Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Garviel Tarrant
Aces -N- Eights Excuses.
9
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 18:33:00 -
[1] - Quote
The Catalyst isn't good.
It may be slightly better than the corm or coercer but its not good.
The thrasher is the only truly good destroyer. Just wanted to clear that up. |
El Geo
Pathfinders.
42
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 19:14:00 -
[2] - Quote
all about how you use them |
Garviel Tarrant
Aces -N- Eights Excuses.
9
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 19:28:00 -
[3] - Quote
Ohh congratulations, do you want a cookie?
Any bloody ship can have some tiny niche use. The fact remains that 9/10 times the thrasher will beat any other of the destroyers including the catalyst. |
Ager Agemo
Saturn Reaper
91
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 19:37:00 -
[4] - Quote
correct me if wrong but dosnt the catalyst sort of almost one shoots trashers? |
inexistin
Rubbish and Garbage Removal AAA Citizens
13
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 20:39:00 -
[5] - Quote
Ager Agemo wrote:correct me if wrong but dosnt the catalyst sort of almost one shoots trashers?
They would kinda one shot each other, but the thrasher can draw it's gun fas... that is, has higher scan res. |
Garviel Tarrant
Aces -N- Eights Excuses.
9
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 20:41:00 -
[6] - Quote
Ok consider yourself corrected.
Even at its optimal it doesn't come close and it cant dictate range at all since it only has two mids so it dies horribly against any competent pilot. It does have an arseload of dps but it won't be able to apply that dps to anything unless the opponent is really really bad.
Its might be able to beat a thrasher in a toe to toe brawl. And so could the coercer
That is however rather irrelevant since the thrasher can just **** off if he so desires since they cannot dictate range at all. |
PinkKnife
The Scope Gallente Federation
123
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 21:16:00 -
[7] - Quote
This is more mirrored the unbalance of the turrets, not necessarily the ships.
Given similar or equal ships, projectiles will almost always win an engagement. |
Garviel Tarrant
Aces -N- Eights Excuses.
9
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 21:21:00 -
[8] - Quote
Meh, they wouldnt be so good if they werent always combined with the ability to dictate range,
Thats what makes ac's good, especially with t1 small ships selectable damage types arent a big factor |
Wa'roun
Quantum Cats Syndicate
33
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 22:00:00 -
[9] - Quote
Regarding the dev blog about destroyers getting an orbital bombardment role:
I just can't see these smaller ships being able to perform this.
In any sci-fi show I have seen where orbital bombardment was being done, they were always larger ships.
I can only see BC+ sized ships doing this. |
Garviel Tarrant
Aces -N- Eights Excuses.
9
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 22:03:00 -
[10] - Quote
Yea its a bit silly.
EDIT: But then again in Eve even the small ships are ******* huge... |
|
Jett0
Team Kitty Choke Slam
123
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 23:33:00 -
[11] - Quote
Orbital destroyers: The new suicide gank? Occasionally plays sober |
Dato Koppla
The Irken Armada Russian International Allegiance
50
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 02:13:00 -
[12] - Quote
Yeah, confirming that IMO, the Thrasher completely craps all over the other destroyers. I would say it's best characteristics are:
Damage bonus + 7 guns allows the Thrasher to have 8.33 'guns' while having a utility high AND easier fitting (on already ridiculously low fitting ACs)
Best sig/speed, very important on a ship that has to catch ships that are faster than it, but also needs to run from things bigger than it.
Range control, ridiculous tracking, fitting, the list goes on, but basically the Thrasher does everything better than other destroyers EXCEPT raw dps which is the only thing the Catalyst has on it. Cormorant is usable but meh and the Coercer is lulz |
Tarra Nobilii
Universal Origin Ayn Sof Aur
4
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 02:28:00 -
[13] - Quote
Idea 1: We have a covert ops frig, covert ops cruiser....covert ops destroyer? Would prove useful as an escort for bombers...or perhaps as a tackler for them. Conversely, could fill the role as a counter to bombers (missile hardpoints for standard launchers with range bonus, for example); would allow it to both escort or counter bombers. Furthermore, it would be consistent with the bonuses given to bombers for torpedoes...granted it is a smaller missile slot.
Idea 2: Command boosting destroyer? Would be nice for frig gangs.
Idea 3: Phasing out of Electronic attack frigs...ECM destroyer
Idea 4: Seige mode destroyers...for removing those annoying high sec towers; extra dps and tank for hitting larger ships...might even be useful in swarms for killing caps...kinda relates to the planetary bombardment role CCP initially presented (dual role?) |
Garviel Tarrant
Aces -N- Eights Excuses.
10
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 02:39:00 -
[14] - Quote
Tarra Nobilii wrote:Idea 1: We have a covert ops frig, covert ops cruiser....covert ops destroyer? Would prove useful as an escort for bombers...or perhaps as a tackler for them. Conversely, could fill the role as a counter to bombers (missile hardpoints for standard launchers with range bonus, for example); would allow it to both escort or counter bombers. Furthermore, it would be consistent with the bonuses given to bombers for torpedoes...granted it is a smaller missile slot.
Idea 2: Command boosting destroyer? Would be nice for frig gangs.
Idea 3: Phasing out of Electronic attack frigs...ECM destroyer
Idea 4: Seige mode destroyers...for removing those annoying high sec towers; extra dps and tank for hitting larger ships...might even be useful in swarms for killing caps...kinda relates to the planetary bombardment role CCP initially presented (dual role?)
I'm talking about the destroyer rebalancing.. Not new destroyers.. but if you want.
Covert ops.. Don't really see the point
Command boosting, pointless with everyone rocking t3 links
How that would work i have no idea but i like everything that fucks with ECM
Just stupid since immobile destroyers would pop like cherries at mardi gras |
Logan Xerxes
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 04:14:00 -
[15] - Quote
Wa'roun wrote:Regarding the dev blog about destroyers getting an orbital bombardment role:
I just can't see these smaller ships being able to perform this.
In any sci-fi show I have seen where orbital bombardment was being done, they were always larger ships.
I can only see BC+ sized ships doing this.
Because throwing some munitions down a gravity well is just so hard... |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc
142
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 04:28:00 -
[16] - Quote
Garviel Tarrant wrote:Meh, they wouldnt be so good if they werent always combined with the ability to dictate range,
Thats what makes ac's good, especially with t1 small ships selectable damage types arent a big factor.
EDIT: That is thats a large factor in how well AC's work. Its not entirely WHY they are good obviously since selectable damage types are awesome. What i mean is that AC's wouldn't be so IMBA if Minni ships weren't always able to dictate range.
I think minmatar ability to dictate range makes them unique and impressive. If autocannons are imba because of it, they probably just need to be whacked a few times with the nerf bat until their dps is low enough to compensate.
Nothing is ever overpowered simply because it gives its user too many unique options. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens |
Abdiel Kavash
Paladin Order Fidelas Constans
593
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 07:26:00 -
[17] - Quote
Wa'roun wrote:Regarding the dev blog about destroyers getting an orbital bombardment role:
I just can't see these smaller ships being able to perform this.
In any sci-fi show I have seen where orbital bombardment was being done, they were always larger ships.
I can only see BC+ sized ships doing this.
Have you considered the fact that the only remote AoE weapon in EVE is only usable by frigate hulls?
(And I guess supercaps' remote ECM.) |
Valerie Tessel
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
169
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 14:43:00 -
[18] - Quote
Garviel Tarrant wrote:Tarra Nobilii wrote:Idea 1: We have a covert ops frig, covert ops cruiser....covert ops destroyer? Would prove useful as an escort for bombers...or perhaps as a tackler for them. Conversely, could fill the role as a counter to bombers (missile hardpoints for standard launchers with range bonus, for example); would allow it to both escort or counter bombers. Furthermore, it would be consistent with the bonuses given to bombers for torpedoes...granted it is a smaller missile slot.
Idea 2: Command boosting destroyer? Would be nice for frig gangs.
Idea 3: Phasing out of Electronic attack frigs...ECM destroyer
Idea 4: Seige mode destroyers...for removing those annoying high sec towers; extra dps and tank for hitting larger ships...might even be useful in swarms for killing caps...kinda relates to the planetary bombardment role CCP initially presented (dual role?) I'm talking about the destroyer rebalancing.. Not new destroyers.. but if you want. Covert ops.. Don't really see the point Command boosting, pointless with everyone rocking t3 links How that would work i have no idea but i like everything that fucks with ECM Just stupid since immobile destroyers would pop like cherries at mardi gras Or something like Aegis destroyers... (see sig) Support Aegis Destroyers: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=97610 |
Korg Tronix
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
52
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 18:42:00 -
[19] - Quote
Tbh the only bad thing about the Coercer is the number of mids it has, if it had two it would be the best destroyer. Atm the moment the only AC Thrasher fit that beats it regularly is the armour fit (Resists) but as far as range goes with close range guns nothing comes close to it.
Tbh the only thing that overdoes it with the thrasher is the number of guns to high slots it has. If it had its current 7 guns with 7 highs rather than 8 I think they would be more balanced. Means the Thrasher would lose the neut that it fits cutting on some of the utility it has. Evil: If I were creating the world I wouldn't mess about with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers, eight o'clock, Day One! [zaps one of his minions accidentally, minion screams] |
serras bang
Lucien Coven
5
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 22:04:00 -
[20] - Quote
i like the idea of destroyers and them adding new ones but what i wanted for you to consider is if caldari is getting a missile destroyer witch im excited about. what else are we gonna get how about an EWAR destroyer or a Light tackle ship ? |
|
Kaikka Carel
White syndicate Wormholes Holders
63
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 07:46:00 -
[21] - Quote
The basic idea was a ship that would be able to defend a gang from frigates and drones.
The pros:
- Fast enough in theory to speed tank larger opponents. - Enough firepower and damage application to be a threat to designated targets. - Small and cheap.
However this concept doesn't work.
Cons:
- Realistically not enough survivablity to perform the duty(speed tank doesn't work, ehp too low) . - Can't force the engagement upon the designated target due to lower speed(can't fit/operate MWD). - Only ACs and Scorch has effective operational range. Cormorant and Catalyst would require at least 125mm Railgun which hinders the rest of the fitting while Neutron Blaster can't be even fited along the proper package. - T2 fitting catapults the price to the point where a BC becomes more costeffective. - 4.5 AU/s warp speed hinders frigate gang mobility and is wasted when accompanying larger ships.
Thus we end up with a suicide ganking Catalyst and the Thrasher do-it-all. The dessies only work when the frigate choses to engage them. But if this is exactly what you want then everything is right. |
Garviel Tarrant
Aces -N- Eights Excuses.
11
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 17:24:00 -
[22] - Quote
Korg Tronix wrote:Tbh the only bad thing about the Coercer is the number of mids it has, if it had two it would be the best destroyer. Atm the moment the only AC Thrasher fit that beats it regularly is the armour fit (Resists) but as far as range goes with close range guns nothing comes close to it.
Tbh the only thing that overdoes it with the thrasher is the number of guns to high slots it has. If it had its current 7 guns with 7 highs rather than 8 I think they would be more balanced. Means the Thrasher would lose the neut that it fits cutting on some of the utility it has.
No small ship is truly good with less than three
At these distances range control is life.
Amarr is slow, thus need scram/web. |
Korg Tronix
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
52
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 22:16:00 -
[23] - Quote
Garviel Tarrant wrote:Korg Tronix wrote:Tbh the only bad thing about the Coercer is the number of mids it has, if it had two it would be the best destroyer. Atm the moment the only AC Thrasher fit that beats it regularly is the armour fit (Resists) but as far as range goes with close range guns nothing comes close to it.
Tbh the only thing that overdoes it with the thrasher is the number of guns to high slots it has. If it had its current 7 guns with 7 highs rather than 8 I think they would be more balanced. Means the Thrasher would lose the neut that it fits cutting on some of the utility it has. No small ship is truly good with less than three At these distances range control is life. Amarr is slow, thus need scram/web.
The Coercer isn't the slowest destroyer and it has the best range for its short range guns thanks to scorch. It doesnt need the web so much as it would need a high slot for the nos.
Not all small ships need 3 mid slots Evil: If I were creating the world I wouldn't mess about with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers, eight o'clock, Day One! [zaps one of his minions accidentally, minion screams] |
Garviel Tarrant
Aces -N- Eights Excuses.
11
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 22:59:00 -
[24] - Quote
Korg Tronix wrote:Garviel Tarrant wrote:Korg Tronix wrote:Tbh the only bad thing about the Coercer is the number of mids it has, if it had two it would be the best destroyer. Atm the moment the only AC Thrasher fit that beats it regularly is the armour fit (Resists) but as far as range goes with close range guns nothing comes close to it.
Tbh the only thing that overdoes it with the thrasher is the number of guns to high slots it has. If it had its current 7 guns with 7 highs rather than 8 I think they would be more balanced. Means the Thrasher would lose the neut that it fits cutting on some of the utility it has. No small ship is truly good with less than three At these distances range control is life. Amarr is slow, thus need scram/web. The Coercer isn't the slowest destroyer and it has the best range for its short range guns thanks to scorch. It doesnt need the web so much as it would need a high slot for the nos. Not all small ships need 3 mid slots
Imo only kiters work decently without it but i guess it would be decent with two. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |