Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 37 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 13 post(s) |
Omnathious Deninard
Extrinsic Operations
154
|
Posted - 2012.09.28 23:55:00 -
[181] - Quote
Kesthely wrote:Giving the Gallente destroyer a possiblity of 10 drones is a bad idea, not due to server lag issues or anything wrong with fielding 10 light drones, but the fact that that will give you a 50 mbit 50 bay minimum, and thus the medium scout drones can be used.
This will take its intended role away (anti frigate platform)
As an alternative, i'm suggesting a role bonus change: Give it an increased warp disruptor range Role bonus: 50% bonus to warp disruptor range
This will keep the gallente (drone) pilots happy and in line with its racials (although i do think you should consider dropping the mids to 2 the same as the amarr one then 5 medium drones dps is not equal to 10 light drone dps using hobgoblins and hammerheads with max skills 10 hobgoblins 297dps 5 hammerheads 237.6 dps i am most worried about server load and not dps difference, plus medium drones track for crap. if the server can handle it the gallente bonuses would be great as such +10% drone damage and hitpoints +10% drone tracking and optimum range role bonus +5 drone control Ideas for Dorne Improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1658683#post1658683 Updated 9/21/12 |
Spr09
East India Ore Trade Intrepid Crossing
51
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 00:00:00 -
[182] - Quote
This makes no sense to me, please make the gallente have drone bonuses instead of hybrid turret bonuses, then give it 50 bandwidth. Especially since the amarr will make a better drone boat than the gallente with the current stats. |
Galphii
Sileo In Pacis THE SPACE P0LICE
68
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 00:10:00 -
[183] - Quote
Still not sold on the idea that all destroyers must be anti-frigate hulls with crap defences. So both destroyers for each race are attack line, and you're going to eventually force players to train through the destroyer skill to level 4 to get cruisers. "Enjoy your glass cannons, noob pilots, because that's all we got'.
Yeah, I'd prefer to see these new destroyers be part of the combat line, with more defensive ability (low/mid slots). You can always add an almost identical glass cannon down the track a bit. Do I think this is going to happen? No. Had to say it though.
Like the changes to the DDA and light missile fittings, they were much needed |
Ares Desideratus
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 00:14:00 -
[184] - Quote
These are all bad.
The Amarr one looks like some kind of fat Sentinal / Vengeance hybrid ship with less tank than a Punisher. I don't like it's mixed weapons systems. One thing that definitely should be mandatory on this one is a bonus to armor resistances, some decent armor HP, and in my opinion, a smaller signature than the other races.
The Gallente one is just... a Catalyst with less rails and more Drones, for whatever reason that is... What does that ship bring to the table that a Catalyst doesn't already do aside from drones? It needs more of a role, make it fully dedicated to drones like the Tristan or make it an active tanking brawler like the Incursus, I says.
The Caldari one.... well, I'm surprised it doesn't have more mid-slots, actually, but that's a good thing. It's going to be slow, but it's damage and range are going to be ludicrously over-powered. This is truly going to be the new Drake. People who say "ohh, but it won't have nearly the tank of the Drake!!11" Those people are truly, truly stupid. It's a destroyer, why would it have close to the tank of a Drake? The point is it's going to be a scary scary missile platform with stupid damage and damage projection, all on a tiny little 10 Million ISK Destroyer hull. Anyone who can't grasp this can sit on it. I mean, look at what a group of Condors is capable of doing these days! It's funny, but a few Condors are one of the scariest things you can run into right now.
The Minmatar one isn't even worth commenting on, really. Why are all these Minmatar ships being turned into missile boats? You guys gonna completely phase-out missiles as a primarily-Caldari weapons system? |
Aglais
Liberation Army BricK sQuAD.
103
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 00:14:00 -
[185] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:Isn't the caldari one just going to kill any frigate instantly within 60km?
In other words, it's going to be a valid anti-frigate ship.
Still I'm kind of unimpressed with the slot layout of the new Caldari destroyer. Why only three med slots? Caldari are renowned for having more medium slots than other races, all the time. Having only three meds, and then two lows, means it won't be able to really fit any kind of defense whatsoever- I'm aware that destroyers aren't ever meant to be capable of shrugging off everything ever, but really? I'm pretty sure that there are going to be frigates that will be more resilient than this ship. |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
2285
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 00:29:00 -
[186] - Quote
Aglais wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Isn't the caldari one just going to kill any frigate instantly within 60km?
In other words, it's going to be a valid anti-frigate ship. Still I'm kind of unimpressed with the slot layout of the new Caldari destroyer. Why only three med slots? Caldari are renowned for having more medium slots than other races, all the time. Having only three meds, and then two lows, means it won't be able to really fit any kind of defense whatsoever- I'm aware that destroyers aren't ever meant to be capable of shrugging off everything ever, but really? I'm pretty sure that there are going to be frigates that will be more resilient than this ship.
I think there should a difference between "valid anti-frigate ship" and "virtually guaranteed win against any frigate".
-Liang
Ed: And really, it's not just frigates that should worry. I'm pretty concerned that the ship as a whole will be massively OP. Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
Heribeck Weathers
The Executioners Capital Punishment.
12
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 00:33:00 -
[187] - Quote
*Has wet dreams about Condor, new caldari dessy wolf packs killign everything |
Daichi Yamato
Swamp Bucket Swamp Bucket Empire
13
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 00:59:00 -
[188] - Quote
like the look of them all except the gallente one. seems a waste to have a turret bonus on drone ships, especially when it doesn't add up to as much damage as a pure blaster boat (not saying make drone boats dps kings, i'm just saying take off the turret bonuses). or if this is a rail boat, then change the drone bonus.
though the rails might be nice for adding ranged dps for missions, i dnt see it having much clout in a pvp gang. removing the bonuses for one weapon system for tanky, warp disruptor or tracking/drone bonuses might be nice. |
Eckyy
EVE University Ivy League
27
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 01:04:00 -
[189] - Quote
Ares Desideratus wrote:The Minmatar one isn't even worth commenting on, really. Why are all these Minmatar ships being turned into missile boats? You guys gonna completely phase-out missiles as a primarily-Caldari weapons system?
They're filling out the racial weapon systems:
Amarr - Lasers / Drones Caldari - Missles / Hybrids Gallente - Hybrids / Drones Minmatar - Projectiles / Missiles
I would like to see the Caldari destroyer moved away from a kinetic bonus, even if you feel the need to reduce its damage somewhat. 5% RoF with 7 launchers wouldn't be bad, it would deal 93% the damage with full damage type selection.
I believe the Gallente boat should have more drone love and less turret love, it does seem silly to me too that the bay is smaller than the Amarr destroyers (which you better not shrink!). 5 turrets and a change from a damage to a tracking bonus would be an appropriate change, but how about changing it to a drone velcoity and tracking bonus? It would read like this:
5% bonus to drone velocity and tracking per level (or maybe just 10% tracking) 10% bonus to drone damage and hitpoints per level Role bonus: 50% bonus to hybrid turret optimal range
I like the Amarr destroyer. I appreciate that you've basically taken away the option of making it a damage monster with the split weapon system - it strongly disincentivizes fitting damage mods. It's like a cross between a miniature Curse and a Typoon, two ships I really love because of their unusualness.
The Minmatar destroyer I don't have strong feelings about. I'd say I'm not really in love with the idea of giving a destroyer hull a bonus to MWD sig bloom - we already have 12 interceptors in the game, this will make 13. I'm not suggesting a change but I'd be open to others' suggestions. |
Zarnak Wulf
Imperial Outlaws
597
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 01:08:00 -
[190] - Quote
Amarr Destroyer:
I think after the ooo's and ahhhh's wear off from the novelty - most people will realize that this ship isn't as good as they think it is. Let's review:
The nos/nuets will have a range of 12km. Pulse lasers also will also have a range of 10 - 12km with Scorch. The hit point bonus for the drones is overkill. If the tank on the destroyer lasts longer then three flights of light drones, your opponent is really doing something wrong. Lastly, drone damage will range from 100 - 125 before Drone mods. That isn't alot of projection beyond 12km. Even then - the Drone damage bonus REALLY infringes on the Gallente. Lastly - three launchers?!? I thought we were trying to move away from that. I'm a fully skilled bitter vet. But it isn't very Amarr noob friendly at all.
In summary, we have a scary ship at under 12 km that is not very good beyond that. Here's my fix:
Lose the drone bonus. 75m^3 for a small ship is novelty enough. Give the ship an optimal bonus instead. Upgrade it to 4 turrets. This gives you a ship that can at least project significant damage. It may not have the firepower the upgraded Coercer offers - but it will be immune to one of the Coercer's glaring weaknesses - frigates getting under it's guns.
Caldari Destroyer:
Liang is right. It's too much. The obvious solution is to convert a high or two to something else.
Gallente Destroyer:
I've posted my thoughts here. I would ask the devs to go back and look at the Catalyst. I know you imagine everyone to use it with ion blasters - but a rail Cat is incredibly dangerous in it's own rights. I've crunched some numbers and the damage projection between a Rail Cat and this new destroyer do not vary enough to justify the delayed damage. If you were to strip the optimal bonus off of the Cat and give it a double falloff bonus though.....
Minmatar Destroyer:
My HG Halo Clone with Loki boosts will be MWD'ing around with a sig radius of 75m in this thing. 69.4m with a blingy MWD. Lots of hillarity should ensue. |
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
311
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 01:09:00 -
[191] - Quote
Ares Desideratus wrote:These are all bad.
The Amarr one looks like some kind of fat Sentinal / Vengeance hybrid ship with less tank than a Punisher. I don't like it's mixed weapons systems. One thing that definitely should be mandatory on this one is a bonus to armor resistances, some decent armor HP, and in my opinion, a smaller signature radius than the other races. Are destroyers designed to have resilience as one of their feature traits? My understanding was they were not, thus a strong defensive bonus seems inappropriate. The neut bonus does seem out of place though.
Ares Desideratus wrote:The Gallente one is just... a Catalyst with less rails and more Drones, for whatever reason that is... What does that ship bring to the table that a Catalyst doesn't already do aside from drones? It needs more of a role, make it fully dedicated to drones like the Tristan or make it an active tanking brawler like the Incursus, I says. Drones are the secondary weapons of the Gallente, and this is a class based mainly on direct combat rather than ewar/logistics/etc. So instead of drones we would have to do um... hybrids again?
Ares Desideratus wrote:The Caldari one.... well, I'm surprised it doesn't have more mid-slots, actually, but that's a good thing. It's going to be slow, but it's damage and range are going to be ludicrously over-powered. This is truly going to be the new Drake. People who say "ohh, but it won't have nearly the tank of the Drake!!11" Those people are truly, truly stupid. It's a destroyer, why would it have close to the tank of a Drake? The point is it's going to be a scary scary missile platform with stupid damage and damage projection, all on a tiny little 10 Million ISK Destroyer hull. Anyone who can't grasp this can sit on it. I mean, look at what a group of Condors is capable of doing these days! It's funny, but a few Condors are one of the scariest things you can run into right now. Odd how you say this one rightfully shouldn't have a strong tank from the shield resist race but the Amarr one should have a resist bonus. |
Eckyy
EVE University Ivy League
27
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 01:10:00 -
[192] - Quote
Zarnak Wulf wrote:Amarr Destroyer:
I think after the ooo's and ahhhh's wear off from the novelty - most people will realize that this ship isn't as good as they think it is. Let's review:
The nos/nuets will have a range of 12km. Pulse lasers also will also have a range of 10 - 12km with Scorch. The hit point bonus for the drones is overkill. If the tank on the destroyer lasts longer then three flights of light drones, your opponent is really doing something wrong. Lastly, drone damage will range from 100 - 125 before Drone mods. That isn't alot of projection beyond 12km. Even then - the Drone damage bonus REALLY infringes on the Gallente. Lastly - three launchers?!? I thought we were trying to move away from that. I'm a fully skilled bitter vet. But it isn't very Amarr noob friendly at all.
In summary, we have a scary ship at under 12 km that is not very good beyond that. Here's my fix:
Lose the drone bonus. 75m^3 for a small ship is novelty enough. Give the ship an optimal bonus instead. Upgrade it to 4 turrets. This gives you a ship that can at least project significant damage. It may not have the firepower the upgraded Coercer offers - but it will be immune to one of the Coercer's glaring weaknesses - frigates getting under it's guns.
Wait a sec. 4 turrets + optimal bonus... doesn't that make it a crappier Gallente destroyer? |
Daichi Yamato
Swamp Bucket Swamp Bucket Empire
13
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 01:11:00 -
[193] - Quote
Ares Desideratus wrote:These are all bad.
The Amarr one looks like some kind of fat Sentinal / Vengeance hybrid ship with less tank than a Punisher. I don't like it's mixed weapons systems. One thing that definitely should be mandatory on this one is a bonus to armor resistances, some decent armor HP, and in my opinion, a smaller signature radius than the other races.
destroyers are designed to have more gank than tank, so resist boost would be un characterful (and as i say that i regret suggesting the gallente might be better with a tanky bonus). also, amarr shouldn't have smaller sig radius than minmatar. its fine where it is.
Ares Desideratus wrote: The Minmatar one isn't even worth commenting on, really. Why are all these Minmatar ships being turned into missile boats? You guys gonna completely phase-out missiles as a primarily-Caldari weapons system?
missiles have been a significant part of the minmatar race since the beginning. but looks like CCP are doing away with some split systems and providing missile boosts to some minnie ships. This in no way makes minnie a more missile based race than caldari and it makes u look silly to suggest so.
i generally agree with u else where tho. |
Alara IonStorm
3196
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 01:15:00 -
[194] - Quote
Galphii wrote: Yeah, I'd prefer to see these new destroyers be part of the combat line, with more defensive ability (low/mid slots). You can always add an almost identical glass cannon down the track a bit. Do I think this is going to happen? No. Had to say it though.
Same.
I would like to see the DPS of these things cut and more tank added to the mix. Make the old ones the glass cannons and the new ones heavier.
|
Gorn Arming
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
53
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 01:16:00 -
[195] - Quote
At first glance the Caldari one looks awfully strong. |
serras bang
Lucien Coven
27
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 01:22:00 -
[196] - Quote
I'm Down wrote:If I'm not mistaken, this puts the new Caldari Missile destroyer in the 210 - 260 DPS at 60+ km range
Does this not negate everything you have already said about HML's, range and damage projection considering this is following the current trends and not the new path you guys were trying to lay down?
Arty thrasher will have nearly 25% lower alpha strike at 20km shorter optimal and more damage reduction from tracking compared to the double boost to the missiles this patch seems to be offering.
not really as a kestral could operate at around 70k |
Zarnak Wulf
Imperial Outlaws
598
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 01:25:00 -
[197] - Quote
Eckyy wrote:Zarnak Wulf wrote:Amarr Destroyer:
I think after the ooo's and ahhhh's wear off from the novelty - most people will realize that this ship isn't as good as they think it is. Let's review:
The nos/nuets will have a range of 12km. Pulse lasers also will also have a range of 10 - 12km with Scorch. The hit point bonus for the drones is overkill. If the tank on the destroyer lasts longer then three flights of light drones, your opponent is really doing something wrong. Lastly, drone damage will range from 100 - 125 before Drone mods. That isn't alot of projection beyond 12km. Even then - the Drone damage bonus REALLY infringes on the Gallente. Lastly - three launchers?!? I thought we were trying to move away from that. I'm a fully skilled bitter vet. But it isn't very Amarr noob friendly at all.
In summary, we have a scary ship at under 12 km that is not very good beyond that. Here's my fix:
Lose the drone bonus. 75m^3 for a small ship is novelty enough. Give the ship an optimal bonus instead. Upgrade it to 4 turrets. This gives you a ship that can at least project significant damage. It may not have the firepower the upgraded Coercer offers - but it will be immune to one of the Coercer's glaring weaknesses - frigates getting under it's guns. Wait a sec. 4 turrets + optimal bonus... doesn't that make it a crappier Gallente destroyer?
I think the nuet/nos bonus speaks for itself in that regard. But expecting a slow destroyer to rush up to a frigate at 12km to apply it's damage - that's not going to work. This boat will get kited to death by everything. Even with three nuets and a flight of hobgoblins - most high dps destroyers will put this thing down before it can suck them dry.
My rail cat does 414 DPS at 14km and 289 DPS at 23km. The 'upgraded' coercer I put together on the test server has a long point, puts 350 dps out to 19km, and has 5k ehp. With conflag - it does 491 dps. That is what this drone boat is up against. 115 DPS from turrets with no range and 155 delayed drone DPS aren't going to cut it. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
220
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 01:36:00 -
[198] - Quote
That Minmatar destroyer looks like it doesn't fit in at all... Forcing it into a MWD role to use bonus? Taking on the roles of AF?
I could understand a shield boost bonus and a strong base velocity with a 4 medslot layout, but this seems weird...
Also the energy weapon bonus on the amarr is usually a good bonus but why not keep that for T2 ships and get it a optimal bonus that will be usefull at range with the small drone swarm? Im happy about new things but crossing into T2 territory in situations where it might not even work seems "messy" to me.
Pinky |
Bouh Revetoile
Barricade.
73
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 01:37:00 -
[199] - Quote
Problem of the gallente destroyer is the two wasted high slot. Nothing will ever fit in there. That mean that this ship have in fact 3 less slot than the caldari and minmatar ones...
Seriously, what to do with these high slots ? Neut/nos ? You wouldn't be able to fit anything other than electron or 75mm, there's not missile hard point and you would need 50 more tf of CPU to fit a drone link augmentor. So it's short range or two wasted slots. Well, you may be able to use them for overload I guess... |
Lili Lu
499
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 01:45:00 -
[200] - Quote
This is a very disappointing op and thread. Where to begin.
Gallente: Seriously? A 50% optimal role bonus? That already exists on all the existing destroyers And now it will only apply to 4 turrets on this new destroyer. Fix the catalyst, give it more grid, and make this new destroyer something new and not another split weapon gallente failure. Also, a 25/50 dronebay that is not as good as the Amarr one is a second slap in the face.
Make the second bonus the tracking bonus the Tristan is getting. And then make the role bonus a 10m3 dronebay per level. Thus at level 5 the dronebay would be 100m3 and thus better than the Amarr dronebay. Drone destroyers are going to lose lots of drones (isk will become a ***** but oh well) so they'd better have lots of spares. Then give the ship another turret to make up for losing the 5% hybrid damage bonus.
Amarr: I don't like your giving a tech I ship a neuting range or amount bonus. And to only give it 2 mids doesn't work for that (a cap recharge bonus still leaves the ship vulnerable to medium and heavy neut alpha). So, how does it fuel the neuts and still have prop and tackle mods? It doesn't.
But then how do you make this ship stand out? Well, no problem with keying on the missile launchers. The coercer is a laser boat. The worm is a drone+missile boat but it shield tanks. So this destroyer can be a drone+missile boat that armor tanks. Give it 4 launchers and no turrets. The second ship bonus could be a drone tracking bonus like the Gallente destroyer. Then the role bonus can be a +5% em damage or rof bonus on the launchers. This split weapon bonus paradigm actually will satisfy Amarr tech II Khanid Innovation fans I would bet.
Minmatar: Ok the missile boats have to be carerful not to be absolute murder on frigates. The Caldari one is game breaker, but I'll get to that last. The damge bonus is fine. The range role bonus is maybe ok, but I'll comment on it with the Caldari comments below. But I have no idea what you are doing with this new mwd sig reduction bonus.
I haven't run the math on what that does to the size of the ship in powered flight. Regardless you are shorting the offensive capacity of this ship by restricting it to 7 launchers and then giving in 2 defensive features (the sig reduction and the extra low slot). This seems to be breaking the mould on this class of new destroyers that all are getting offensive bonuses only except for this ship. I suppose the extra low could be filled with another BCS as against the Caldari one, or a TE and thus something like what the Caldari one's proposed bonus is. But I really can't figure this out, so I'll leave this for others to comment on.
Caldari: And here is where I have real concerns. The damage bonus is fine. The range and explosion velocity bonuses though I'm concerned about especially in conjunction with the new TC/TE mechanics. Even without the new mods these bonuses with the increased light missile damage and the other ship damage bonus could alone make these ships absolute frigate murderers. It could very well moot all the work you are doing on frigs. The drone boats drones can be killed, and the travel time on the drones is slower and very more noticiable on the screen. But killer missiles are not so apparent (especially since many of us have the trails turned off for frame rate issues, and even if not they are not going to be blinking yellow as they travel toward the targeted ship).
I would like to see the math on what a 50% range velocity bonus will mean in conjunction with new mTCs/mTEs. Also, ditto for the secondary explosion velocity bonuses and the new missile tracking mods. You absolutley have to avoid making these two missile destroyers into Instant frigate nullifers. Be very careful with this. Maybe post some numbers for us. |
|
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
891
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 01:53:00 -
[201] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Galphii wrote: Yeah, I'd prefer to see these new destroyers be part of the combat line, with more defensive ability (low/mid slots). You can always add an almost identical glass cannon down the track a bit. Do I think this is going to happen? No. Had to say it though.
Same. I would like more then glass Destroyers introduced along side the lighter ships. I would like to see the DPS of these things cut and more tank added to the mix. Make the old ones the glass cannons and the new ones heavier.
+1 to this message. Do something different.
Mimidae Risk Solutions Recruiting |
The VC's
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
28
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 02:01:00 -
[202] - Quote
I'm going to buck the trend here and say the Gallente dessy look pretty hot. I'll be a better solo boat than the cat. The optimal bounus lends itself to void and null. Maybe an extra turret would be nice. It'll be pretty ferocious.
The catalyst is better as a rail boat IMO.
And as for the amarr destroyer. If you ever fit turrets on it you'll be missing it's trick. The equivalent of 3.6 medium neuts with 324 cap alpha. Who needs turrets. |
Lili Lu
500
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 02:05:00 -
[203] - Quote
The VC's wrote: The catalyst is better as a rail boat IMO. Have you looked at trying to fit 150mm rails on the new Catalyst? |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
893
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 02:09:00 -
[204] - Quote
Lili Lu wrote:The VC's wrote: The catalyst is better as a rail boat IMO. Have you looked at trying to fit 150mm rails on the new Catalyst?
I've seen 400 DPS rail fits on a catalyst that can shoot 30km+ or whatever it is.
They're pretty gross, 3 of my noobie corpies in t1 frigates charging simultaneously at it didn't even make it within 10km of the thing. Mimidae Risk Solutions Recruiting |
The VC's
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
28
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 02:09:00 -
[205] - Quote
Lili Lu wrote:The VC's wrote: The catalyst is better as a rail boat IMO. Have you looked at trying to fit 150mm rails on the new Catalyst?
Yeah. Do-able if you really need the range. Still works well with 125's. The extra tracking on the 125's is more forgiving, I've found.
A very underestimated weapon system, railguns. |
Aaron Greil
Royal Imperial Navy Reserves
34
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 02:19:00 -
[206] - Quote
I agree with the growing sentiment that these new destroyers have poorly defined roles and need a completely different design philosophy.
I support the idea of making them tankier and less dps. With all these new changes, I feel like I'm losing the core of amarr: thick armor and lasers. With frigates and cruisers its easier to have specialized ships because the ship class is so much larger. If we only had two crusiers or frigates, what would they be? The secondary weapon system is okay for a single ship in the large ship classes and for tech 2, but in small classes like this, they should really follow the core design philosophy of the race. Why can't we have a mini maller/rupture If you want clear ship progressions, then make these follow the clear progression of the patterns you have already started building.
For the amarr version, how about something like this? This is just something off the top of my head, so it (naturally) would need to be adjusted for balance, but:
5 highs, 5 turrets (no drones) 3 mids 4 lows
5% to laser damage per level 5% to armor resistances per level special ability: 50% to laser cap use
Give it a (nearly) cruiser sized tank for a little less speed than the coercer, with less damage. New players would actually fly this, and it would fill a fairly unique role of fast, yet high tank ship, for older players. AFs would still outperform this in speed, and in the case of the retribution, be using a different weapon system. I guess basically, this would be a stepping stone to an AF.
Do something with shield resistances for caldari, shield rep for minmatar, and armor rep for gallente, using missiles, projectiles, and drones, respectively. Give them a proper progression into other ships. As an older amarr pilot, I would never fly the new amarr destroyer. If I wanted frig pvp, there are a half dozen better amarr based ships for the job. |
Gogela
Freeport Exploration Loosely Affiliated Pirates Alliance
1176
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 02:27:00 -
[207] - Quote
I like all of them... and these things look dangerous. A lot of faction and T2 frigs will fall prey to them I'll wager.
|
Aaron Greil
Royal Imperial Navy Reserves
34
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 02:37:00 -
[208] - Quote
Bloodpetal wrote:Alara IonStorm wrote:Galphii wrote: Yeah, I'd prefer to see these new destroyers be part of the combat line, with more defensive ability (low/mid slots). You can always add an almost identical glass cannon down the track a bit. Do I think this is going to happen? No. Had to say it though.
Same. I would like more then glass Destroyers introduced along side the lighter ships. I would like to see the DPS of these things cut and more tank added to the mix. Make the old ones the glass cannons and the new ones heavier. +1 to this message. Do something different.
QFT |
Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
58
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 02:41:00 -
[209] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
GALLENTE DESTROYER: Gallente are always about raw firepower
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 25 / 50 Gallente have usually had more bandwidth than Amarr since you introduced the bandwidth concept. Why not keep with that? Make this dessie all about firepower. Make it the assault dessie that can be cruiser hunter instead of just a frig hunter.
Give it (bandwidth / bay): 40 / 60, and then drop a turret or change the turret bonus to tracking or falloff or w/e.
That way if it's fitted up with medium drones it's dead meat against frigs. But with light drones it can still perform a decent job at frig hunting (not as well as the other dessies, but enough to make a frigs life seriously unpleasant).
|
Villanor
Polaris Rising Gentlemen's Agreement
1
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 03:21:00 -
[210] - Quote
I'm Down wrote:MIrple wrote:I'm Down wrote:If I'm not mistaken, this puts the new Caldari Missile destroyer in the 200 - 210 DPS at 60+ km range
Does this not negate everything you have already said about HML's, range and damage projection considering this is following the current trends and not the new path you guys were trying to lay down? Think these ships are meant to operate with precisions what would the range be with this type of ammo fitted? No, Light missiles are getting a boost to explosive velocity already this patch, and then this ship gets an added boost to hitting small fast targets And i was wrong, it hits up to 260 dps at 57km w/o rigs/TCs Ironically, this thing post changes is going to come awfully close to the drake in both dps and range with far less training time
For the love of god nobody uses drakes for their L33T awesome DPS. Drakes are great for how tanky they are for so little training. Tengu is the same just better in all aspects. Both have great tanks and reliable mediocre (compared to their equivalents) damage.
Tengu is OP a bit but this destroyer is lacking the tank that makes these other two so powerful.
TL;DR Drake dps is not why they are used and finally a missile glass cannon |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 37 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |