Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |
Sanka Cofie
The Yaar Offices of Pointe Webb and Podemall
2
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 05:10:00 -
[331] - Quote
The Coercer is fine the way it is.
>> Does not need 2nd midslot. >>> Should not lose 4th low.
Lets be honest, all of those destroyer hulls are glass cannons. Even without the warp disruptor you can kill shield tanks before they align out, and if you're going to lose the fight it's going to be over quickly anyway.
Gùä The Views or Opinions Expressed Above Are My Own And Do Not Reflect the Views or Opinions of My Corporation, My-áAlliance, or My Internet Service Provider. Gùä But They Should, Because I Am Usually Right. Gùä I Am Quitting The Forums and Giving Away All My ISK, Send me 10M ISK In Game And I Will Send You All My ISK!Gùä |
Atreides 47
FIRST SHOCK SQUADRON MASQUERADE.
3
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 10:21:00 -
[332] - Quote
How dare you to even think of mounting rockets on THRASHER ? I don't know which ******* idiot pushed that idea, but he can shoot his head with any projectile cannon. Long live to Fighters ! |
Heribeck Weathers
The Executioners Capital Punishment.
6
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 16:46:00 -
[333] - Quote
Atreides 47 wrote:How dare you to even think of mounting rockets on THRASHER ? I don't know which ******* idiot pushed that idea, but he can shoot his head with any projectile cannon. Rookies after that damnable winter patch must learn rockets instead of learning projectiles, because Destroyers are the only good starting combat ships.
lol well mimatar are getting a "new" rocket dessy, but i dotn think the thrasher is going to become the rocket king of the sky instead |
Atreides 47
FIRST SHOCK SQUADRON MASQUERADE.
3
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 19:34:00 -
[334] - Quote
Heribeck Weathers wrote:lol well mimatar are getting a "new" rocket dessy, but i dotn think the thrasher is going to become the rocket king of the sky instead
The people I distrust most are those who want to improve our lives but have only one course of action. Long live to Fighters ! |
ColdCutz
Pwny Nation
28
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 17:48:00 -
[335] - Quote
Please do away with the single drone on the Catalyst and give it more powergrid. Fiddling around with the drone interface while in a fight is not worth one drone, and the second line of Amarr and Gallente destroyers will have drones covered. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
772
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 17:52:00 -
[336] - Quote
The cormorant absolutely does not need to lose a medslot, it'd be better off with less highslots if it really has to have another low. |
Martin0
The Scope Gallente Federation
65
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 18:07:00 -
[337] - Quote
ColdCutz wrote:Please do away with the single drone on the Catalyst and give it more powergrid. Fiddling around with the drone interface while in a fight is not worth one drone, and the second line of Amarr and Gallente destroyers will have drones covered. THIS. The catalyst have lots of fitting problems. And increase autocannos pg usage |
Harvey James
Prospero's Sight
13
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 18:36:00 -
[338] - Quote
indeed the only ship designed not too use the top tier guns how bizarre is that? |
Kannteir
Protectors Holdings CORE Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.17 06:47:00 -
[339] - Quote
Why has CCP not made destroyers like Tier 3 Battlecruisers? Just give them 4 turrent/lanucher slots and 100% damage bonus on their weapons? You wouldn't be able to fit the dps to kill a cruiser, but frigates couldn't solo you anymore. Not to mention you could use them for those awkward low level 3 missions. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
201
|
Posted - 2012.09.17 09:41:00 -
[340] - Quote
I would definately redistribute 1 hi-slot for an additional med/low slot depending on the racial flavour... The destroyers do have a good amount of dps and they are supposed to be fragile - but unless you can get propulsion, tackle and a plateextender on them they will explode if anything sneeze in their direction...
If you insist on the current slot layout perhaps an additional amount of shield/armor/structure hitpoints - these ships rarely have slots with resistance modules anyway... |
|
Iokasti palaiologou
DAMSEL In Duress
14
|
Posted - 2012.09.17 14:22:00 -
[341] - Quote
I was fortunate to see some of that in person by the amazing presentations of CCP Tallest and CCP Guard at the eve-dust summerfest in Greece with a unique presentation with pictures of the new Caldari Destroyer that made us drool.
|
Oreb Wing
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
27
|
Posted - 2012.09.17 21:05:00 -
[342] - Quote
Selnix wrote:Oki Riverson wrote: Also could we get some faction destroyers pls? I mean the models ARE already there... ^_^ This please!
Perhaps replacing existing ship bonuses with a 25% fitting bonus to cpu&pg of weapons, keeping the existing layout (pre-winter changes), but dropping 2 highs down to racial specific slots. That would make one helluva ship. |
Furry Commander
Furry Armada
2
|
Posted - 2012.09.20 00:07:00 -
[343] - Quote
I think destroyers could use some love in general, they aren't necesarily always terribad, but they are frequently underwhelming
try this:
COERCER:
Destroyer skill bonuses: unchanged Slot layout: 8 H, 2 M (+1), 4 L Fittings: 90 PWG (+15), 175 CPU (+15) Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 700 (+12) / 950 (+90) / 800 (+70) Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap per second): 700 (-3) / 370 s / 1.9 Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 255 (+3) / 2.75 (-0.1485) / 4.28 s Drones (bandwidth / bay): 0 / 0 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 30km / 525 / 6 Sensor strength: 10 Radar Signature radius: 62
CORMORANT:
Destroyer skill bonuses: unchanged Slot layout: 8 H, 4 M, 2 L (+1) Turrets 8 (+1) Fittings: 70 PWG (+15), 225 CPU (+10) Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 950 (+90) / 700 (+12) / 700 (+23) Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap per second): 600 (-25) / 320 s (-13) / 1.9 Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 250 (+1) / 2.5 (+0.231) / 4.42 s Drones (bandwidth / bay): 0 / 0 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 36km / 475 / 7 Sensor strength: 12 Gravimetric Signature radius: 65 (-3)
CATALYST:
Destroyer skill bonuses: unchanged Slot layout: 8 H, 3 M, 3 L Fittings: 75 PWG (+015), 175 CPU (+ 5) Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 750 (+5) / 850 (+ 47) / 900 (+118) Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap per second): 650 (+64) / 350 s (+37.5) / 1.8 Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 265 (-1) / 2.45 (-0.352) / 4.04 s Drones (bandwidth / bay): 5 / 5 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 33km / 500 / 7 Sensor strength: 11 Magnetometric Signature radius: 68 (+3)
THRASHER:
Destroyer skill bonuses: unchanged Slot layout: 8 H, 3 M, 3 L (+ 1) Fittings: 70 PWG, 175 CPU (+ 5) Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 850 (+ 47) / 750 (+5) / 750 (+125) Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap per second): 550 (+3) / 290 s (-1.6) / 1.9 Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 270 (+2) / 2.89 / 4.17 s Drones (bandwidth / bay): 0 / 0 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 27km / 550 / 6 Sensor strength: 9 Ladar Signature radius: 56
Its only a few small changes and an extra slot and the PWG and CPU numbers are probably ned more fine tuned, but i think this setup will give a better performance overall, especially if small artillary got a slight reduction in fitting as well |
Mildew Wolf
52
|
Posted - 2012.09.20 05:42:00 -
[344] - Quote
3 mid corm? ouch |
Soon Shin
Caucasian Culture Club Transmission Lost
133
|
Posted - 2012.09.20 05:45:00 -
[345] - Quote
Furry Commander wrote:I think destroyers could use some love in general, they aren't necesarily always terribad, but they are frequently underwhelming
try this:
COERCER:
Destroyer skill bonuses: unchanged Slot layout: 8 H, 2 M (+1), 4 L Fittings: 90 PWG (+15), 175 CPU (+15) Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 700 (+12) / 950 (+90) / 800 (+70) Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap per second): 700 (-3) / 370 s / 1.9 Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 255 (+3) / 2.75 (-0.1485) / 4.28 s Drones (bandwidth / bay): 0 / 0 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 30km / 525 / 6 Sensor strength: 10 Radar Signature radius: 62
CORMORANT:
Destroyer skill bonuses: unchanged Slot layout: 8 H, 4 M, 2 L (+1) Turrets 8 (+1) Fittings: 70 PWG (+15), 225 CPU (+10) Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 950 (+90) / 700 (+12) / 700 (+23) Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap per second): 600 (-25) / 320 s (-13) / 1.9 Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 250 (+1) / 2.5 (+0.231) / 4.42 s Drones (bandwidth / bay): 0 / 0 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 36km / 475 / 7 Sensor strength: 12 Gravimetric Signature radius: 65 (-3)
CATALYST:
Destroyer skill bonuses: unchanged Slot layout: 8 H, 3 M, 3 L Fittings: 75 PWG (+015), 175 CPU (+ 5) Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 750 (+5) / 850 (+ 47) / 900 (+118) Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap per second): 650 (+64) / 350 s (+37.5) / 1.8 Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 265 (-1) / 2.45 (-0.352) / 4.04 s Drones (bandwidth / bay): 5 / 5 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 33km / 500 / 7 Sensor strength: 11 Magnetometric Signature radius: 68 (+3)
THRASHER:
Destroyer skill bonuses: unchanged Slot layout: 8 H, 3 M, 3 L (+ 1) Fittings: 70 PWG, 175 CPU (+ 5) Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 850 (+ 47) / 750 (+5) / 750 (+125) Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap per second): 550 (+3) / 290 s (-1.6) / 1.9 Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 270 (+2) / 2.89 / 4.17 s Drones (bandwidth / bay): 0 / 0 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 27km / 550 / 6 Sensor strength: 9 Ladar Signature radius: 56
Its only a few small changes and an extra slot and the PWG and CPU numbers are probably ned more fine tuned, but i think this setup will give a better performance overall, especially if small artillary got a slight reduction in fitting as well
That now is better and makes more sense. |
ColdCutz
Pwny Nation
31
|
Posted - 2012.09.20 06:00:00 -
[346] - Quote
Hi CCP Ytterbium. Whatcha thinkin' about? Yay or Nay? Testing out the extra slots on the dev servers? It's great to be able to hash these things out ahead of time on the feedback threads - just curious what your thoughts are on the slots and weapons hardpoint requests. |
Hannott Thanos
Notorious Legion
116
|
Posted - 2012.09.20 07:08:00 -
[347] - Quote
After testing the "no-changes Catalyst", I stand by my previous statement. Add some 10-20 PG and 5 CPU and remove 2 turret hardpoints.
Edit: Oh, and screw the drone. The hassle to deploy it is not worth the dps it adds. |
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
1143
|
Posted - 2012.09.20 10:46:00 -
[348] - Quote
ColdCutz wrote:Hi CCP Ytterbium. Whatcha thinkin' about? Yay or Nay? Testing out the extra slots on the dev servers? It's great to be able to hash these things out ahead of time on the feedback threads - just curious what your thoughts are on the slots and weapons hardpoint requests.
Been busy designing the new ore frigate and destroyers. We definitely like the Coercer second medium slot. The Catalyst and Cormorant changes are still quite up in the air. We don't want to add extra slots for the sake of it though, so we'll either keep the current Cormorant layout or give it back it fourth medium slot back at the expense of the low, not decided yet.
We'll definitely have some iteration time on destroyers, this class is tricky to balance, especially with the new hulls coming out. |
|
Satracz
Meteoric Security Supply Service
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.20 10:58:00 -
[349] - Quote
If you not give the Cormorant an extra medslot ,better give it the old layout back with 1 Low. The Base Lockrange is crapy in my eyes,its need an Sensorbooster if the 150 Rails are fitted... But i would like it if you Guys increase the Lockrange about 6km + more,if it is an option the 3/2 Slots are OK too... Ah...and a bit more speed would be nice...only a little |
Gypsio III
Chemikals Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
361
|
Posted - 2012.09.20 11:02:00 -
[350] - Quote
Four meds for the Cormorant, definitely.
(More room for tracking disruptors, heh) |
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
213
|
Posted - 2012.09.20 12:14:00 -
[351] - Quote
Cormorant definately would be a good destroyer with 4 meds and 2 lows - just remove the 8th hi-slot... It might give some grey areas that you will have to think through but it will make the cormorant a nice destroyer. But yes then if you absolitely have to choose I think the double lowslot layout would give the most flexible/interesting fitting possibilities? |
Azula Kishtar
Lonely among the Stars
10
|
Posted - 2012.09.20 15:33:00 -
[352] - Quote
After playing around with the Coercer and Cormorant on Duality i have to say that i do like the new Coercer.
Fitting the Small Focused Pulse Lasers (the old Medium Pulses) is easy enough to make up for the loss of the low. I can use my current kite fit with FPL instead of DLP without losing anything (well, i lose some tracking, but haven't found this to be a problem), but get a long point on top of it. I'm sure people will find exciting new fits, too, when they play around with it.
However i fear the Catalyst gets overshadowed by the new Coercer. The rail version loses the main advantage over Scorch Pulse Coercer: the second mid as Coercer now can do the same. Blaster Catalyst just isn't as good as it may look on paper.
I really feel the Catalyst needs some rethinking.
I'm not sold yet on the Cormorant either. I only tested the 100k sniping Cormorant which actually works still very good/even better than before. It has more DPS and enough lock range if you don't fit an MWD but you are of course highly dependent on bookmarks and good warp-ins. MWD fit should work too though with some loss in range.
Still, i think the Corm loses a lot of uniqueness and it isn't bad now really. If you really think it needs a buff i'd day you should find another way to buff it without touching the medslots. |
Furry Commander
Furry Armada
3
|
Posted - 2012.09.20 18:24:00 -
[353] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:ColdCutz wrote:Hi CCP Ytterbium. Whatcha thinkin' about? Yay or Nay? Testing out the extra slots on the dev servers? It's great to be able to hash these things out ahead of time on the feedback threads - just curious what your thoughts are on the slots and weapons hardpoint requests. Been busy designing the new ore frigate and destroyers. We definitely like the Coercer second medium slot. The Catalyst and Cormorant changes are still quite up in the air. We don't want to add extra slots for the sake of it though, so we'll either keep the current Cormorant layout or give it back it fourth medium slot back at the expense of the low, not decided yet. We'll definitely have some iteration time on destroyers, this class is tricky to balance, especially with the new hulls coming out.
I understand that adding slots for the sake of adding them is misguided, but there is good justification for it in the case. all of the new frigates have 6 or more combined lows/mids. all of them. Having 6 on a destroyer seems fair and balanced to me and with a slight boost to CPU and PWG (considering the other modifications you are making) and possibly a wee bit more HP i think that would finally stabalize them in comparison to the frigates and cruisers as you are developing them now.
|
Eli Green
The Arrow Project
18
|
Posted - 2012.09.20 20:18:00 -
[354] - Quote
The new coercer makes an excellent sniper boat, with the ability to fit a full rack of small focused beams, and a t2 mwd (w/ an RCU II) it can do about 100 dps at 44km w/gleam. Fitting a SeBo to help target out to that range, (or using rigs which i haven't tried yet) making them good support for a small frig/dessie gang that has enough brawlers to keep points, and take fire. |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
289
|
Posted - 2012.09.20 20:36:00 -
[355] - Quote
Eli Green wrote:The new coercer makes an excellent sniper boat, with the ability to fit a full rack of small focused beams, and a t2 mwd (w/ an RCU II) it can do about 100 dps at 44km w/gleam. Fitting a SeBo to help target out to that range, (or using rigs which i haven't tried yet) making them good support for a small frig/dessie gang that has enough brawlers to keep points, and take fire. Single T1 rig gives you 46km targeting range. You mean with Aurora, surely
Current Coercer gets 150+ dps at 40km with Fourier TE, 2xHSII and a T2 suitcase. Increase that to 170+ by swapping luggage for another HSII.
Revision means it is worse off in all conceivable configurations, aka. it is being nerfed.
Up the grid and base stats as planned but don't destroy the ship by moving the slot .. only alternative is to move a high to the mids as the decrease in damage is not nearly as harsh as the blanket nerfage the loss of a low entails.
|
Zarnak Wulf
Imperial Outlaws
570
|
Posted - 2012.09.20 20:43:00 -
[356] - Quote
Eli Green wrote:The new coercer makes an excellent sniper boat, with the ability to fit a full rack of small focused beams, and a t2 mwd (w/ an RCU II) it can do about 100 dps at 44km w/gleam. Fitting a SeBo to help target out to that range, (or using rigs which i haven't tried yet) making them good support for a small frig/dessie gang that has enough brawlers to keep points, and take fire.
I was getting 225 DPS at 53km with a 60km lock range. The thing works and it's nasty. I think the first thing I killed as a new kitey Kestrel using light missiles. The response he posted in local was 'WTF' I was pushing 391 dps at 14km. The ability to switch ammo on the fly I can't praise enough.
The Pulse Coercer was also nice. I kept forgetting I had a point. I was doing about 350 DPS at 19km with 5k EHP. 491 DPS with Conflag. 'Nuff Said.
The Cormorant surprised me. Someone had a MASB version that was particularly hard to kill. For my own gank sniper fit I was able to fit 150s, a light missile launcher, MWD, two SB, and two MFS II. I was doing around 350 DPS at 23km. I could lock out to 109km and spike would give me 83km optimal. 167 DPS.
The rail Catalyst is comparable to the Beam Coercer. It does however lose out on the ammo flexibility front. I'll sum up by saying the Thrasher has some real competition here. |
Songbird
61
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 00:09:00 -
[357] - Quote
you need to make tier 2 destroyers with cruiser weapons :) |
Eckyy
EVE University Ivy League
11
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 04:34:00 -
[358] - Quote
My Coercer fit has been buffed in every way.
8x Medium Pulse (Small Focused?) 1x MWD 2x Heatsink, 1x TE, 1x Nano
2x locus 1x ANCR
200/200 CPU and 108.72/113.44 grid
New fit drops the nano but can fit without one of the ANCR and thus can have a polycarbon instead (or other fun rig). It also gains 8 CPU, which is perfect for a sensor booster for faster wtfbbq.
An alternative fit is to put a +CPU rig in on in place of an ANCR and maybe drop to a named TE, thus allowing a warp scrambler in the extra mid. |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
614
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 13:58:00 -
[359] - Quote
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
The Pulse Coercer was also nice. I kept forgetting I had a point.
I think we are seeing that although people would often complain about the lack of the midslot due to not having a point, few people will fit a point on it anyway. The large amount of small gun damage often makes it unnecessary.
I never used a tracking computer before but I might use one for this new destroyer. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Allandri
Liandri Industrial Liandri Covenant
6
|
Posted - 2012.09.22 03:31:00 -
[360] - Quote
From what I have seen on the test server, the new coercer is a mean little ship |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |