Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 .. 86 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 24 post(s) |
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
254
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 01:28:00 -
[1441] - Quote
Cajun Style wrote:Moonaura wrote:Leon Kalfren wrote:Wow Good Job Messing Up my game play for an other 2 month of retraining to be able to use Either Hurricaine or Cyclone Since im Gun Shield now i cant use the cyclone and cant use the Huricaine aswell
at least if your gona make the cyclone a missile boat make it a real one and remove all gun slot for more missile
Ps i was already prefering to stay in my rupture than moving to the cyclone now im stuck in it not by choice but cause of the messup your planning Yeah, the fact it isn't all missile hard points is a strange one, given that they said they are going to make the Typhoon all missiles as well, and now there are pure missile Minmitar frigates and cruisers. I really want to be here to see the tears for the Typhoon kick in. Should go something like this: 'I felt a great disturbance on the forums, as if millions of typhoon pilots suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened to the 1400 DPS Typhoon' Consider not being stupid. Those are utility highs. P.S. @ Moon's last post, the new ferox actually looks totally killer.
It looks totally killed lol. I will await the vast hordes of Ferox's that will no doubt be unleashed against us, and laugh as they die without capacitor to their new Prophecy overlords.
Thanks for calling me stupid. I'm doing something right then! We are recruiting talented pilots for innovative small gang PvP
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=175061 |
Cajun Style
Shattered Planet
8
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 01:49:00 -
[1442] - Quote
Moonaura wrote:Cajun Style wrote:Moonaura wrote:Leon Kalfren wrote:Wow Good Job Messing Up my game play for an other 2 month of retraining to be able to use Either Hurricaine or Cyclone Since im Gun Shield now i cant use the cyclone and cant use the Huricaine aswell
at least if your gona make the cyclone a missile boat make it a real one and remove all gun slot for more missile
Ps i was already prefering to stay in my rupture than moving to the cyclone now im stuck in it not by choice but cause of the messup your planning Yeah, the fact it isn't all missile hard points is a strange one, given that they said they are going to make the Typhoon all missiles as well, and now there are pure missile Minmitar frigates and cruisers. I really want to be here to see the tears for the Typhoon kick in. Should go something like this: 'I felt a great disturbance on the forums, as if millions of typhoon pilots suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened to the 1400 DPS Typhoon' Consider not being stupid. Those are utility highs. P.S. @ Moon's last post, the new ferox actually looks totally killer. It looks totally killed lol. I will await the vast hordes of Ferox's that will no doubt be unleashed against us, and laugh as they die without capacitor to their new Prophecy overlords. Thanks for calling me stupid. I'm doing something right then!
Yeah the prophecy looks like a monster tbh
NP :P
I get what they did with the harby guns, but the real question is why nerf the speed/agility so damned hard?
|
Kesthely
Fleet of the Damned Happy Endings
36
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 01:53:00 -
[1443] - Quote
After playing on sisi, i have to admit, i really like all of the redesigned battlecruisers. Since i have a nice amount of skillpoints primarily towards (battle)cruiser sized ships i've been able to fit everyone of them. There are a few minor things i would love to see improved, 10 / 15 cpu and power here or there, a bit more agility or some other tiny tweaks that would make me able to fit my prefered fits without implants or fitting modules, i'm actually quite happy with the ships atm.
However, and this is something i don't think anyone has seen or posted about yet, is that the role of the Battle CRUISER is going to be different from upcomming redesign. They are actually going to be pushed more in a clear role, instead of beeing allround the top ship in many situations. What i've seen so far, is that the Battlecruiser will become an ship wich will excell in killing cruiser sized ships (as the destroyer is to the frigates) while becomming vulnerable to the Battleships. Unlike the destroyers however, the Battlecruiser hulls main purpose will not be pure dps, but the'll be able to kill there smaller (even T2) cruisers by sustained dps + Tank.
With the Combat Battlecruiser in the role of sustained Anti-cruiser sized dps, Tank and Link capabilities, I like the road where this is heading. No there not going to be the best choice for Solo PvP, but on a hull that supports GANG Links, that isn't nessicerily a bad thing!
I hope the destinction will become better visible, when the T2 (Battle)Cruisers, Attack line Battlecruisers and Battleships redesigning has gone trough. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
305
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 03:19:00 -
[1444] - Quote
After a little testing (not much yet):
Ferox looks really nice and nasty - especially for teamwork. Obviously 5 medslots is way too little for a slow shield tanker to do proper solo tackle, but I like the Ferox like this (as long Drake doesn't get 6 medslots and keep the resist bonus).
The only thing striking me is how nice the Railguns "seems" but then wonder why anyone would fit them in the current game. Forget about sniping with this... It's just not worth even trying. Only thing you get is versatility with decent dps at close range at the cost of tracking and lots of dps.
Drake looks super boring. The only comment I have until we see the new suggestions is buff the cpu just a little...
The Prophecy is a nice and solid ship. It suits the role as drone boat and T1 command ship perfectly, however: Without a laser bonus this ship will be a monstrous bait ship and people will use it for bait only...
Why not give it drone bonus and a bonus towards guns - give it another hi-slot instead and just 6 lowslots. Throw the resist bonus after the Harbinger and fix the wrong 10% damage bonus. Dont get me wrong I love the Prophecy as it is now, but you need to keep focus on lasers for this beauty even as a drone boat. Give people a reason to do it...
Pinky |
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
27
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 04:54:00 -
[1445] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:PS. With Cyclone becoming primarily a misile ship with an active tank it could easily benefit from moving a lowslot to a medslot. Active tanking isn't easy to fit (guess why Raven sucks in pvp). Also if it need to fit a command processor for 2 warfare links in the utility hi-slots this would be a very good move. This isn't a deal breaker ofcourse - people can always fit nanofibers and co-processors in those lowslots :-) Raven isn't that good in PvP because large missiles are immensely underpowered. Raven also has some PG issues but otherwise in theory being able to fit 6 torps and 2 heavy neuts very nice. It's not an active tanking issue. |
Cytherion
Critical Strike
0
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 05:29:00 -
[1446] - Quote
Has anyone thought about Command Ships? In all honesty, Command Ships need a "buff". I have invested years in command ship (nighthawk / sleipnir) with support skills and yet it just feels underplayed, underpowered. Links are nice to run but it should not gimp the ship. They are sturdy ships, hard to train for and in the end the experience is not very rewarding. These ships should be top tier and a popular choice of squad leaders / fleet commanders. Yet its not flown on a regular basis.
I also think they need to deal higher in terms of damage, be electronically superior and have a higher base resistance to jamming and dampening. I don't care if you want to add a few months more of training but please make these ships part of the mainstream eve population. I am not asking them to be a I WIN button ships but still considering the price it takes to make them elite is not worth their role.
"The Role they play is not incentive enough to take them out in a fleet" |
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
27
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 05:36:00 -
[1447] - Quote
Cytherion wrote:Has anyone thought about Command Ships? In all honesty, Command Ships need a "buff". I have invested years in command ship (nighthawk / sleipnir) with support skills and yet it just feel underplayed, underpowered. Links are nice to run but it should not gimp the ship. They are sturdy ships, hard to train for and in the end the experience is not very rewarding. These ships should be top tier and a popular choice of squad leaders / fleet commanders. Yet its not flown on a regular basis.
I also think they need to deal higher in terms of damage, be electronically superior and have a higher base resistance to jamming and dampening. I don't care if you want to add a few months more of training but please make these ships part of the mainstream eve population. I am not asking them to be a I WIN button ships but still considering the price it takes to make them elite is not worth their role.
"The Role they play is not incentive enough to take them out in a fleet" Did you seriously ask for the Sleipnir to get buffed? In terms of the combat oriented Command Ships, the Sleipnir and, to a slightly lesser degree, the Absolution are absolutely fine - in fact those two ships should be the benchmark for the other Command Ships to meet. Nighthawk and Astarte however do need buff, although the issue with the Astarte is largely due to active armor tanking. As for the link oriented Command Ships, CCP already said they were going to buff them significantly so that T3 links didn't make them obsolete. |
Cytherion
Critical Strike
0
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 06:08:00 -
[1448] - Quote
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:Cytherion wrote:Has anyone thought about Command Ships? In all honesty, Command Ships need a "buff". I have invested years in command ship (nighthawk / sleipnir) with support skills and yet it just feel underplayed, underpowered. Links are nice to run but it should not gimp the ship. They are sturdy ships, hard to train for and in the end the experience is not very rewarding. These ships should be top tier and a popular choice of squad leaders / fleet commanders. Yet its not flown on a regular basis.
I also think they need to deal higher in terms of damage, be electronically superior and have a higher base resistance to jamming and dampening. I don't care if you want to add a few months more of training but please make these ships part of the mainstream eve population. I am not asking them to be a I WIN button ships but still considering the price it takes to make them elite is not worth their role.
"The Role they play is not incentive enough to take them out in a fleet" Did you seriously ask for the Sleipnir to get buffed? In terms of the combat oriented Command Ships, the Sleipnir and, to a slightly lesser degree, the Absolution are absolutely fine - in fact those two ships should be the benchmark for the other Command Ships to meet. Nighthawk and Astarte however do need buff, although the issue with the Astarte is largely due to active armor tanking. As for the link oriented Command Ships, CCP already said they were going to buff them significantly so that T3 links didn't make them obsolete.
Well I was talking mechanics of command ships in general. But yes, Nighthawk at the moment even with max skills invested is nothing more than a brick specially with heavy missiles nerfed, I really dont feel like flying it. Some say fly it like a HAM drake...that would just defeat the purpose.
Anyways, while Sleipnir is nice ship and I fly it quite a bit, I sincerely hope it will not be changed to be drifted to missile platform like the Cyclone. |
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
27
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 06:57:00 -
[1449] - Quote
Cytherion wrote:Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:Cytherion wrote:Has anyone thought about Command Ships? In all honesty, Command Ships need a "buff". I have invested years in command ship (nighthawk / sleipnir) with support skills and yet it just feel underplayed, underpowered. Links are nice to run but it should not gimp the ship. They are sturdy ships, hard to train for and in the end the experience is not very rewarding. These ships should be top tier and a popular choice of squad leaders / fleet commanders. Yet its not flown on a regular basis.
I also think they need to deal higher in terms of damage, be electronically superior and have a higher base resistance to jamming and dampening. I don't care if you want to add a few months more of training but please make these ships part of the mainstream eve population. I am not asking them to be a I WIN button ships but still considering the price it takes to make them elite is not worth their role.
"The Role they play is not incentive enough to take them out in a fleet" Did you seriously ask for the Sleipnir to get buffed? In terms of the combat oriented Command Ships, the Sleipnir and, to a slightly lesser degree, the Absolution are absolutely fine - in fact those two ships should be the benchmark for the other Command Ships to meet. Nighthawk and Astarte however do need buff, although the issue with the Astarte is largely due to active armor tanking. As for the link oriented Command Ships, CCP already said they were going to buff them significantly so that T3 links didn't make them obsolete. Well I was talking mechanics of command ships in general. But yes, Nighthawk at the moment even with max skills invested is nothing more than a brick specially with heavy missiles nerfed, I really dont feel like flying it. Some say fly it like a HAM drake...that would just defeat the purpose. Anyways, while Sleipnir is nice ship and I fly it quite a bit, I sincerely hope it will not be changed to be drifted to missile platform like the Cyclone. I wouldn't want the Sleipnir to be a missile boat or for the Absolution to be a drone boat. There's certainly no need for it. Anyway,
Nighthawk buff is actually very simple. The bonuses aren't terrible, but the ship's stats are. It's one of the most frustrating ships to fit and for this reason alone it doesn't do anything that a drake can't do just as well (if not better). The only thing a Nighthawk does better is being able to fit over 1K DPS passive shield recharge tank, but with the isk and sp required to fly such a nighthawk, it really begs the question: why didn't you just go for a Tengu? |
Roime
Shiva Furnace
1728
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 07:15:00 -
[1450] - Quote
Any news on the armor tanking fixes?
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
|
Cytherion
Critical Strike
0
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 07:17:00 -
[1451] - Quote
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote: I wouldn't want the Sleipnir to be a missile boat or for the Absolution to be a drone boat. There's certainly no need for it. Anyway,
Nighthawk buff is actually very simple. The bonuses aren't terrible, but the ship's stats are. It's one of the most frustrating ships to fit and for this reason alone it doesn't do anything that a drake can't do just as well (if not better). The only thing a Nighthawk does better is being able to fit over 1K DPS passive shield recharge tank, but with the isk and sp required to fly such a nighthawk, it really begs the question: why didn't you just go for a Tengu?
+1 to that.
offtopic I am trying to refrain from posting my opinions about T3s in this thread ( x1 lvl training for subsystems..really? its like giving a 16yr old kid, keys to a ferrari..all I can say it train it, have fun while fotm lasts..) |
Corben Arctus
EVE University Ivy League
4
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 08:59:00 -
[1452] - Quote
Cytherion wrote: Anyways, while Sleipnir is nice ship and I fly it quite a bit, I sincerely hope it will not be changed to be drifted to missile platform like the Cyclone.
It has already been confirmed that the Claymore will be a missile ship. Sleipnir will keep the dakka dakka. |
Apostrof Ahashion
Viziam Amarr Empire
36
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 09:24:00 -
[1453] - Quote
Anyone with some good harbinger fits? I was trying for some time yesterday but simply could not find a solid armor fit. That thing runs out of pg with just guns, plate and afterburner. And cpu is so low that you just have to go over it out no matter what. |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
342
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 10:32:00 -
[1454] - Quote
Moonaura wrote:Notes: The reason you need a small cap booster on both fits - is that the best way to disable a command ships gang links is to cap drain it. This helps negate this issue, and is considered best practice as a lack of gang links is generally considered, a bad thing. So, the Damnation with slaves hits: 556,093 EHP with a signature of 265 The Vulture with halo set (The best thing currently for a shield buffer fleet fit like this) hits: 214,547 with a signature of 291 Spot the difference? Now, the passive recharge which, you think makes the Vulture somehow awesome. Well again - its not constant - it is only that figure around 25% - comes in at 594 a second. This equates to, 35640 over a minute - if - and somehow magically - the enemy keeps it at 25% perfectly, for 10 minutes - then... finally, you could argue about how awesome that somehow the Vulture is better. When you reach titan level, the difference can be as much as 20 million EHP between say, the Erebus, and the Leviathan when being boosted. And agreed, passive shield recharge is a factor, albeit nowhere near as powerful as you make out. But it would be very easy for CCP to release a shield EHP implant set, that also nerfed shield recharge time. Easy. But shields should always have less EHP than Armor, but not quite as dramatic a difference as this. The reason is that the armor tanks only activate at the end of the cycle, rather than shields that activate at the start. Which is a factor in logistics backed fights. The calls for a buffer implant for shields is an entirely fair one, and one of the biggest imbalances in the current game. This conversation has zero relevance to this thread, but here goes . . .
You realize that the damnation you just fitted out has the align time agility and turning radius of a planet right?
See the thing is that your vulture could keep up with a hurricane fleet, fairly easily, but the damnation could never keep up with an armor HAC gang, and it wouldnt have the signature to tank with it either as it would need to swap out the slaves for a halo set.
in eve there is no better or worse, it all depends on the situation . . . |
ChromeStriker
The Riot Formation Unclaimed.
459
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 10:41:00 -
[1455] - Quote
... So umm can we get some info on that Jove BC on the test server?? - Nulla Curas |
Mike Whiite
Cupid Stunts.
120
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 10:46:00 -
[1456] - Quote
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:Also it doesn't make any sense that the Drake and Ferox have smaller signatures than the Brutix and Myrmidon. We all know that ship signature is heavily influenced by shield size, the caldari ships have bigger shields (as they should) but have smaller signatures. Perhaps I am reading it wrong, but this doesn't seem right.
It won't because the Drake and ferox will fit Shield mods, enlarging their signature far over that of the Brutix and the Myrmidon.
Just like the mass of the Drake and Ferox are higher than those of the Brutix and Myrmidon wich will settle when they fit plates.
See it like a their racial experties grants them to make their base plate lighter and their base shields more compact.
|
Allandri
Liandri Industrial Liandri Covenant
24
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 10:54:00 -
[1457] - Quote
ChromeStriker wrote:... So umm can we get some info on that Jove BC on the test server??
It's not Jove, it is SoCT |
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
255
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 10:59:00 -
[1458] - Quote
Sigras wrote: This conversation has zero relevance to this thread, but here goes . . .
You realize that the damnation you just fitted out has the align time agility and turning radius of a planet right?
See the thing is that your vulture could keep up with a hurricane fleet, fairly easily, but the damnation could never keep up with an armor HAC gang, and it wouldnt have the signature to tank with it either as it would need to swap out the slaves for a halo set.
in eve there is no better or worse, it all depends on the situation . . .
Actually, if you read the thread and the comments previously, it was relevant, as it was all to do with a much earlier comment and shield recharge, which in its way, was relevant to EHP numbers on the Ferox.
As you will see if you continue in the thread, I soon get back to the Prophecy and Ferox. Please feel to rip into those lol
Alas, the Damnation is win. The Vulture is mildly quicker, but it isn't some Minmitar spring chicken that you might think it is. And besides, when webbed etc, what good is having a lot less EHP and a larger signature anyway?
Given any boosting command ship is intended to be used in larger fights, its a fair bet to say it may well be webbed if primary and will rely on its resists and buffer to survive. We are recruiting talented pilots for innovative small gang PvP
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=175061 |
Allandri
Liandri Industrial Liandri Covenant
24
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 11:06:00 -
[1459] - Quote
Apostrof Ahashion wrote: ...whine about not using 800mm...
[New Setup 1] 1600mm Reinforced Steel Plates II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Damage Control II Reactive Armor Hardener Heat Sink II
Experimental 10MN Afterburner I Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I Optical Tracking Computer I,Optimal Range Script
Heavy Modulated Pulse Energy Beam I,Imperial Navy Multifrequency M Heavy Modulated Pulse Energy Beam I,Imperial Navy Multifrequency M Heavy Modulated Pulse Energy Beam I,Imperial Navy Multifrequency M Heavy Modulated Pulse Energy Beam I,Imperial Navy Multifrequency M Heavy Modulated Pulse Energy Beam I,Imperial Navy Multifrequency M Heavy Modulated Pulse Energy Beam I,Imperial Navy Multifrequency M
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I Medium Trimark Armor Pump I Medium Trimark Armor Pump I Drones Hammerhead II x5, Hobgoblin II x5 |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
462
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 11:47:00 -
[1460] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:
The Prophecy is a nice and solid ship. It suits the role as drone boat and T1 command ship perfectly, however: Without a laser bonus this ship will be a monstrous bait ship and people will use it for bait only...
Why not give it drone bonus and a bonus towards guns - give it another hi-slot instead and just 6 lowslots. Throw the resist bonus after the Harbinger and fix the wrong 10% damage bonus. Dont get me wrong I love the Prophecy as it is now, but you need to keep focus on lasers for this beauty even as a drone boat. Give people a reason to do it...
Amarr ships without lasers tend to be the best ones.. Unless you're blobbing.
|
|
ChromeStriker
The Riot Formation Unclaimed.
459
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 13:03:00 -
[1461] - Quote
Allandri wrote:ChromeStriker wrote:... So umm can we get some info on that Jove BC on the test server?? It's not Jove, it is SoCT
Pff close enough lol - Nulla Curas |
Apostrof Ahashion
Viziam Amarr Empire
37
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 13:04:00 -
[1462] - Quote
Allandri wrote:Apostrof Ahashion wrote: ...whine about not using 800mm... ...posts incredibly stupid harbinger fit ...
That fit uses T1 guns, and thats even worse than downgrading to Medium Pulse, they use more PG and cant use scorch. And Reactive Armor Hardeners suck. And warp scrambler with short range guns on a ship with 300m/s is hilarious. And you still could not put anything in that utility high. Cookie cutter Maller fits have ~10k less ehp, ~50 less dps and move 4x faster.
thanks for proving my point. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
305
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 13:06:00 -
[1463] - Quote
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:Pinky Denmark wrote:PS. With Cyclone becoming primarily a misile ship with an active tank it could easily benefit from moving a lowslot to a medslot. Active tanking isn't easy to fit (guess why Raven sucks in pvp). Also if it need to fit a command processor for 2 warfare links in the utility hi-slots this would be a very good move. This isn't a deal breaker ofcourse - people can always fit nanofibers and co-processors in those lowslots :-) Raven isn't that good in PvP because large missiles are immensely underpowered. Raven also has some PG issues but otherwise in theory being able to fit 6 torps and 2 heavy neuts very nice. It's not an active tanking issue.
Trust me the Raven does nice dps against battlecruisers and up (Faction torpedos hti well). Yes it has powergrid issues making it difficult to use the 2 utility hi-slots to their max - However the real problem is the lack of pvp tank. 6 medslots just isn't enough for a decent active tank and the largest shield extenders are pretty useless on battleships. |
Xindi Kraid
The Night Wardens Viro Mors Non Est
107
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 13:18:00 -
[1464] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:But Fozzie, 7.5% bonus to armor repair amount on both Gallente Battlecruisers?? But we all know how much active armor tanking sucks!! Whatever will you do about this dilemma..... Out with it man. Still that at least tells me they may be trying to make active armor tanking not suck any more.
Yay at the myrmidon drone buff. Boo at the -1 turret.
Hopefully the Ferox fares well with these changes. it's a ship I've always wanted to love, but have trouble when it's uses are so limited by being tier 1 |
Hakan MacTrew
Caledonian Heavy Industries Sick N' Twisted
240
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 13:56:00 -
[1465] - Quote
To the numpties who obviously can't be bothered to read the dev blog that's been up for ages: The Sleipnir is not being made into a missile boat, the Claymore is.
All the Command Ships are being balanced so they can either boost, (using up to two types of boosted links @3%/level,) or fulfill a combat role.
That's means the Sleipnir is probably going to lose either its falloff or damage bonus from the Command Ship skill in lieu of a 3% link boost.
T3s are having their warfare sub changed to affect 3 types of links @2%/level.
Also, I haven't sorted out access to SiSi as yet, has anyone actually compared the Brutixs agility and speed to some of the other BCs? I'm curious how the mass change is affecting it. MODULAR DRONES
MORE ORE SHIPS |
Wivabel
Exanimo Inc Unclaimed.
99
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 14:51:00 -
[1466] - Quote
Moonaura wrote:Wivabel wrote:You are in a brawler setup if you are getting kited then you are likely going to die. At least the Ferox with its optimal bonus and null allows you to do damage out to long point range. 2:30 seconds is forever in PVP. Null still gives you a respectable 550 DPS 470 + 80 from drones or 620 DPS overheated. The 5 low slots also give you plenty of room for different mods be they damage mods tracking enhancers or nano/overdrives. The new Ferox will be a very effective ship. Wiv Hey Wiv, I appreciate its a brawler, but lets go over the 2:30 seconds - thats optimal, thats not having warped in, or used the guns already, or anything else that used the cap up. So, its far less than that in actuality, and the Ferox does need to use the MWD to move around. If you do forgo top damage and use the Nulls, please don't discount the fact it gets a 25% tracking nerf. So 550 DPS on EFT is not really 550 DPS unless you're shooting a Battleship or larger. And even some battleships it won't hit at that. As for the low slots? The new low slot the Ferox has is automatically filled by a Reactor Control II, or you ditch a bunch of shield rigs and pop in 10m ISK a pop Ancillary power rigs. Otherwise - you can't actually fit the guns you're giving these numbers for with any sort of tank that is. If the Ferox was so freaking awesome, why isn't everyone flying it? Because it ain't. Its been the poor pick of the bunch for a long long time, only really beaten by the pointless Prophecy before this change. Even the Cyclone has been popular lately with the Ancillary shield booster. More powergrid allows it to fit the weapons its supposed to use, with a moderate buffer tank. And instead of the extra lowslot, an extra midslot would be genuinely useful. An extra low slot to just fit a power grid is not an extra lowslot. Its just there for fitting, and its not even an exotic fit or anything crazy. Its just a MWD and LSE with guns on. I have three Ferox's in my hangar. I look at them. And I just can't get the will to undock them. I know they will fail hard. Having basically - the same ship - with just 1 gun more instead of a missile launcher, and a low slot to give me the joy of a reactor control to fit it. Not exactly the improvement Caldari folks were after.
To be a part of future EVE intrigue check us out. Sov in the south. Small gang pew is what we do when we are-ánot defending our space.-á
Join "Exan-áRecruitment"-áin game |
Cytherion
Critical Strike
0
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 15:00:00 -
[1467] - Quote
Hakan MacTrew wrote:To the numpties who obviously can't be bothered to read the dev blog that's been up for ages: The Sleipnir is not being made into a missile boat, the Claymore is.
All the Command Ships are being balanced so they can either boost, (using up to two types of boosted links @3%/level,) or fulfill a combat role.
That's means the Sleipnir is probably going to lose either its falloff or damage bonus from the Command Ship skill in lieu of a 3% link boost.
T3s are having their warfare sub changed to affect 3 types of links @2%/level.
Also, I haven't sorted out access to SiSi as yet, has anyone actually compared the Brutixs agility and speed to some of the other BCs? I'm curious how the mass change is affecting it.
I am an ex field Command Ship pilot (both NH and Sleipnir) who just came back to the game to check out the noise that was all about, finally found the BC/Command Ship "dev blog " after digging for it. For those interested in reading it, here is the link http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=73530
All I can say is that they better not touch my Sleipnir damage bonus , command ships need to be able to multi-task like a mother and not just be someones buff-monkey. They need to be able to deal significant damage (slighty under top tier BS damage) while holding their own. They are command ships, thats where they belong, in the middle of heavy fire, wrecking havoc. Not stuck inside a pos piloted by an alt..
Most command ships (sleipnir aside) already seriously lack in the damage area "rebalancing" them in this area is only going to make matters worse..
So far not a huge fan of BC changes and its definitely made me wary of what they might do to the Command Ships...braces for impact |
Jerick Ludhowe
Crimson HellHounds Drunk3n H00ligans
366
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 15:30:00 -
[1468] - Quote
Cytherion wrote:
So far not a huge fan of BC changes and its definitely made me wary of what they might do to the Command Ships...braces for impact
Why are you not a fan of the current BC changes? After spending some time on test server I can say that all 8 of the combat BCs are functioning rather well. Some specific changes need to be made (more grid/cpu on harbie, less mass on cane) but overall it's a MASSIVE step forward in terms of overall ship usage and general balance.
If fozzie takes this same style of balancing up the Command line we can easily assume that all commands will be getting an additional slot (except sliepnir and claymore), reworked fittings, and more base hp. We will also be receiving 4 new Combat oriented Commands as the old fleet commands will be reworked to be just as functional as the field commands.
|
Ashlar Vellum
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
10
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 16:00:00 -
[1469] - Quote
I'm quite concerned about the harb, -25 cpu is too much in my opinion. It would be almost impossible to make something useful out of it for low sp players and extremely tight fits for high sp players. Fozzie please take one more look at it. |
Arya Greywolf
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
36
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 17:16:00 -
[1470] - Quote
I won't try to speak specifically about the other changes to BCs, but I am happy they are getting the 'tiercide' treatment. Some interesting things happening. I do want to speak about the changes Harbinger specifically though. I'm a little confused on your thought process here and why you made the changes you did, especially when you seemingly are aware of the actually issues of the Harbinger.
In a previous post you seemed to recognize at least one of the problems with armor tanking and maneuverability:
"What about armor tanking? The imbalances caused by the mass of plates, the speed penalty on armor rigs and the weakness of armor reps in pvp situations are a problem that becomes more pronounced for these ships than for any of the smaller classes and should be fixed as soon as possible!
(your response) I completely agree. ~Working on it~. However since we want to be very careful about what we promise and when that's all I can say at this exact moment."
You seem to understand the issues with active armor tanking rigs and mass issues. You recognize that active armor rigs shouldn't have the large mass addition to active armor tanking ships that they do now. One could see then, that the reason you added mass to the Harb, was in anticipation of the removal of the mass addition from active armor rigs. The problem here is that no one fits the Harb for active tanking, and yet you added mass to the ship anyway. Can you please discuss this? It doesn't seem to make much sense to make this already sluggish ship even slower, especially when you have taken away PWG making it even harder to fit plates/a decent fit without sacrificing rigs or getting implants. *Note - this is NOT the case with other BCs.
Seemingly, you reduced the PWG and CPU because, even though you -1 turret, you pumped up the damage bonus to 10%, making the projected damage in effect every so slightly better. However, even before with 7 turrets and the original amount of PWG and CPU it was still unreasonably hard to fit a decent tank + (edit) heavy pulses on.
Mynna explains this pretty well:
"The problem people who have with the Harbinger have is that decent fits require unreasonably large compromises. You have to jump through some pretty serious hoops to get both heavy pulse lasers and a 1600mm plate on, like "ditch two trimarks for a CPU and Grid rig and add in a CPU implant" compromises. Even if you drop to an 800mm plate, you still need an implant. It can also drop to smaller guns, but that's a ~14% loss of range and damage, and it still requires a CPU implant too. Compare that to the prophecy and myrmidon, which can fit a 1600mm plate with no problems. Or compare it to the hurricane - to fit a 1600mm plate and 425mm autos, it either uses one fitting rig, or downgrades the guns to 220mm ACs, which is a only a ~5% loss in damage/range. Or it can go all the way down to dual 180mm ACs, which is a 17% loss of range and 10% loss of damage, more similar to the price the harbinger pays...but in return, it gets to actually use its utility high, fitting a neut or something. Even a lot of Tech 1 cruisers have an easier time fitting a plate than a Harbinger does.
So no, it's not actually "fine"."
Mass addition to the prophecy doesn't even make sense either because it makes sense to go EHP over active armor tanking (given the assumed reduction in active armor tanking rigs).
Could you explain?:
- What the point of the mass addition to the Harbinger was? (because even if active armor rigs get reduced in mass addiction, people don't fit the Harb for active armor tanking)
- Why the reduction in PWG and CPU, when it was already unreasonable hard to fit a Harb? (-1 turret doesn't fix the fitting issue)
In summary, I don't understand the reduction in PWG and addition to mass. Taking away PWG from the already hard to decently fit Harb + adding mass makes your changes very confusing and wrong - unless you're trying to make this ship useless. Basically, we can either fit crappy guns along w/ trimarks and a decent tank to be an unreasonably slow, low DPS ship (even for Amarr) or sacrifice any good rigs to get an absolute crap tank (compared to other BCs and slow Amarr ships) and have good DPS.
And if anyone tries to claim that "it's like a mid-grade Armageddon" you're missing the fact that the Armageddon can fit a massive passive tank and not sacrifice DPS. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 .. 86 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |