Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Cinnander
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 18:07:00 -
[91]
Originally by: Arte (What he said)
I know tell me about it heh :D
Lets just hope they don't make cruisers FOTM. I like being a bit different. |
Mangus Thermopyle
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 19:16:00 -
[92]
I just hope that tech 2 frigates gets some love, becasue as it is now they are pretty redundant. You can do everything better in bigger ships.
Ohh, and please dont give me this tackling nonsense about interceptors. If 2 gangs fought, one with 4 BS and 4 BC, the other with 4 BS, 3 BC and one ceptor, its very easy to see who would win (and in case you dont know, the gang without the interceptor would easily win if everything else where equal).
Please, either remove the tech 2 frigates, or make them useful for something other than entering 1/10 and 2/10 complexes.
|
Nafri
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 20:29:00 -
[93]
Originally by: Mangus Thermopyle I just hope that tech 2 frigates gets some love, becasue as it is now they are pretty redundant. You can do everything better in bigger ships.
Ohh, and please dont give me this tackling nonsense about interceptors. If 2 gangs fought, one with 4 BS and 4 BC, the other with 4 BS, 3 BC and one ceptor, its very easy to see who would win (and in case you dont know, the gang without the interceptor would easily win if everything else where equal).
Please, either remove the tech 2 frigates, or make them useful for something other than entering 1/10 and 2/10 complexes.
good planned 3 BC and tech2 frig will win
but anyway, tech2 frigates are very very good
Your bla bla hit bla bla for bla bla damage. Wanna have some bubu now? |
Grimpak
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 21:54:00 -
[94]
Edited by: Grimpak on 02/09/2005 21:55:21
Originally by: Tuxford Other numbers you have there have also been changed for example the low slot on Rifter was removed again, the extra med slot on Condor, Atron, Slasher and Executioner have been removed for now though I kind of want to move slots around on the executioner to give it 2 med slots.
....giving a 3rd med to the slasher, would transform the useless speedy frig, in the cheapest tackler arround. IMHO, it's a good change
Originally by: Jerod Nox
Executioner: Slots changed from 2/1/3 to 2/2/3 Speed changed from 350m/s to 410m/s
Doesnt this make the executioner the undeniable king of T1 frigate speed?
*and* an extra mid slot?
...actually no.
applying the speed bonus inherent from minmatar frigates to the MK2 slasher (390*1.25 im case of minmatar frig at lvl5) would give to the slasher, an amazing 487,5m/s speed. add to that navigation skills, and the slasher comes ontop (mass of both ships is the same btw).
...and I can say that the slasher atm *can* sustain a mwd running forever if you put a CPR in that lonely low-slot.
...as j0s said once, if you thought vigils were a pest, then MK2 slashers would be the king of pests
Originally by: CCP Hammer Tux forgot to say you're all on KOS.
come and get me then -------------------
Grimpak, all round nice guy |
Tovarishch
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 22:02:00 -
[95]
Would just like to say that's it's fantastic to see some Dev response in here. After seeing this thread I was worried that Caldari ships were about to take another hit even though they are (for the most part... not completely) at the bottom of the barrel in almost all categories.
Thanks for your responses, Devs.
|
Justin Cody
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 23:03:00 -
[96]
Edited by: Justin Cody on 02/09/2005 23:03:50 Edited by: Justin Cody on 02/09/2005 23:03:34 *bump* luv it sticky maybe?
"Ill armed and half starved, they were still desperate men, to whom danger had lost all fears: for what was death that they should shun it to cling to such a life as theirs?"--- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle |
Zyrla Bladestorm
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 23:53:00 -
[97]
Originally by: j0sephine "The signature radius is something that I wanted to try but tbh I haven't tested it that much and it will definitly go out if it is a massive nerf to heavy launchers."
The signature radius reduction does sound like a good idea... just maybe tweak the signature resolution of medium turrets and explosion size of heavy missiles a little, to reflect that change? ^^;;
Seconded for truth . ----- Apologies for any rambling that may have just occurred.
|
Forsch
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 00:24:00 -
[98]
Edited by: Forsch on 03/09/2005 00:24:39
Originally by: Joerd Toastius How about making the Augoror the EW boat? Makes sense IC (they managed to turn the hull into a Support ship which a) suggests it's got sound electrics/electronics, and b) gives them experience working with the class in that kind of direction) and OOC sense (Arbi's the drone boat, Maller's the ubertank, Omen's, well, a run-of-the-mill cruiser and Augoror's a waste of space once you can afford something bigger).
That's a VERY good idea! No one uses the Augorur these days. (Not to speak of the Navy issue, which I haven't seen in use 'ever'.) If it became an EW platform, alot of people would start using it in pvp. Bonus to armor plus EW capabilities... perfect. And the Arbi would still be used as drone carrier, to be able to deal other dmg than em/thermal.
EW Augorur, go go!
Edit: Damnit, can't even spell Augorur correctly.
The Auctoritan Syndicate Defenders of the Empire - Curatores Veritatis Alliance |
Fidelis Deus
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 00:55:00 -
[99]
I personally think the arbitrator needs a little boost, it's never used due to the thorax.
Same problem with the vexor, why use it when their is the thorax?....
|
Gierling
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 01:27:00 -
[100]
Give the Tristan 3 turret slots please.
Bastards we are lest Bastards we become. |
|
ThiefKillerkiller
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 01:43:00 -
[101]
Originally by: Tuxford
Originally by: Sorja Tuxford, did you have a look at this thread please?
I'm sure you did, but... just in case...
The MK2 project is highly anticipated btw
I did and it's a good thread. I don't go all that into tech 2 ships but some changes might propagate to the tech 2 ships.
Look at bit on the smaller interceptors, the once that should be the tacklers but only got 2 med slots, like the Ares ! :D
|
Dale Omen
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 04:31:00 -
[102]
PGrid changed from 725MW to 850MW CPU changed from 275 to 300 Sig Radius changed from 130 to 104
Tell you what, this is gonna be good for mimitar. Finally a bit of lovin for us matars......
|
DigitalCommunist
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 05:49:00 -
[103]
I dislike all of these changes.
I don't know who is doing this, but they don't know a damn thing about pvp. Adding a slot here and there, boosting agility and lowering sig does what? It makes them closer to frigs. If I'm flying a cruiser, I want to be flying a cruiser and not some AF knockoff. When was the last time you got killed in a frig or cruiser by a battleship with small or medium guns? I'm betting "not that often" would be the common answer.
So why do they even die to begin with? Drones, nos, web. You put these changes in and it will do nothing but potentially screw balance between each other and do nothing to make them more balanced in the long run. How about making drones tracking correspond to the type of ship they are designed to kill? Simply crapping on the speed of heavy drones in hopes of "balance" makes them better frig killers than bs killers.. cause very few bs try to get right up to your face. And nos? How about introducing some inefficiency for oversized nos?
How about increasing HP of all ships finally? I don't care if I get hit by a large gun here and there, as long as I have time to get out of its path.. especially true for frigs. One excellent on a 1400 = dead inty.
Man, Kali better not be a bunch of stupid changes like these.
Perpetually driven, your end is our beginning.
|
Gungankllr
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 06:12:00 -
[104]
If sigs get reduced on cruisers Caldari Missile users might as well switch to rails.
[ 2005.09.02 19:34:58 ] (combat) <color=0xffbbbb00>Your Devastator Cruise Missile I hits Deep Slumber <BOB>(Claw), doing 0.9 damage.
|
Aliksr
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 06:18:00 -
[105]
Edited by: Aliksr on 03/09/2005 06:19:05 It's not intended to balance pvp between classes DG it's to boost unused ships so they are better in some way than other ships, instead of worse in every way.
Second, people are forgetting that making cruisers more agile makes them more fun to fly. Guns can be boosted to keep pvp balanced later, they're just testing the idea ffs
|
DigitalCommunist
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 06:27:00 -
[106]
Boosting unused ships is one thing, boosting all ships overall is another. I also don't think giving ships extra grid, cpu, and turrets is going to make them much better in the long run.. it just increases the ease of fitting. And why use tier 1-2 stuff (even after boosts) when the tier 3 version will always be the best. Give the lower ranked ships unique roles and bonuses. A damage bonus on a crappy frig or cruiser is not useful.
Perpetually driven, your end is our beginning.
|
Orvas Dren
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 07:19:00 -
[107]
Edited by: Orvas Dren on 03/09/2005 07:19:23 Now my question to the devs...
Is all that data I pulled out and posted now out-of-date?
If so, could you sneak me the new stuff so I can update it?
I just hate for my thread to become suddenly very useless.
Either way, I got Hammer to respond to my thread, and in that, I am content! I'm famous now! =============================================== The Nest
|
Admiral IceBlock
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 07:38:00 -
[108]
instead of boosting hitpoints, why not decrease damage? and while we are at it decrease optimal range of ALL guns by 50%! :) this will make medium range battles now to long range battles.
"We brake for nobody"
|
Dred 'Morte
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 11:29:00 -
[109]
Originally by: Admiral IceBlock instead of boosting hitpoints, why not decrease damage? and while we are at it decrease optimal range of ALL guns by 50%! :) this will make medium range battles now to long range battles.
Idiot... PvE? Who gives a **** about pve when your rich and all you do is pvp right?
Signature made by Mr Floppykickners |
Admiral IceBlock
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 11:48:00 -
[110]
Originally by: Dred 'Morte
Originally by: Admiral IceBlock instead of boosting hitpoints, why not decrease damage? and while we are at it decrease optimal range of ALL guns by 50%! :) this will make medium range battles now to long range battles.
Idiot... PvE? Who gives a **** about pve when your rich and all you do is pvp right?
shut up retard!
dont you think this would happend to npcs too?
"We brake for nobody"
|
|
HippoKing
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 12:01:00 -
[111]
however, at the moment, lvl4 missions give a lame amount of ISK per hour
making them take longer would **** on the grave of an already dead way of making cash
|
Admiral IceBlock
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 12:24:00 -
[112]
Originally by: HippoKing however, at the moment, lvl4 missions give a lame amount of ISK per hour
making them take longer would **** on the grave of an already dead way of making cash
increasing hitpoints all over wouldnt help much either.
just up the bounties if it becomes a big problem.
"We brake for nobody"
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 14:21:00 -
[113]
"Adding a slot here and there, boosting agility and lowering sig does what? It makes them closer to frigs. If I'm flying a cruiser, I want to be flying a cruiser and not some AF knockoff. When was the last time you got killed in a frig or cruiser by a battleship with small or medium guns? I'm betting "not that often" would be the common answer."
I think the signature size change is trying to address situation where cruisers die in droves to battleships equipped with large guns, rather than nos or drones... y'know, those battles where half people love to focus on the cruisers because they aren't really harder to hit than a battleship, but much more likely to die, so it's better chance to get a killmail to wave around?
Making them somewhat harder to hit might make some of these people realize they might as well shoot at ships of their own size instead... dunno.
|
Nomen Nescio
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 15:00:00 -
[114]
DC for the win!
Although some changes to low end cruisers are welcome, in general probem lies beyond slots and sig and grid.
- BS special weaponry was not changed for ages. Large nos is a weapon of doom for any ship smaller then bs. Why is it not fixed? No small ship can engage a bs if it has large nos fitted.
- Heavy drones - wtf? I was waiting and waiting and waiting and drone "overhaul" brought tech2?!!! Heavy drones are the killer of a cruiser class, not some sig! heavy drones can catch up and deal huge damage on cruiser np. Moreover, thorax is overpowered EXACTLY because heavy drones can hit under bs size extremely good. And they have HP wich is beyond cruiser weaponry. PLUS for some bizzare reason ecm burst was totaly taken out of the game.
- HP of all ships, but especially cruiser.... I mean for the love of god, if totaly abolutely everyone fits 1600 plates, doesn't it tell you that eveyone needs more HP? Why can't we have cruisers with 4k armor/shields? With current HP cruiser blows up to bs in a volley and can't really outlast a frig sized
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 15:16:00 -
[115]
"I mean for the love of god, if totaly abolutely everyone fits 1600 plates, doesn't it tell you that eveyone needs more HP? Why can't we have cruisers with 4k armor/shields?"
We have them, they're called battlecruisers.
Noticeable lack of popularity of these things tells me there's more 'we' want from ships that just the fat hp... could be the cost of bc, the low speed and large signature radius make them 'no fun' in the eyes of people, in which case cheap cruisers with decreased signature radius and slightly better agility just might be "it"... guess we'll see. maybe. o.O;
|
Nomen Nescio
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 15:29:00 -
[116]
BC have 2 times of cruiser sig. Practicaly same cap. Have about 20% more dps max and cost 3 times. Slow as bs and has all weaknesses of cruiser. There is no role which can't be done with cruiser and done with bc.
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 15:37:00 -
[117]
Aye, that's why i said i think it's not just more hp people want... they want more hp *and* all they get from a cruiser at the same time ^^
Thing is, if you start comparing then cruisers like that and battleships... the latter start looking kinda lukewarm. Maybe twice the hp, maybe twice the damage output (unless you go all gank) ... but 4 times the signature size, 4-5 times slower, 10x more expensive...why bother really when two cruisers together will perform equally good if not better..?
|
slip66
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 16:24:00 -
[118]
Originally by: CCP Hammer Tux forgot to say you're all on KOS.
lol
|
Kintac
|
Posted - 2005.09.04 12:21:00 -
[119]
Edited by: Kintac on 04/09/2005 13:03:17 You are right, why using a Vexor when there is thge Thorax ?
The Vexor really should have an increased drone bay. At lease more than Thorax.
what about +15 m¦ drone bay increase with each Cruiser level for the Vexor ?
|
Wrayeth
|
Posted - 2005.09.04 19:10:00 -
[120]
Edited by: Wrayeth on 04/09/2005 19:13:35 Screw it. I give up. Trying to make people understand that making ships useless against anything smaller than their own class would be a mistake seems to be a lost cause. This is my last post on the matter. After this, I'll just wait for the patches with my mouse pointer hovering over the "cancel" button since I hate flying frigates.
Yep, that's right: if cruisers are useless against frigates and battleships are useless against both frigates and cruisers, there's no point to flying anything BUT a frigate.
Seriously, the trend in the development process seems to be in making the larger ships less and less useful. First missiles got nerfed all to hell against anything smaller, which was both a good and a bad thing; the role of any ship in the game is to kill ships of the same size or one size smaller (EDIT: I consider destroyers a subset of frigs, and battlecruisers a subset of cruisers), so the torpedo and cruise missile reduction vs. frigs was a good thing. What was NOT beneficial to the game was the reduction of heavy missile damage against frigates and torp/cruise damage against cruisers.
Now, cruiser sig radius is being reduced, as well. This will move the raven from "sub-par" vs. cruisers to "utterly useless" and will screw the hell out of other close range battleships such as the megapulse 'geddon and blasterthron - not only will they be unable to kill frigs effectively, but now they won't be able to do much against cruisers either.
Good show, CCP.
This will result in the close-range ship users complaining about how they can't kill cruisers but the long-range sniper ship users still can; this will, predictably, result in long-range setups being nerfed so battleships cannot kill a cruiser at any range. Immediately following this, battleships will disappear entirely from PvP, and even rat hunters/missioneers will stop using them.
Again, good show - you will have entirely removed the role of battleships from the game, which is apparently what the frig and cruiser pilots of the world want. In addition, you won't have done much for cruisers, since people STILL won't fly them once battleships are gone; after all, if you can't kill a frigate with one, you might as well just fly a frigate yourself (you'll note the patch doesn't do anything to improve cruisers' ability to kill frigates).
Seriously, instead of reducing the sig radius of cruisers to make them harder to kill with battleships (battleships are SUPPOSED to kill cruisers!), a better change would be to increase the tracking of medium guns so that they become effective against frigates, and also increase heavy missile damage vs. frigates.
Of course, this will never happen...
Anyway, I'll await the changes, but I hold out little hope they'll be a positive boost for the game.
Please note that this is not intended as a flame - I'm just a battleship pilot who's getting tired of watching his ships become more and more useless - right now I never fly my raven in PvP unless intel reports the hostiles actually have battleships with them, and if my tempest becomes useless against cruisers as well, I will have no further reason to play.
Thank you, and have a nice day. -Wrayeth
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |