot, as that gives you the option to fit a web or cap booster to power a repper in the lows.
The main problem I see with destroyers though is the ease with which they die. Lowering the sig radius will help a lot against larger ships, but IIRC, they got left behind back when all ships got a significant HP buff. Bring their EHP up 20-25% so they actually have more tank than say, a cov ops.
I also really like the idea of adding a tier 2 variant as well as a T2 version that is meant as a T2 anti frig platform instead of a bubbler.
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente Imperial Tau Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.07.14 19:36:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Maxsim Goratiev on 14/07/2009 19:36:47 Edited by: Maxsim Goratiev on 14/07/2009 19:36:33 another bump. I know destroyers are small ships and noone cares on them as they aren't important, but... By the way, i got advanced weapon upgrades and ftting destroyers is STILL horrible! Still EVERY destroyer except thrasher sucks. A +3% powergreed implant and advanced weapon upgrades 4 don't seem solve fitting problems on destroyers. Still they can't have any tank. AT least i can now fit guns properly. wonder if situation will change with the rig patch. The sad fact is there isno reason to fly a destroyer, it had ABSOLUTELY NO advantage in front of a cheap t1 crouser. Not even in killing frigates. ANd i agree we should get a t2 version of destroyer that is oriented towards combat, supression of assautships and septors.
Fix Destroyers |
A Sinner
THE MuPPeT FaCTOrY
|
Posted - 2009.07.14 20:24:00 -
[39]
destroyers are supposed to be frigate killers indeed but not t2 frigate killers, therefore i don't agree with the op. However I do agree that we need a specialised t2 frigate killer with a destroyer hull. So I am for a new t2 destroyer, leave the t1, they're fine as they are right now. something needs to be done so you have my support -----
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente Imperial Tau Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 04:12:00 -
[40]
Originally by: A Sinner destroyers are supposed to be frigate killers indeed but not t2 frigate killers, therefore i don't agree with the op. However I do agree that we need a specialised t2 frigate killer with a destroyer hull. So I am for a new t2 destroyer, leave the t1, they're fine as they are right now. something needs to be done so you have my support
OK, then why is thrasher so much better then cathalyst?
Fix Destroyers |
|
Jaskey
0beron Construct Shadow Empire.
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 07:58:00 -
[41]
|
Dav Varan
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 17:06:00 -
[42]
Support for destroyer love.
Although I think the main problem with destroyers is there sig. There sigs are too big and they can be pooned to easily by cruiser+
lower there sig and destroyers would be much better. no to a firepower increase though. |
Red Raider
Airbourne Demons DeMoN's N AnGeL's
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 18:05:00 -
[43]
Agreed. I always tell noobs that I train that destroyers are nothing but warm up targets for cruiser pilots.
A happy gamer isnt on the forums, they are playing the game unless they have an idea that they honestly think is helping out. |
Twilight Magester
Foundation Sons of Tangra
|
Posted - 2009.07.16 08:31:00 -
[44]
destroyers definately need a power-up.
|
Lt Forge
Pilots From Honour
|
Posted - 2009.07.16 10:03:00 -
[45]
[Small thing] It is possible to fit 8 small smartbombs on it. If one smartbomb needs 30 CPU and you need 8 of them: 8 x 30 CPU = 240 CPU is needed.
The ship with the most suitable CPU is the Cormorant with 215 CPU yes. It is certain you'll (nearly) reach the 240 minimum, but that's easily do-able with skills and maybe one CPU Processor.
Tip: Get the 'better' smartbomb types, like 'Nolos' or something.
[/smartdestroyer rave ended]
Supported. \o/ |
Laxyr
Chamsin Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.07.16 14:52:00 -
[46]
Edited by: Laxyr on 16/07/2009 14:55:19 Supported Thx Zymurgist for deleting this Signature with all it's links. I guess the complaint about its size couln't have been posted BELOW the signature so I can simply exchange the links... but thats jus |
Lauren Sheaperd
Minmatar Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
|
Posted - 2009.07.18 00:50:00 -
[47]
Not supported. I wish I could support these changes, but you would destroy my Thrasher fit, which is the only cost efficant small scale ship out there in my opinion.
|
Seras Ronon
|
Posted - 2009.07.18 18:11:00 -
[48]
Supported.
Currently the only thing I see the destroyer class ships good for is salvaging. This was not their intended role, therefore they really need some love from the CCP devs to allow them to accomplish their stated mission: kill frigate class ships. As the destroyers currently are, it is a matter of luck as to whether you will kill the frigate or the frigate kills you.
|
Daquaris
Dreams of Desolation Systematic-Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.07.25 13:39:00 -
[49]
|
theZJ
Suicidal Trainingscamp
|
Posted - 2009.08.05 02:08:00 -
[50]
1. Get pvp destroyer out of random boredom 2. Warp in belt 3. Die 4. ??? 5. No profit
|
|
Venkul Mul
|
Posted - 2009.08.05 06:38:00 -
[51]
Even if I love my fleet of salvagysts (salvage catalyst) the destroyers need a revamp and possibly a second T1 model.
|
Razel Krieg
Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.08.05 19:26:00 -
[52]
supported. Would make ganking hulks with huge gangs of dessies even more fun
|
Keitoshi Yamada
Caldari MJOCO Botanical Entheogenics Division Mjolnir Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.08.06 09:04:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Yahrr Edited by: Yahrr on 30/06/2009 07:43:35 Destroyers need love indeed. A lot! It says enough that 99% of the new players are advised to skip the destroyers and to skill towards cruisers instead.
edit to check the support-box
Though I agree with the OP, I always suggest to players to train into a destroyer as soon as possible strictly for the amazing usefulness of one fit with nothing but salvagers and tractors. =>_>=
|
Hester Shaw
|
Posted - 2009.08.07 10:58:00 -
[54]
SupportBump
|
Syaran
IMPERIAL SENATE Cool Kids Club
|
Posted - 2009.08.07 14:44:00 -
[55]
I agree destroyers need some love, and some pretty elaborate loving at that.
They should probably be split off into two categories similar to Intereptors, one glass cannon and one more tankable.
As a whole, they should probably be brought more in-line with other ships. As mentioned, the current implementation gets stuck with neither the right slots/stats to fit a useable glass cannon nor to fit a decent tank.
A split in two would be more in line with other shiptypes, I can't think of any sub-cap ship category of which each race only has one, if I am mistaken feel free to correct me.
|
Valuv
Dark Ascendancy The Council.
|
Posted - 2009.08.08 05:33:00 -
[56]
|
Don Pellegrino
|
Posted - 2009.08.08 18:29:00 -
[57]
Do not change the Trasher. Make the other ones as good (but still different) as the Trasher.
|
Hull Blaster
Dark Nexxus
|
Posted - 2009.08.23 09:44:00 -
[58]
Supported, I really liked the destroyer but it is seriously in need of some love. Seems slightly ridiculous that there is only one destroyer hull per race... they did it for battle cruisers lets do it for destroyers CCP :)
|
Corian Teranos
Critical Mass Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.08.23 20:00:00 -
[59]
definatly supported although as well as the fix i would also like to see a true TII destroyer the intradictors are more specialized tactical ships than TII frigate killers
|
Yakov Draken
Tides Of War
|
Posted - 2009.08.23 21:13:00 -
[60]
Supported.
|
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente Imperial Tau Syndicate Eych Four Eks Zero Ahr
|
Posted - 2009.08.24 07:41:00 -
[61]
Like.. if so many people agree.... Could we get some attention? I have seen no reason not to implement this so far... And i still fail to understead the reason to -25% Rate of fire penatlty. Fix Destroyers |
Alun Hughes
United Amarr Templar Legion Fidelas Constans
|
Posted - 2009.08.25 15:47:00 -
[62]
Love Dessies but they are lacking so a booste would be nice.
But i think i would like a second tier of them so their are 2 choices per race
|
Fille Balle
Ballbreakers R us
|
Posted - 2009.08.25 18:56:00 -
[63]
Edited by: Fille Balle on 25/08/2009 18:57:23 compulsory bump.
Also, I too would like a tier 2 dessie for each race. There's two bc's for each race, so where's the second dessie?
Edit: some faction dessies would be cool too, but I guess that would be pushing it.
|
Max Hardcase
Art of War Cult of War
|
Posted - 2009.08.26 17:58:00 -
[64]
As someone who has posted about destroyers b4, and coming up with much of the view of the problems and possible fixes of dessies : 2 thumbs up.
|
Dierdra Vaal
|
Posted - 2009.09.19 14:42:00 -
[65]
bringing this up for the next CSM meeting Director of Education :: EVE University Chairman of the CSM
|
Plutonian
Intransigent
|
Posted - 2009.09.19 19:38:00 -
[66]
Edited by: Plutonian on 19/09/2009 19:37:44 It is ironic that the second class of ships a noob will encounter (using standard size progression) cannot be fit with his/her skills.
It takes solid support skills to make the Thrasher work at all, and maxed-skills to make it shine. Of the Catalyst, Coercer*, and Cormorant no amount of skills seems to enable them to perform adequately.
Destroyers badly need a rebalance (ship bonus, powergrid, sig radius, and CPU at minimum).
* FUN FACT: I actually had to look up the name of the Amarr destroyer. I've not actually seen one in use in years, and had forgotten it.
|
chopper14
|
Posted - 2009.09.19 20:36:00 -
[67]
possibilities to fix destroyers. as i see it now destroyers are papertanked drone killers that dont even fulfill that role effectivly because if the enemy fleet has one missile module between them your gone no matter how good your range is. destroyers suposedly were intended to massaacre frigates but my kesteral will walk right through a well tanked destroyer withought letting off the ab and fly through the explosion. so how about this.. proposal. Glass cannons aproach. make it so they can all fire effectivly from 0-30km range. no fall off and better tracking than any other smaller ship and smallest guns. no rof penalties damage increase to make it hazardous to t2 frigs and t1 cruisers if ignored. and good base resists across the board to make them less brittle against frigates. keep the sig rad how it is so bs, battlecruisers and med drones can still dispach them. easilly. in short make these 4 scenarios happen. A. a cormorant warps into the middle of 5 t1 frigates locks them and blows one of them away before his disrupter and web has even activated. another blows up just before entering warp another escapes leaving the pointed target to the destroyer 4 dead 1 escaped. minimal damage done to the destroyer. if they stay and fight they all die and the destroyer might have hull damage. B. a harpy attacks a cormorant. althought the cormorant recieves significant damage it wins with 30% of its hull still intact. C. five cormorants jump a cruiser although they are doing amazing damage (at first) the cruiser manages to tank them for the whole minute it takes for it to blow them all away with its heavier firepower. the cruiser heads to the repair bay with 15% of its hull still intact. the pilot just glad he didnt take a "bio break" now opts for a change of underwear and a smoke. D. 2 oposing fleets of say 10 to 12 collide. durring the battle a destroyer slips in unoticed at first and begins tearing through a moa's shields, by the time the moa realizes it being killed by a destroyer and not "the" harbinger which is only hitting him with one gun for distraction while focusing most of its firepower on a primaried drake it is too late he cant target him fast enough and hit him hard enough before his hull is ripped to shreds. the primaried drake however did fianally notice and after he pulled all his highs of the harbinger fired a volly that reached the cormorant just as the moa pop'd blowing whats left of the destroyer to bits and whats worse 2 more destroyer's just came in and are wiping your fleets drones out in short order as soon as they start geting targeted they switch to attack your frigates and whipe out 3 before they are finally silenced. unfourtunatly you loose the battle due to the loss of dps. this would make roaming gang's of destroyers possible and even dangerous with the attachment of falcon's it would make them able to decimate drones and t1 frigates. hold their own against 1v1's with t2 frigates and make them valuable in a fleet and possibly even earn them the honor of being primary not because they are weak but because if you dont exploit that weakness you will regret it. comments?
|
Darwin's Market
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 00:26:00 -
[68]
|
Ignition SemperFi
The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 05:13:00 -
[69]
DO WANT ---- People Say Im paranoid because I have a gun, I say I dont have to be paranoid because I have a gun.
Space Vikings |
Anargirou
Fatal System Error Combined Planetary Union
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 07:51:00 -
[70]
supported
|
|
Totally Hopeless
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 14:09:00 -
[71]
Remove the pointless ROF nerf on destroyers, fix done. Nothing else needs to be done to make them tougher or whatnot.
When destroyers were released ships had 60%-ish less armor/shields/hull than they do now (RMR armor boost, and another subsequent one in a later expansion, and new ships always seem to be 'tougher' than the ones that came before).
In Exodus a destroyer was a credible threat to an inty or AF, much more a single T1 frigate tanked or not... and that was [i]with[i] the ROF nerf. Now a single plated rifter, extended merlin or kestrel, zippy imicus, can laugh while it rips an auto-thrasher or blaster cormorant to ribbons and walks away smiling.
|
kassie kelmar
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 19:22:00 -
[72]
When destroyers were first introduced they were two t1 frigs shoved together to make a gun platform, they were not glass cannons, the changes that have occurred in Eve since they were introduced has reduced their usefulness in everything except as Salvagers.
I had some of the most fun PvP I've ever had in zerg dessie fleets, before they were nerfed into uselessness.
Dessies need some love. |
Tozmeister
Digital Fury Corporation
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 20:44:00 -
[73]
a sig radius reduction would be a big help as well
+++????+++Out of Cheese Error. Redo From Start+++
|
Yokohead
BulletProof Monks Sons of Tangra
|
Posted - 2009.09.23 20:54:00 -
[74]
I always loved the concept of Catalysts but have been rather depressed when running them in practice.
|
Mercylesss Ming
|
Posted - 2009.09.24 01:29:00 -
[75]
/supported.. give dessies some love.. I so wanted a dessy to be the next step up from a frig but was severely dissapointed when I had the ability.
I can live with the pathetic shield if they get a 50% damage/range bonus but only use 8x75mm or equivalents and maybe some insane web-range bonus to fulfill their role as frigate/drone destroyers... or increase the tank and remove a gun. Something needs to be done. Totally agree with that!
|
Kazzzi
Amarr Minmatar Ship Construction Services Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.09.26 01:33:00 -
[76]
Should give Dessies the ability to fit a "De-cloaking" device. Have it work like the directional scanner where you aim your camera and decloak things in a 5 degree radius up to a certain range based on skills.
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente Imperial Tau Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.09.26 11:51:00 -
[77]
even removal of useless ROF nerf would help. Please, some attention..... Fix Destroyers |
Allen Ramses
Caldari Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.09.27 03:40:00 -
[78]
I'll just say what I did in the game dev forum.
Originally by: Allen Ramses Simple adjustment, really.
Remove -25% ROF / +50% optimal role bonus Reduce turret hardpoints to 5, with 1 missile or utility high slot Add one mid or low slot +15% CPU/Grid +35% capacitor
These changes will allow for: The ability not to fit tiny weapons for the sake of barely scraping by on PG. The ability to fit a tank that could sustain more than a stray drone collision. The ability to fit some decent utility that won't make you cap out before engaging.
____________________ CCP: Catering to the cowards of a cold, harsh universe since November, 2006. |
Wu Jiaqiu
Azer Irregulars Beer and Smoke Federation
|
Posted - 2009.09.27 14:08:00 -
[79]
Supported
|
Bel'shamharoth
Lone Star Academy
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 20:31:00 -
[80]
Supported -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm not a fig plucker or a fig plucker's son, but I'll pluck figs till the fig plucking's done. |
|
Ulstan
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 20:57:00 -
[81]
The balance in the destroyer class is not very good. Thrasher is head and shoulders above the rest. It has adequate power grid, and gets the all important damage bonus. The others just don't really compare.
Destroyers as a class will need some additional help if the AF 75% AB thing goes through.
Interdictors also need a lot of balancing between ships of the same class - all of them are pretty much horrible except the sabre.
|
Tatiana Valenko
Quam Singulari Cult of War
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 22:36:00 -
[82]
Not enough destroyers in PVP.
|
who mi
KAOS CORP RELLIK ALUCARD THE B0RG COLLECTIVE
|
Posted - 2009.10.03 03:35:00 -
[83]
Bump and supported even though it was brought to ccp last meeting
|
Tarnahel
|
Posted - 2009.10.04 04:55:00 -
[84]
Supported
|
yani dumyat
Black Storm Cartel
|
Posted - 2009.10.07 19:07:00 -
[85]
I mainly fly T2 frigates and have no fear of dessies whatsoever. Surely this is wrong.
IIRC the purpose of having -25% ROF but with more guns was to increase alpha. It all made sense a very long time ago. _________________________________________________ Lifeboat ----> + Human |
Dretzle Omega
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2009.10.07 19:39:00 -
[86]
Cormorant I'd prefer to fit with 8 missile slots, to be honest. Tweak them they can only effectively fit Rocket Launchers and give them a missile range boost, if you have to; that fits in with the anti-frig effect, anyways.
|
Bomberlocks
Minmatar Icarus Prime
|
Posted - 2009.10.07 22:14:00 -
[87]
I honestly love the Thrasher, even if I don't fly it that much any more. You could make it better by adding another low slot for a Gyro, or another mid for some more shield or a SeBo.
Even nicer would be if there were 2 T2 variants of the Thrasher, one, the Sabre, and two a little terror damage boat with a tank.
The one thing they should do with the Thrasher is remove the RoF penalty, to make it viable against AFs AND cruisers.
They could make a T2 catalyst variant with 5 drones, aka an ishkur with guns and tank.
Coercer could simply do with a Cap bonus, and Cormorant, well, I honestly don't know, because it's so bad.
But any buff to Destroyers would be lovely.
|
Dibsi Dei
Salamyhkaisten kilta HYDRA RELOADED
|
Posted - 2009.10.11 09:26:00 -
[88]
Sweet solutions, m8.
|
Rip Minner
Freewind Ventures
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 03:33:00 -
[89]
Got my vote always thought they were a waist of a ship class as is right now. Is it a rock? Point a Lazer at it and profit. Is it a ship? Point a Lazer at it and profit. I dont realy see any differnces here. |
Bado Sten
Minmatar Dead poets society The Laughing Men
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 11:39:00 -
[90]
I see a lot of people have the misguided idea that the Thrasher needs to be using arties. Please don't change it for that!
It's the ship I have the most of my kills in, and 99% are with AC's. It's great fun for solo PVP.
Sure you will lose several, but it is cheap and easy to fit.
The only thing I really see it needing is a lower sig radius to last just a little longer.
|
|
Kaltooth
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 05:27:00 -
[91]
Originally by: Dretzle Omega Cormorant I'd prefer to fit with 8 missile slots, to be honest. Tweak them they can only effectively fit Rocket Launchers and give them a missile range boost, if you have to; that fits in with the anti-frig effect, anyways.
This would be great, but the heretic can already tell you all about the awesomeness of rockets. Soon as they fix that, then maybe we can talk about such a boat.
|
Atran Drake
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 06:09:00 -
[92]
Hum, I don't have a smart comment to do, but I support this
|
Slave 775
Ministry of Punishment Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 06:35:00 -
[93]
Edited by: Slave 775 on 01/11/2009 06:42:17
At fanfest they talked about T3 frigs.
frigs> there are 6 Basic + 2 assault + 2 ceptors + 2 covops + 1 Electronic warfare destroyers> oh yeah we got interdictors
Thats typical CCP instead of giving destroyers a powerup and players a reason to train destroyers they boost the already good frigs even more.
Destroyers are the unwanted stepchild of eve.
Centuries ago, the Bible warned of dangers posed by evil men described as master[s] at evil ideas and scheming to do bad. (Proverbs 24:8) PRIVATEERS Officialy nerfed by CCP 05/07 |
Ravenja
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 07:02:00 -
[94]
Supported. Maybe not the changes you propose, but destroyers need some love. Even though they are supposed to be frigates with more firepower I think they need a moderate hp boost. Also a second dessy for each race would be interesting.
|
Xahara
StarFleet Enterprises Libertas Fidelitas
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 14:10:00 -
[95]
My Thrasher needs to be able to thrash moar ships. Supported :)
|
Pan Dora
Perkone
|
Posted - 2009.11.01 19:50:00 -
[96]
_
I like to play this game because it make my in-game actions and archievments to mean something in-game. |
Yon Krum
The Knights Templar R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 03:46:00 -
[97]
My hope is that after they get done boosting the speed of AF using ABs, the resulting enormous AF swarms raping everything in sight will swing the pendulum back toward the idea of a dedicated anti-frigate ship--ie. the Destroyer hulls.
I say "hulls" because despite my love for the T1 ships, malformed red-headed babies though they may be, the counter to a T2 ship is usually another T2 ship.
I'd just like the acceptable counter to T2 frigs to NOT be "get one of your own", which is what it is now.
--Krum --Krum |
ZigZag Joe
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 08:24:00 -
[98]
Slots: Yes. Give a low to minnie/caldari and a med to amarr/gallente
Fitting: More cpu, and possibly a hair more grid. Nothing more.
HP: Most important - I'd like to see high base hull and armour hp; think about the same as a tier 3 cruiser or a little more - about 1.8k hp. Still not going to beat down cruisers but will give some resistance to instagib. Hp buff should not be propagated to interdictors.
Bonus changes: No.
Speed/agility: Just fine, though an increase in warp speed to 4.5 or 6 would be nice.
Might be interesting if corm got standard missiles and cata range bonus, though.
Built in hull resistances would also be nice (50%) and disallow fitting DCUs. Shield remains the same, as these are effectively heavily armoured frigs but still ultimately frigs.
|
Alfons Richthofen
Caldari Die Luftwaffe
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 12:13:00 -
[99]
Originally by: SubLepton All other ships in game can at least fit highest caliber guns of there class.
Tachyon Beam Laser IIs on any Battleship.
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente Imperial Tau Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.11.02 17:18:00 -
[100]
Originally by: Alfons Richthofen
Originally by: SubLepton All other ships in game can at least fit highest caliber guns of there class.
Tachyon Beam Laser IIs on any Battleship.
They have a role, and even with reactor controls apocalypse is still one of the best sniping battleships. It has a role, and it is damn good at it. I cannot say the same about destroyers. I feel sad when i see a combat ship with so much potential used as a salvage boat. Fix Destroyers |
|
Ku'Nari Skywall
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 23:00:00 -
[101]
I agree that Destroyers need some love. They are no longer the frig-killers they should be.
I like the idea of moving a high to a mid/low and change to the -25% ROF to -10% ROF or complete removal.
|
OzDeaDMeaT
The Goodies
|
Posted - 2009.11.04 16:19:00 -
[102]
I think these should have the HP boosted by about 200%. They are just 2 paper thin, sig radius too big and too slow to be any good at anything. 2 Destroyers should be able to take out atleast a cruiser. Possibly a t2 Frigate of some description.
At this point they could be removed from the game and I dont think anyone would miss them. Eve-au.com News Reporter |
Minkert
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 17:57:00 -
[103]
√
|
Dibsi Dei
Salamyhkaisten kilta HYDRA RELOADED
|
Posted - 2009.11.06 00:03:00 -
[104]
Don't forget destroyer warp speed.
Frigates are 6 au/s Industrials 4.5 au/s Destroyers and Cruisers 3 au/s.
I'd recommend boosting destroyer warp speed to 4.5 au/s.
|
Zayne Zacharias
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 03:23:00 -
[105]
This is just my opinion, and a bit of idea collection, but here it is:
As i see it, the destroyers are supposed to be an average between frigates and cruisers, like their big battlecruiser brothers are between cruisers and battleships. And frankly, destroyers are absolutely useless at the moment. They can't deal with their own faction's Tier 3 frigates. What we need is for the destroyers to be the super-frigate/mini-battlecruisers that they are meant to be. Instead, most pilots are using them as mere salvage-haulers.
I also think that the destroyers we have are far too similar. We need to bring some racial variations into play - for example, Amarrian ships are known for having sturdy armor tanks, while the Minmatar are versatile, fast ships mixing tanks and weapons.
Coercer: The Prophecy has a 5% armor resistance bonus. Therefore, the Coercer should also have a tank bonus. Also, its slot layout renders it next to useless - one mid slot. This makes it difficult to use in combat, and therefore it should recieve an additional mid, to bring it in line with the Punisher. Finally, the Coercer has problems fueling a full rack of guns and armor repairers (It has the same peak capacitor regeneration as the Punisher). In light of this fact, cap capacity or recharge time should be boosted.
Cormorant: Firstly, this ship should have been a missile ship. Two supporting arguments for this change:
1) Seeing as the Caldari are the missile race, their only destroyer should also be a missile ship. 2) If we look at the flow of ships that most Caldari pilot will fly, it looks like this:
Kestrel - Cormorant - Caracal - Drake - Raven
As the Cormorant is the only turret-based ship in this flow, many of us are simply skipping from the Kestrel to the Caracal, based on our skills. Its bonuses should be changed from turrets to missiles (either a 5% velocity or damage bonus), and the 50% range bonus should be removed completely. An extra mid slot would also be extremely helpful.
Catalyst: In my opinion, the Catalyst should receive a 50m3 drone bay and 25 bandwidth, while scaling back the damage of its turrets. Currently, most pilots are leaving the drone bay empty, as the ability to launch one light drone is not worth the effort. The ship needs an active armor tank bonus (perhaps a 5% bonus to armor repairers, similar to what its big brothers - the Brutix and Myrmidon - currently enjoy). It should also recieve another mid slot to bring it in line with the Tristan.
Alternatively, the Catalyst's bonuses should be brought into line - the current optimal/falloff mix is unacceptable, as SubLepton has mentioned.
Thrasher: The Thrasher is currently overpowered compared to it's brethren from the other factions. The changes above would fix this, though the Thrasher should also receive an additional slot.
These changes are geared more towards empire missioning than PVP, but both categories of pilots will enjoy the newly revamped Destroyer class.
In conclusion:
Coercer: 5% armor resistance bonus per level Removal of tracking bonus +1 medium power slot ~10% boost to Capacitor capacity
Cormorant: Conversion to a missile ship (7 missiles/1 turret) +1 medium power slot Removal of 50% optimal bonus and turret bonuses 5% missile damage/5% missile velocity bonus per level
Catalyst: Conversion to a drone ship: + 50m3 drone bay, 25 bandwidth Removal of all turret bonuses + 10% drone damage, 10% drone hp per level +1 mid slot
Blaster Boat: 50% optimal bonus converted to 50% falloff bonus 10% reduction in MWD cap penalty per level +1 mid slot
Thrasher: +1 low slot Increase in base speed to 300m/s
All ships: Increase in warp speed to 4.5AU/s
Carpe Noctum! |
Dark Exarch
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 04:38:00 -
[106]
Please CCP.
Fix mah dessie!
|
Jared Ulfsuun
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 13:01:00 -
[107]
Love the dessie!
|
Alpha195
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 23:39:00 -
[108]
I would love to see some attention given to destroyers. In particular I would love to see changes to the Cormorant: 1)Make it a missile ship with a velocity/damage bonus 2) Give it an extra low slot and/or give it some more PG 3) Decrease Sig radius 4) Give it a scan res boost, so it can actually lock a frigate before the frig starts blazing away
On a more general note, I would like to see more then 1 kind of destie and perhaps a second type of T2 destie
|
Foulque
|
Posted - 2009.11.28 15:27:00 -
[109]
Plus increase in agility & lower sig for all destroyer hulls. ________
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.11.28 15:45:00 -
[110]
Decrease sig a fair bit, increase agility a little bit and add more targeting slots, and we're good to go.
|
|
Tiny Montgomery
|
Posted - 2009.11.29 10:56:00 -
[111]
Supported More flexibility with different destroyer variants!
ò Add a T2 dessie ò Add another T1 dessie hull for each race (with specific dessie role, i.e drone boat, sniper, etc.) ò Apply appropriate improvements to current T1 hulls ò Add garbage-hauler/junk-yard/salvage boat hull, just for fun, and make it appropriately hideous (not to be confused with possible bulldozer class industrial ship hinted at by CCP).
More choices/options/specializations on smaller, cheaper ships makes sense! |
Jarvis Hellstrom
The Flying Tigers Elysium.
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 15:51:00 -
[112]
I would love to see destroyers have a proper place in fleets.
If they're supposed to be glass cannons, then they need more range. If they're supposed to be mean frig killers from closer in then they need to be both faster and tougher.
May God stand between you and harm in all the Empty places you must walk
(Old Egyptian Blessing) |
Z0D
|
Posted - 2009.12.02 23:59:00 -
[113]
Issue supported, this ship class has potential but is currently underused and only seems to have a role in FW due to the minor plexes and in suicide ganking, which we all hate.
Wiki document pending approval here. Click below for my manifesto.
|
ZigZag Joe
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.12.03 00:48:00 -
[114]
Originally by: Z0D Issue supported, this ship class has potential but is currently underused and only seems to have a role in FW due to the minor plexes and in suicide ganking, which we all hate.
Wiki document pending approval here.
Notes@ the wiki page
ROF penalty is fine as is Bonuses changing - NO! A small pg buff all around - yes Hp buff - yes
Dessies aren't meant for knife fighting, really, they're meant to swat frigs from afar.
As far as that goes, they're fine, though cat could use its bonus changed to optimal and coercer could use a 20% cap use reduction instead of 10%.
HP: Give them roughly the HP of a tier 3 cruiser (1.9k armour and hull, but not shield). Built-in hull resists would also be interesting. This would also make them a little better at knife fighting. Not sure if this should propagate to dictors or not (probably not)
Also, give them another slot: low for minnie/cald, med for amarr/gall.
Main problem with dessies is they don't have the survivability to hang with snipe HACs/BS/etc. As far as the frig killing goes, they die, but one zealot takes a fancy to you and welp.
|
Alpha195
|
Posted - 2009.12.03 02:27:00 -
[115]
Yes please for the reduced sig, boosted PG, extra lows for cormorants, and increased hp. However I am begging you to change the cormorant to a missile boat and the catalyst to a drone boat, or at least introduce a new T1 destie that can do that.
|
Krystal Flores
Sinister Elite
|
Posted - 2009.12.03 07:58:00 -
[116]
i support better destroyers, or another T1 hull.
|
Tiberius Abraxus
Crowded Igloo
|
Posted - 2009.12.03 08:04:00 -
[117]
Poor destroyers are so neglected.
A sig radius decrease would be welcome too.
|
Ozone71
Caldari Kamikaze Fleet Command
|
Posted - 2009.12.03 10:34:00 -
[118]
Not all ships need to be for PvP. My Cormorant makes an excellent salvager.
4 x tractor beam 4 x salvager salvage tackle x 3 Currently AB with MWD to come.
It has its use ... just not in combat. "Ozone is blue and smells faintly of geraniums." (Qi, BBC TV) |
Mike Azariah
|
Posted - 2009.12.09 00:37:00 -
[119]
|
Marcus Henik
|
Posted - 2009.12.09 01:25:00 -
[120]
Quote: Not all ships need to be for PvP. My Cormorant makes an excellent salvager.
4 x tractor beam 4 x salvager salvage tackle x 3 Currently AB with MWD to come.
It has its use ... just not in combat.
yeah but its billed as a frigat killer, I want to use a dessy forfrig poping, not my AML Cerb.
|
|
sting122
The Maverick Navy IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.12.09 03:02:00 -
[121]
|
Vaneshi SnowCrash
|
Posted - 2009.12.10 19:17:00 -
[122]
Destroyers might as well not exist other than for their ability to tug 4 tractor beams and 4 salvagers along to the person beginning mission running.
In PvP I see very few T1 hulls being used to sc**** the likes of me off the bigger ships or scraping oiks off of me when flying something bigger.
I fully support some panel beating of the destroyer class of hulls.
|
Seth Ruin
Ominous Corp Cult of War
|
Posted - 2009.12.11 00:20:00 -
[123]
Destroyers need some serious lovin'. The most under-used ship class in the game, and with good reason.
TBH, I don't think I've ever seen a destroyer out in nullsec... (Well, besides salvage ships)
|
Korvin
|
Posted - 2009.12.11 00:49:00 -
[124]
destroyers needs some love.
atleast less signature, so they can do their role in fleet.
|
Millie Clode
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.12.11 01:27:00 -
[125]
I used to adore destroyers until I got my first AF.
Mainly because I'm fairly well specced in Amarr and the coercer can't point its target and dictate range at the same time due to lack of midslots.
Retribution is much more fun to fly
|
procurious2
|
Posted - 2009.12.16 01:13:00 -
[126]
Edited by: procurious2 on 16/12/2009 01:15:05 how bout adding another slot for missels or rockets? and please upgrade the pg a little anyway
Originally by: SubLepton Edited by: SubLepton on 28/06/2009 22:28:01 Slots: This is the final part of the proposal, and i do not view it as necessary, and not everybody agrees on this, but I think that this would be the final touch in making destroyers worthwhile ships. All battlecruisers have more slots then ANY cruiser in game, this enables them to tank additional damage they receive due to larger signature radius. Then why do destroyers receive LESS slots then there frigate counterparts? Let's have a look at tristan, we have 3 low and 3 med. slots, a total of 6 slots. All destroyers have 5 slots. I believe every destroyer deserves an extra slot.
|
Nemo Spades
|
Posted - 2009.12.19 00:17:00 -
[127]
Supported |
Voddick
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 07:46:00 -
[128]
Edited by: Vod**** on 22/12/2009 07:46:45 Fully support Destroyer love.
Lower sig, more tank, another tank slot.
|
Awesome Possum
Imperium Signal Corps
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 14:18:00 -
[129]
destroyers should have a minimum of 2 med/low slots. coercer and cormorant get boned.... well no, just coercer gets boned. cormy can fit ab/point/web. coercer can fit... ♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Faraelle Brightman
Moira.
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 17:26:00 -
[130]
Edited by: Faraelle Brightman on 22/12/2009 17:27:12 Support on principle, debatable as to specifics. Dropping the ROF penalty may or may not stick them in the overpowered category, sig radius and grid improvements are desirable.
TeaDaze, you're in Agony - the ones with the excellent dessie Woflpacks class - would be interesting to see your input here. -----------------------
"Every once in a while, declare peace. It confuses the hell out of your enemies." |
|
Neu Bastian
Minmatar Valklear Guard
|
Posted - 2009.12.22 21:35:00 -
[131]
Thrasher is amazing, leave it alone.
Catalyst could use some extra CPU and something other than the falloff bonus, Cormorant could use a bit extra PG or a new low slot. Coercer could use a med but its pretty good as it is too.
These are alpha ships tho, 25% RoF penalty is fine.
Quote:
Neu Bastian Valklear Guard - CEO
|
Everseeker
Immortalis Silens
|
Posted - 2010.01.08 21:44:00 -
[132]
Edited by: Everseeker on 08/01/2010 21:46:16 While there can be arguments made about the EXACT form of change, let's face it, CCP will take the subject, listen with half an ear to the rest, and proceed...
So, Heck yes... THE DESTROYERS need to DESTROY, not simply Annoy. To that end, they should be Glass CANNONS, not Glass Slingshots..
CCP, make it so... How you do it?... Surprise us
--
EverSeeker |
Tuvar Hiede
Snuggle Muffins
|
Posted - 2010.01.08 23:40:00 -
[133]
|
Starfinder Smith
|
Posted - 2010.01.09 02:27:00 -
[134]
I agree. I only use my Cormy as a salvage boat. It is just a (slow)moving target otherwise
|
Pesets
The Hunt Club
|
Posted - 2010.01.10 03:15:00 -
[135]
Edited by: Pesets on 10/01/2010 03:25:16 Agreed about removing rof penalty and decreasing sig (and maybe mass) a bit; maybe extra 5% to fitting.
As for slots and bonuses, leave them alone and learn to figure out the ships' purposes. Destroyers are, for the most part, pack animals and not solopwnmobiles. Cata's bonus to optimal works just as fine as falloff bonus for blasters - because optimal is half their range - and gives it flexibility to fit rails (but of course not compete with Cormorant in that). Corm's tracking bonus makes sure it will hit the target not only at max range, but also as it's spiraling towards you (and with -75% tracking penalty on Spike, you need that extra tracking). Replacing tracking bonus with damage bonus won't help at all - you still won't alpha anything solo, and if you're a sniper you won't point anything either. Also, without tracking bonus, you're taking away its flexibility to be anything except the long-range sniper. If you need more grid - use rigs, they're cheap now. If you need even more grid - train Advanced Weapon Upgrades (you should have it anyway tbh).
Interdictors could possibly use some looking into - though on the other hand, they will likely be fine once rockets are fixed. They could share the sig radius decrease with destroyers though, if that comes through.
Overall, not supported in proposed form.
|
Rakamy
|
Posted - 2010.01.10 07:56:00 -
[136]
Edited by: Rakamy on 10/01/2010 07:55:40 I fully support this idea, but let's not over look the techII versions as well....more specifically the Eris Post
|
Saelyre
|
Posted - 2010.01.31 11:01:00 -
[137]
|
Soon Shin
|
Posted - 2010.03.08 04:34:00 -
[138]
Edited by: Soon Shin on 08/03/2010 04:37:32 That's Right CCP fix our goddamn DESTROYERS!!!
Stop working on a useless expansion like Tyrannis and fix the problems of this game!
Sound, Rockets, Hybrids, Black Ops, Drones, and Destroyers!!
My Destroyer should actually be able to DESTROY T1 Frigates, not be DESTROYED by them!
They are only used to SALVAGE? and LULZ Suicide GANK!
You may gain new players, but you will lose your original player base if you don't listen to them.
|
ISellThingz
|
Posted - 2010.03.08 13:18:00 -
[139]
Supporting. I'd love to fly destroyers more without being just a free killmail.
|
Miyamoto Isoruku
The Phoenix Enclave
|
Posted - 2010.03.08 22:11:00 -
[140]
Support, a thousand times over. Although for the record, there ARE good cormorant fits out there.
|
|
Tagami Wasp
Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 00:40:00 -
[141]
------------
+15% to railguns' dmg modifier -reduce Spike optimal bonus to 70% +10% to Caldari railboats PG |
galphi
Sileo In Pacis THE SPACE P0LICE
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 01:07:00 -
[142]
Loved this discussion, so many good ideas for improvements. CCP, you have no excuse to delay these fixes past the next expansion!
The only thing I'd add is that warp speed should be increased to 4.5 au/sec, and that the coercer definitely needs a second midslot - if all the other destroyers get more than one midslot, they can be used for solo pvp (propulsion + point), if coercer is left at 1 it'll only be useful as an escort or a pve ship, regardless of other changes.
|
commander mordecai
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 10:40:00 -
[143]
supported
|
James Tritanius
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 15:09:00 -
[144]
No, the changes will make destroyers overpowered and make assault frigates obsolete. I can't believe anyone is supporting this.
|
JurassicDragon
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 19:22:00 -
[145]
supported
|
Caldron Forge
Quantum Forge Partners
|
Posted - 2010.06.04 02:50:00 -
[146]
Supported!
|
Zarnak Wulf
|
Posted - 2010.06.04 03:29:00 -
[147]
More EHP. They should be tougher then AF. AF have up to 9-10k EHP. Let's get some dessies up to 15k EHP for a tanked fit. Cut some turrets AND the ROF penalty. The goal is to keep the DPS the same. Add those missing turrets back in as mid or low slots.
|
Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
|
Posted - 2010.06.04 09:23:00 -
[148]
Originally by: Zarnak Wulf More EHP. They should be tougher then AF. AF have up to 9-10k EHP. Let's get some dessies up to 15k EHP for a tanked fit. Cut some turrets AND the ROF penalty. The goal is to keep the DPS the same. Add those missing turrets back in as mid or low slots.
This.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Ambaseter Doggy
|
Posted - 2010.06.04 20:18:00 -
[149]
Originally by: James Tritanius No, the changes will make destroyers overpowered and make assault frigates obsolete. I can't believe anyone is supporting this.
Destroyers are SUPPOSE to kill AF and frigs. they are ANTI frig boats. also i think af already have more ehp then a dessie.
|
Hrin
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2010.06.04 21:13:00 -
[150]
I think the best change would be the extra low/mid slot, but in general I support the other changes as well.
|
|
Hailey Sunweaver
Ordnance. Epsilon Fleet
|
Posted - 2010.06.06 17:45:00 -
[151]
signed
|
Plarbis
The Merchant Kings
|
Posted - 2010.06.07 10:20:00 -
[152]
Let's give Destoryers a chance! |
Taudia
Sane Industries Inc. Initiative Mercenaries
|
Posted - 2010.06.08 12:31:00 -
[153]
Supporting a general dessie buff.
|
Titanius Bridge
The Secret Corp
|
Posted - 2010.06.08 14:42:00 -
[154]
I'll sign this. ------------- Because I am Bridge, and I'm AWWWWWESOOOOMMMMEEE!!!
|
Vladimiru
|
Posted - 2010.06.09 02:06:00 -
[155]
Originally by: Dierdra Vaal bringing this up for the next CSM meeting
ABOUT DAMN TIME, LET ME SHOW YOU THE PAST 3 RECENT POSTS YOU MISSED ON THIS SUBJECT
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1317687&page=1
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1327231&page=1
There's a third one somewhere too from last week, but I lost the bookmark.
|
CG Oglethorpe
Universal Army Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.06.09 02:09:00 -
[156]
Dessies need buffing.
A second hull per race sounds good, but they are so underpowered right now that they have been repurposed into salvagers by many pilots.
They follow a similar path to their big brothers, the battlecruisers. Yet they never reach their desination, and are ignored as a failed ship design.
|
Azshann
|
Posted - 2010.06.09 02:45:00 -
[157]
Sexy
|
Boraf Flux
|
Posted - 2010.06.09 08:00:00 -
[158]
Not sure this is the best solution but I'm supporting this because destroyers have needed work for a long, long time.
|
Nassus Ryn
|
Posted - 2010.06.09 18:46:00 -
[159]
|
Psycros
|
Posted - 2010.06.10 05:40:00 -
[160]
YES. At least two mid and two low slots for all destroyers. Boost grid to allow for a full complement of any small guns or missiles and all but the hungriest modules. Its a destroyer - it should be almost as fast as a frig, slightly tougher and loaded for bear!
|
|
1Ekrid1
|
Posted - 2010.06.23 00:59:00 -
[161]
Edited by: 1Ekrid1 on 23/06/2010 01:05:17 Edited by: 1Ekrid1 on 23/06/2010 01:04:16
Originally by: Elo Behram yes to grid and ROF, no to extra slots (destroyers supposed to be glass cannons)
No they are not. they already get BBQ'd faster than a witch in salem by cruisers, they need more slots because if their hps and sig radius dont change, at least they can tank a little better or actually put on some different useful modules to make them more useful as a ship with higher versatility. they lack versatility which is their main problem, their bonuses are flawed, which is their second, their fittings aren't right, which their tertiary flaw, and the final flaw is that their sig radius makes them instapop from cruisers.
you know how easy AC's rip up frigs? A cruiser is twice the sig radius of a frig, slower, and has only about 30% more HP than a frig.
Originally by: Psycros YES. At least two mid and two low slots for all destroyers. Boost grid to allow for a full complement of any small guns or missiles and all but the hungriest modules. Its a destroyer - it should be almost as fast as a frig, slightly tougher and loaded for bear!
the coercer only has 1 mid. try doing anything useful with that ship. its like having to choose between speed to avoid damage and catch up to targets, or cap boosters to keep moving at a snail pace without running out of cap.
Personally, I'd like to see a 4% bonus per level to afterburner speed, with a 1% increase in cap use for afterburner.
you know whats funny is that this ship could have all kinds of different bonuses set on it to make it better, but each bonus, if its related to a module would effectively fitting out the other modules.
like if it had an AB bonus, and a Tracking computer bonus, and a cap battery bonus, and a web bonus. on ships with only 1 or 2 midslots, you can only choose two at most, and if the bonuses weren't to OP, then a particular fight would favor switching out a bonused mod for an unbonused one that would be more helpful in a particular fight.
there's tons of ways to improve ships, not just with buffs to stats but also with new bonuses that, if taken advantage of, take a slot away from being able to use another bonus.
Originally by: Psycros YES. At least two mid and two low slots for all destroyers. Boost grid to allow for a full complement of any small guns or missiles and all but the hungriest modules. Its a destroyer - it should be almost as fast as a frig, slightly tougher and loaded for bear!
battlecruisers are solo PVP lowsec ships in droves. that doesn't compare to a ship relegated to salvaging for everyone. There's 1, repeat 1, frigate in the T1 lineup designed to be a suicide tackler. the rest are for COMBAT. so don't tell me to tackle when I'm in a combat T1 frig. OR tell CCP to fix their mess. |
Khorvek
Amarr Dead Pool Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.06.23 01:15:00 -
[162]
I got something to say. put in two of the small rigs that increase fire rate 10%. DPS is huge then. these rigs also tend to be pretty cheap. I think the only answer is to tank destroyers because otherwise the frigs they're supposed to kill take them out instead.
|
Soapy5
Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2010.06.23 01:25:00 -
[163]
+1
|
Syekuda
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2010.06.23 03:01:00 -
[164]
I agree, more dps, same fragility. At least I could use my cormy with 7 150mm without pen.
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente Imperial Tau Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.06.24 15:54:00 -
[165]
Originally by: Khorvek I got something to say. put in two of the small rigs that increase fire rate 10%. DPS is huge then. these rigs also tend to be pretty cheap. I think the only answer is to tank destroyers because otherwise the frigs they're supposed to kill take them out instead.
Catalyst does not have enough powergrid to fit full-rack of 150 mm rails.. NOw, if i add two rigs that boots their power useage by 10% each, and it stacks, and put a couple plates and an mwd on, i wonder what will happen......
|
Patrice Macmahon
Department of Defence
|
Posted - 2010.06.25 19:37:00 -
[166]
Edited by: Patrice Macmahon on 25/06/2010 19:38:25 Just gonna take a moment to interject here,
Destroyers are really good T1 ships. I can take a catalyst and wipe the floor of any basic t1 frig and take on most faction level frigs no problem. Hell, I've easily popped the unweary, first assult stealth bomber and intercepter who thought that they were gettting froggy.
So as a T1 hull, as they exist now, are just fine and do a really really good job at what they are supposed to be doing. But thats the problem, its only a t1 hull.
Now, the problem is everyone is trying to make them usable and viable in a world filled with assult ships and cruisers on the battle field. Interdictors are very niche and they do worse at handling frigs than their t1 counterparts.
The solution is not to make these great T1 hulls even stronger, its to finally push over and make dedicated T2 combat hulls for them. Drop the sig radius and give them a bonus to small module rep/boost amount. That would definately make them quite viable on today's battlefield.
=)
The Intakis have an obligation to defend the Federation, but not to assult others on its behalf. |
1Ekrid1
|
Posted - 2010.06.26 04:56:00 -
[167]
so.. the solution to making a T1 hull viable is to make them T2?
Are T1 hulls supposed to be obselete? Didn't CCP see this coming, that eventually the universe would be filled with the majority of pilots flying HACS and AFs such that there is no room for the newbie in The T1 hull?
Thats what happens when you make the next gen of ships more than 50% stronger than the previous gen. you make gen 1 useless except in very narrow circumstances that happen .0001% of the time. There's 1, repeat 1, frigate in the T1 lineup designed to be a suicide tackler. the rest are for COMBAT. so don't tell me to tackle when I'm in a combat T1 frig. OR tell CCP to fix their mess. |
Patrice Macmahon
Department of Defence
|
Posted - 2010.06.26 23:02:00 -
[168]
Originally by: 1Ekrid1 so.. the solution to making a T1 hull viable is to make them T2?
Are T1 hulls supposed to be obselete? Didn't CCP see this coming, that eventually the universe would be filled with the majority of pilots flying HACS and AFs such that there is no room for the newbie in The T1 hull?
Thats what happens when you make the next gen of ships more than 50% stronger than the previous gen. you make gen 1 useless except in very narrow circumstances that happen .0001% of the time.
Think about what you just said...
Rifter is still used just as much as the wolf.
T1 EW frigs are used just as much as their T2 counterparts. Destroyers are still being used all over the place. Head out to null or low sec and youll get a taste of some really good Destroyer pilots.
The only problem were running into is that where people are trying to use a t1 ship in essentially t2 situations and they arnt doing so well...
The Intakis have an obligation to defend the Federation, but not to assult others on its behalf. |
Tir Ona
|
Posted - 2010.06.27 12:00:00 -
[169]
Supported. I would love to see buffs to destroyers. As a relatively new player I was quite sad to be told to completely skip the class. I didn't, because I loved the Cormie hull (and the ability to have some salvaging ability on board while doing level 1s and 2s).
In PvP destroyers should be something that frigates are afraid of. Not so much that they can destroy fleets of them solo, but dangerous enough that they could kill frigates better than other frigates can.
|
Luminus Mallus
|
Posted - 2010.07.01 11:41:00 -
[170]
The original post is from almost exactly a year ago. It received pretty major support, is well thought out, and reasonable, however if I'm not wrong, there's no CCP contribution to it? How much approvals does one good idea need to achieve before it attracts attention?
We're mainly talking about balance here. Takes no genius to see that catalyst and cormorant are sub par.
|
|
Rhok Relztem
CGMA Synergist Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.07.01 16:50:00 -
[171]
+1 wholeheartedly
Destroyers are the forgotten ship class. They are underpowered and slow, and even within the class the desparities between the racial ships is ridiculous. They certainly do not live up to their billing as frigate killers, at least not anymore. And why are there no T2s or variations from the militia or various outlaw groups? I love flying my destroyers (all of my characters have at least one of their racial design) but they are mainly used for salvaging purposes instead of frigate hunting which is a real shame. The class has potential if it got some attention by the devs.
|
Elisa Fir
|
Posted - 2010.08.20 14:18:00 -
[172]
signed
|
Cearain
Caldari The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
|
Posted - 2010.08.20 14:49:00 -
[173]
This is an old thread posted before apoc 1.5 and the rig changes. Now destroyers can fit 3 cheap small rigs. They get more of a boost from this % increase than t1 frigates because they started out with better stats. They get more of a boost from this than tech 2 frigs because tech 2 frigs only has 2 rig slots. The high alpha of destroyers make them extremely dangerous for all frigates. Going from memory, I think a thrasher can do about like 240 dps (that may include overheat not sure) and have about 7k ehp! With its tracking bonus its hard to say how this doesn't destroy properly destroy frigates. Those small guns are doing close to full damage.
The hull is essentially the same cost as a t1 frigate so why would anyone ever fly a t1 frig if the signature of destroyers is reduced? Boosting destroyers even further just makes t1 frigates (one of the funnest ships in the game) obsolete.
In low sec I see *plenty* of destroyers. I don't see any need for a general boost.
That said I do think a coercer should have 2 mids.
-Cearain
Make fw occupancy pvp instead of pve: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1329906 |
Astroka
|
Posted - 2010.08.20 19:14:00 -
[174]
I would love it if CCP could bring some value to this relatively worthless ship class.
|
Erik Legant
|
Posted - 2010.08.20 20:42:00 -
[175]
signed |
Mongo Edwards
|
Posted - 2010.08.21 00:59:00 -
[176]
Originally by: Cearain This is an old thread posted before apoc 1.5 and the rig changes. Now destroyers can fit 3 cheap small rigs. They get more of a boost from this % increase than t1 frigates because they started out with better stats. They get more of a boost from this than tech 2 frigs because tech 2 frigs only has 2 rig slots. The high alpha of destroyers make them extremely dangerous for all frigates. Going from memory, I think a thrasher can do about like 240 dps (that may include overheat not sure) and have about 7k ehp! With its tracking bonus its hard to say how this doesn't destroy properly destroy frigates. Those small guns are doing close to full damage.
There are 3 other T1 ships in that class and a Cormorant needs either an implant or a rig to fit T2 150mm rails if you are using the low slot for a magstab. I'm not really sure what awesome dps you are talking about the cormorant with T2 rails does with maxed skills 136 dps with 1 weapon rig at 25km with CN antimatter. Even then you need to 2 ancillary current routers to make it happen. In long range sniper mode its optimal is 90km +11 falloff and does an amazing 79 dps you might as well be tickling the enemy to death.
Blaster cormorants are pretty much fail since even with Null a frig can still be in point range and recieve no damage from a cormorant no matter what you use in the low and mid slots. Not to mention that with the hybrid rig you don't have the pg for a speed mod so a frig can either kite you or disengage at will.
|
Cearain
Caldari The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
|
Posted - 2010.08.21 02:41:00 -
[177]
I agree the corm isn't great. But since many frigs in low sec have an ab a corm with a mwd and rails can be quite effective at killing them.
[Cormorant, New Setup 1] Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Catalyzed Cold-Gas I Arcjet Thrusters Medium Shield Extender II Faint Warp Disruptor I X5 Prototype I Engine Enervator
125mm Prototype I Gauss Gun, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S 125mm Prototype I Gauss Gun, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S 125mm Prototype I Gauss Gun, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S 125mm Prototype I Gauss Gun, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S [empty high slot] 125mm Prototype I Gauss Gun, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S 125mm Prototype I Gauss Gun, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S 125mm Prototype I Gauss Gun, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S
Small Ancillary Current Router I Small Ancillary Current Router I Small Ancillary Current Router I
This ship will go 1500ms (overheat over 2098) 140 dps with 15k optimal and 6k falloff! (165 dps overheated) and has 5k ehp. Yes if you can drop a scram on it then its dead but thatÆs true of any kiter and this is one of the weakest destroyers.
But the catalyst and thrasher are good and the coercer would be *very* good also if given a midslot. If the proposal was to do that I would support it. But again when combined with a decent tackler the coercer can really spit out dps. But whatever 50% of the ships in the class are quite good. Thrasher is bordering on op IMO.
There are 16 t1 frigs only about 30% are good. There are 8 t2 frigates 3 are good. There are 8 interceptors 4 are good. There are 4 faction frigates and 2 are good. There are 4 pirate frigates and only one is good. :)
But here is the most important thing. Of all these ships you will see just as many thrashers out in low sec as any other frigate class ships except drams and rifters. Destroyers are very common and very useful. They certainly do not need a boost. You would see more catalysts if it werenÆt for all the thrashers. The thrashers are borderline oped so why bother with a catalyst?
Instead of a ôboost destroyersö at most we really just need a thread to give coercers a second mid and possibly some more fitting room for the corm. But even there I donÆt see any urgency that *every* ship in eve be perfectly equal. T1 destroyers really do a good job destroying T1 frigates. I donÆt think anyone denies that after the rig changes. Distancing them even further from the already hurting t1 and t2 frigates just doesnÆt make sense.
-Cearain
Make fw occupancy pvp instead of pve: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1329906 |
SupaKudoRio
|
Posted - 2010.08.21 15:00:00 -
[178]
Edited by: SupaKudoRio on 21/08/2010 15:00:43 I don't remember if I've supported this...
Edit: I hadn't. Must've been horrendously drunk when I read it last, or something.
Ye'llo? |
Bronya Boga
Black Eagle SocieTy
|
Posted - 2010.08.21 16:13:00 -
[179]
/signed
The catalyst needs a boost and the coercer needs it too....this is a good solution
|
Ramon Wilco
Caldari Psycho Corp
|
Posted - 2010.08.21 17:27:00 -
[180]
My destroyer... i use it only to salvage ^^ Fear your incomprehension, but love the differences. Ramon Wilco |
|
Uriel Winston
|
Posted - 2010.08.21 20:03:00 -
[181]
/signed
all destroyers should have at least 2 Med slots, 1 mwd 1 scram. There is no point to call a ship frigate killer when it cant point it. and no they are not supposed to 1-shot frigates nor all should fly arty thrashers
|
D Scan
|
Posted - 2010.08.22 15:04:00 -
[182]
Agree with moar T1 hulls.
And why not have T3 go to dessies next?
|
Fournone
|
Posted - 2010.08.25 03:09:00 -
[183]
dest = fail, any boost is a welcome boost
|
Zilberfrid
|
Posted - 2010.08.25 04:15:00 -
[184]
The t3 thought I don't support. I think that should be tied to the ship size skill (frig, cruiser, bs) not to the blanket skills (destroyer, battlecruiser) ------------------------------------- I like to fly around and shoot stuff. |
Kogh Ayon
|
Posted - 2010.08.25 08:33:00 -
[185]
It is a T1 stuff anyway. T2 assault destoryer will nerf AFs and Interceptors but they are already too weak against neuts,scrambers even just some medium turrets.
|
Lemmy Kravitz
|
Posted - 2010.08.30 09:00:00 -
[186]
Edited by: Lemmy Kravitz on 30/08/2010 09:05:01 I absolutely agree with this post. But I would like to see these changes applied to a new T2 varient of destroyers known as "Assault Destroyers" No ROF penalty, better pg and cpu, and all the other things you mentioned.
Also I forgot who is the drone heavy race. But who ever it is, drop thier highslots to like 2 or 3. But let em have a drone bay that can have like 8-10 small drones. or something like that.
|
Uriel Winston
|
Posted - 2010.08.30 14:51:00 -
[187]
Originally by: Lemmy Kravitz Edited by: Lemmy Kravitz on 30/08/2010 09:05:01 Also I forgot who is the drone heavy race. But who ever it is, drop thier highslots to like 2 or 3. But let em have a drone bay that can have like 8-10 small drones. or something like that.
lol that would be the BEST destroyer, its just makes all other powerless. just think of it, 5 t2 150mm rails + 5 t2 hobs hit orbit at 10km and enjoy the fireworks.
~drones are not for destroyers~
|
Glyken Touchon
Independent Alchemists
|
Posted - 2010.09.01 20:18:00 -
[188]
Supporting the idea that destroyers need to be serious ships that can actually do what the description says (cormorant is an exception in the pattern of descriptions):
Originally by: catalyst the Catalyst is touted as one of the best anti-frigate platforms out there.
Originally by: thrasher the Thrasher's tremendous turret capabilities and advanced tracking computers allow it to protect its larger counterpart from smaller, faster menaces.
Originally by: coercer the Coercer, a vessel designed specifically to seek and destroy the droves of fast-moving frigate rebels.
One idea to help the rebalancing would be to switch the role bonus from optimal to tracking. This then allows the skill bonuses to be better tailored to the individual race's needs.
|
Ishtvaan
|
Posted - 2010.09.02 08:52:00 -
[189]
+1
Destroyers deserve much more than only being pulled out of the hangar for salvaging issues...
|
chaosjj
|
Posted - 2010.09.04 12:08:00 -
[190]
signed
anyone noticed that that while this topic exists for over a YEAR! there is still not a single response from a CCP dev
|
|
Lev Aeris
b.b.k
|
Posted - 2010.09.04 15:46:00 -
[191]
Originally by: Kaltooth
Originally by: Dretzle Omega Cormorant I'd prefer to fit with 8 missile slots, to be honest. Tweak them they can only effectively fit Rocket Launchers and give them a missile range boost, if you have to; that fits in with the anti-frig effect, anyways.
This would be great, but the heretic can already tell you all about the awesomeness of rockets. Soon as they fix that, then maybe we can talk about such a boat.
God please don't take anymore gunboats from the caldari, the cormorant is awesome if you know how to fit it and fly it.
If you want a pve boat, get a drake, don't put those **** weapons on a perfectly good ship.
Also, Not Supporting, Dessies are fine the way they are, you just have to know how to use them.
|
William Archer
|
Posted - 2010.09.08 21:44:00 -
[192]
yes to all
|
Bo Tosh
|
Posted - 2010.09.09 08:19:00 -
[193]
Destroyers have needed love for a long time, supported
|
Den Sethos
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 09:12:00 -
[194]
Destroyers indeed lack the edge they should have over frigates, which is a shame, considering that should be their role.
I agree with the improvement on grid (not being able to fit all railguns on a Cormorant is frustrating...) as well as the removal of the penalty to rate of fire. I would consider a rebalancing of modules as profitable: remove one high slots, add a low or mid-slot, depending on the ship.
|
matthiastee
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 18:41:00 -
[195]
yeppers
|
Antaeus Fantasy
|
Posted - 2010.11.21 19:19:00 -
[196]
I think that not only destroyer upgrade is needed. but some faction destroyers too. destroyers can be much more then they are now. like medium assault ships. or stealth guard or ambush ships.
|
Yhaerlin
|
Posted - 2010.11.24 17:15:00 -
[197]
I support this proposal.
In the Advanced Tutorial, when you get the Destroyer (Coercer) ... I did the mission... couldn't even fit a full complement of T1 Medium Lasers (small)... an AB, tried to mod for Armor Tanking.
I almost lost it.
I did it again in a Punisher, I was afraid to, an Anti-Frigate Destroyer almost lost, what chance would I have in a Frigate? It was like night and day. It's sad when something in it's description states that it is an ANTI-Frigate platform... yet loose to 1 Frigate!
I didn't even know about the "Glass Cannon" train of thought.... but even then, that fails... the Coercer is a Glass Pellet Gun!
|
Tyr Aeron
Therapy. Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2010.11.24 19:41:00 -
[198]
I love my gank Catalyst on frigate roams, but to be out DPS'd and out ranged by Dramiels, Daredevils, and some T1 frigs is just, well, pathetic. Glass certainly, but a cannon it is not.
C'mon CCP, give destroyers some love.
|
Gallion
|
Posted - 2010.11.25 00:38:00 -
[199]
Since I generally love the destroyer.
|
mjolnir feaw
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.11.26 10:51:00 -
[200]
As a young eve player, I tried to fly a catalyst efficiently in Missions or ratting. I really tried. But with low SP destroyer are inferior to a good T1 frig (Kessie...) and later in the game I couldn't find any fight where it would be better than a low-end cruiser. It's cheaper all-right, but I kept repairing/losing them.
I disagree with removing the high sig. A destroyer should be a frigate hunter, but unable to fight bigger ship. It's paper/rock/scissor thing, really.
Catalyst needs Grid upgrades and either removing the ROF penalty or increasing the damage bonus (why not?)
----- " There's no brave in a 5-to-1 fight. Just 5 cowards and a fool. - Perhaps. But it worked didn't it?" |
|
JuanCamaney
Xatruch Tech
|
Posted - 2010.11.27 20:08:00 -
[201]
+1;
dessies NEED 2 low/mid slots minimum!!!! coercer: to tackle/get in range Corm: fit/dps
|
Tyr Aeron
Therapy. Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2010.11.28 18:07:00 -
[202]
BUMP
|
Massive Dragon
HAIL DRAGONS
|
Posted - 2010.11.28 22:14:00 -
[203]
destroyers are already very strong against ceptors and frigs. i say this having been able to take my thrasher up against 5 ceptors and win comfortably.
you have SOME trouble with a few afs, but even stuff like ishkurs you can deal with just fine in a thrasher.
if any change at all is needed the coercer could use a second mid... but thats it.
not supported.
|
Lubomir Penev
Sausages of Truth S I L E N T.
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 02:33:00 -
[204]
Originally by: SubLepton
Let's start with a catalyst. We have bonus to falloff, and as a class they get bonus to optimal. So if i shoot rails I will use them in optimal, so the ship bonus is simply wasted. If i use blasters, then the optimal bonus is nearly useless as it gives me only extra 200meters, which is virtually nothing. Conclusion: If it is suppose to be a blaster boat (which it probably is) Change the class bonus to 50% bonus to falloff, and the ships bonus should be changed to bonus to small hybrid turret damage.
I disagree with your points (the falloff bonus is good with rails that have lots of it), and the new VOID will make the optimal bonus a lot better with blasters, which is admittedly pretty meh now.
However your suggestion would make it a better ship.
|
Lolkarma
|
Posted - 2010.12.03 00:34:00 -
[205]
Supported. CCP, where are you? The CSM voted for buffing destroyers unanimously last year. |
Alias 6322A
|
Posted - 2010.12.03 01:20:00 -
[206]
Quote: destroyers are already very strong against ceptors and frigs. i say this having been able to take my thrasher up against 5 ceptors and win comfortably. you have SOME trouble with a few afs, but even stuff like ishkurs you can deal with just fine in a thrasher. if any change at all is needed the coercer could use a second mid... but thats it. not supported.
I notice you mention Thrasher...which the OP mentioned as the one destroyer not being terrible? I personally have PvP'd a thrasher successfully and you are right in that they carry out their intended role as a fast-frigate killer. The other destroyers don't.
Support for finding a way to make Destroyers worthwhile again. (Since the Noctis will soon kill them off anyways, except as a poor-man's salvager now.)
|
napolion II
|
Posted - 2011.01.04 11:25:00 -
[207]
Yea, destroyers
DESTROY, DESTROY'ers
I can't see salvagers in there any place, let me look again
If i wanted to destroy something, what ship should i use, i need something with dps, and more dps, and a pod.
Hmm, cruiser it is then
How about medium guns, or large guns and no shields or armer, that would do, oh and before hulkageddon please.
Thanks in advance.
|
Henry Haphorn
Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2011.01.04 18:45:00 -
[208]
/supported
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente Imperial Tau Syndicate
|
Posted - 2011.01.04 22:03:00 -
[209]
Originally by: Massive Dragon destroyers are already very strong against ceptors and frigs. i say this having been able to take my thrasher up against 5 ceptors and win comfortably.
you have SOME trouble with a few afs, but even stuff like ishkurs you can deal with just fine in a thrasher.
if any change at all is needed the coercer could use a second mid... but thats it.
not supported.
thrasher, that the prolem. Thanks for the bump dudes.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: [one page] |