Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
62
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 18:58:00 -
[61] - Quote
Heribeck Weathers wrote:Ok so the fleet Cain is our old Cain with NO new flavor, and no tracking bonus like ALL three other navy BCs? For gods sake give it a 7th gun, take away the damage bonus and then give it a tracking bonus. The rest look Awsome, I welcome our new navy Drake overloards
May Wanderdriven wrote:Why on earth there is no cap bonus for the harbinger navy? don't you guys know that cap is life? what's wrong with you? why do you insist of ruining the Amarr?
IN THIS THREAD:
People complain about the Faction battlecruisers having features that they are whining about not existing on the new Battleships.
Old Cane is back - everyone is probably happy. It'll put out loads of dps with decent tracking like before. You can fit full tackle on it... stop moaning. Nice to see a tracking bonus on an Amarr ship :)
Re: No cap bonus on the Harbinger - GOOD! As an Amarr player I'm glad this is the case. We have 2 great bonuses for dps, and can deal with the lack of cap through logistics and a cap booster. If you want more cap, fly the standard bloody Harbinger. :/
This thread is a clear example of how you are never going to please anyone. One extreme to the other, some saying the new Drake is useless, others saying it's massively overpowered. A lot of that does seem to come from some people only caring about resist and dps bonuses, and ignoring bonuses to applying the damage (tracking/explosion radius) and 50% extra hitpoints...
Thankyou CCP for adding some new ships that will add to variation and give us more shiny things to blow up.
|
Lili Lu
726
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 18:59:00 -
[62] - Quote
Navy Drake
You did it, you finally did it . . . http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPfcim_p38w |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1850
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 19:00:00 -
[63] - Quote
Minkert wrote:Shouldn't Drake bonus say '5% reduction to explosion radius/ lvl' it says says bonus... which makes it LESS effective against smaller craft...
It says "bonus" so that you won't confuse yourself like that.
Bonus does not mean bigger, it means better.
I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all. |
Kaal Redrum
The Tuskers
26
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 19:05:00 -
[64] - Quote
Three things to say:
[1] You have near unused EIGHT T2 Battlecruisers, rather than fixing them and figuring where in the curve the fit, youre throwing 4 new BC hulls .. Okay. I mean, I get it that the T2 balance will start after youre done with T1 and possibly with the Command Ships, but this is adding to a already messed up BC lineup.
[2] Also, such a disappointing and epic lazy design decision on the Hurricane Fleet Issue.
Further the Matari alternate doctrine of launchers and continue your attempt to 'redeem Minmatar split weapon platforms' - take the Cane Fleet in the direction of Scythe Fleet please.
Versatile fitting with 2 equal bonuses to guns n launchers - let pilots fit either set 2 Utility Highs Fast and Small Sig
At least try, youre really expecting people to shell out ~200m+ for the old Cane with extra beef?
[3] I get the buffed HP values, but are the resist profiles the same as the T1 variants? The price is creeping to Command Ship levels, are these worth it? (or will they be post the CS rebalance) |
Desert Ice78
Cobra Kai Dojo WHY so Seri0Us
213
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 19:13:00 -
[65] - Quote
I thought the navy versions of ships were ment to bridge the gap between Tech 1 and Tech 2 ship classes? These stats are not doing that.
Underwhelmed, especially by the Navy Drake. I am a pod pilot: http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/DesertIce/POD.jpg
CCP Zulu: Came expecting a discussion about computer monitors, left confused. |
Angry Mustache
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 19:17:00 -
[66] - Quote
It seems like the drake navy issue has exceptionally poor fitting,
At all level 5, it has 1100 PG 687.5 CPU.
for a bare-bones fit, say DCU2, 10mn MWD, and 8 HML2's, DCU II - 1PG, 30 CPU Experimental 10mn MWD - 150PG, 50 CPU 8 HML2 @ AWU 5. 756PG, 330.4 CPU
that leaves 193 PG 227.1 CPU
which is enough for only 1 LSE, making the Drake navy issue considerably more fragile than the regular drake. this is also only enough CPU for 2 hardeners and 2 BCS's with 13 CPU left over for 1 low and 2 mids.
What about a HAM fit? same DCU II, and experimental 10mn MWD 8 HAM 2@AWU 5, 813PG, 300 CPU
that leaves 136 PG 307.5 CPU
The good news here is that there is spare CPU to fit 2 invuln and 2 BCS, and web+scram. The bad news is that unless you have BOTH AWU5 and Shield upgrades 5, forget about fitting a LSE to your 170million faction ship.
The drake was always tight on fitting, and there is no way to cram 2 extra launchers onto 80 extra PG and 50 extra CPU.
Without AWU 2, you won't be able to fit an LSE on the HML version either. The navy drake will be less shooty, less bulky, and overall a complete waste of money over the regular drake. http://themittani.com -á- your one stop site for all News Eve Related |
Julius Foederatus
Hyper-Nova
169
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 19:19:00 -
[67] - Quote
Can we please give the regular Brutix these bonuses and just let the navy brutix be as is? I mean seriously, two ******* ships with 7.5% armor rep per level? Why do you hate us so much? Why is it the navy version is the only decent fleet BC in the Gallente line up? |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
560
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 19:22:00 -
[68] - Quote
gonna drop about a thousand of those brutixes on miners
thank you for finally giving us a ship we can blastergank in with style |
Mole Guy
Xoth Inc Unclaimed.
55
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 19:23:00 -
[69] - Quote
is this 3.8 cap/sec day or what?
the "cap intense" amarr ships NEED cap, yo!
it needs recharge rate. 6 guns (cap suckers), prop mod, repper and hardners will kill it in no time. and with only 6 low...
it needs a cap bump and itll be great. the brutix will out damage it, so we need more cap to run our guns as normal amarr ships do.
other than that!
they are freakin awesome. thats ALOT of hp. thats alot of spank...
|
Katsami
Sancta Terra
17
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 19:23:00 -
[70] - Quote
If this is even close to what they will launch as at that LP cost, then either don't launch them or save them for the Winter expansion.
Don't give us back the Hurricane at 6 times the cost an expect everyone to jump for joy. That's just lazy on your part. |
|
elitatwo
Congregatio
70
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 19:24:00 -
[71] - Quote
I would rather get stronger railguns instead of more navy boats but its just me |
Seranova Farreach
Friendship is Missles
440
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 19:24:00 -
[72] - Quote
Stan'din wrote:Arise Drake navy issue, King of the battlecruisers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3JpBY7sOJQ i believe this song is possably suitable for the RISE OF THE NAVY DRAKE! |
Mire Stoude
Antelope with Night Vision Goggles
171
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 19:24:00 -
[73] - Quote
These ships will cost 180-220m (assuming FW prices), I don't see 220m worth of ship on any of them.
80k LP price (again for FW) would put it in the neighborhood of 140m, that's more reasonable. |
Seranova Farreach
Friendship is Missles
440
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 19:26:00 -
[74] - Quote
Qaidan Alenko wrote:Yes... "Dat Drake".. loking good, I just wish Caldari Navy skins were not so... so, diseased looking. maybe it looks disease stricken because of the plauge that is drakeswarms! |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
1253
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 19:26:00 -
[75] - Quote
Julius Foederatus wrote:Can we please give the regular Brutix these bonuses and just let the navy brutix be as is? I mean seriously, two ******* ships with 7.5% armor rep per level? Why do you hate us so much? Why is it the navy version is the only decent fleet BC in the Gallente line up? Because they decided that they don't want to give the same bonuses to a T1 Battlecruiser that they give to a T1 cruiser. |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus Caldari State Capturing
471
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 19:33:00 -
[76] - Quote
GallowsCalibrator wrote:8 launchers. 8 LAUNCHERS.
with insufficient PG to fit them Project Cerberus is recruiting for the US Timezone, click here |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus Caldari State Capturing
471
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 19:35:00 -
[77] - Quote
Julius Foederatus wrote:Can we please give the regular Brutix these bonuses and just let the navy brutix be as is? I mean seriously, two ******* ships with 7.5% armor rep per level? Why do you hate us so much? Why is it the navy version is the only decent fleet BC in the Gallente line up?
Its ok the drake will be used as a frig killer just like the old caracal: insufficient PG to really fit all those launchers, and the targeting range is kind of crap to really use it as a cerb Project Cerberus is recruiting for the US Timezone, click here |
PotatoOverdose
SONS of LEGION RISE of LEGION
101
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 19:35:00 -
[78] - Quote
So the navy drake has less tank and less damage then non-navy drake. Since pvp is pretty much omni tank, the rof bonus applying to all missile types is a pretty marginal benefit. It will cost around 200 mil.
Yeah, that's not gonna happen. You can introduce it that way if you want, and it will be yet another ship no one uses. Woooo.
Then there's the new cane, same as the old cane. Except you took the old cane away, slapped a 200mil pricetag on it, and are now trying to introduce it as a "new" ship to the playerbase. Yeah, no sale.
So TL; DR for dev blog: Here's some reskins. We put absolutely zero thought or effort into them. And they cost 200 mil a pop. Enjoy!
~Quality Content~ |
Havegun Willtravel
Mobile Alcohol Processing Units
88
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 19:36:00 -
[79] - Quote
Thanks for the new toys.
|
Super Chair
Project Cerberus Caldari State Capturing
473
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 19:53:00 -
[80] - Quote
The harbinger looks really good. I might fly it. Project Cerberus is recruiting for the US Timezone, click here |
|
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Tormented of Destiny Cha Ching PLC
115
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 19:56:00 -
[81] - Quote
Kaal Redrum wrote:
[2] Also, such a disappointing and epic lazy design decision on the Hurricane Fleet Issue.
Further the Matari alternate doctrine of launchers and continue your attempt to 'redeem Minmatar split weapon platforms' - take the Cane Fleet in the direction of Scythe Fleet please.
Versatile fitting with 2 equal bonuses to guns n launchers - let pilots fit either set 2 Utility Highs Fast and Small Sig
At least try, youre really expecting people to shell out ~200m+ for the old Cane with extra beef?
While i like the idea of a FIscythe treatment for the FIcane, some difference should be made. Otherwise you just dilute the incentive to fly the FIscythe.
How about focussing them more on a support function. For example the old scythe had a bonus on Tracking Links. I imagine them equal to their t1 counterpart in a one on one but when they are part of a small gang, the whole gang profits from their presence.
boosting the strengths of their own race: FIcane: tracking link NIbrutix: remote sensor boosters NIharbinger: cap transfer NIdrake: remote eccm
or maybe countering the strengths of the opposite race: FIcane: cap transfer NIbrutix: remote eccm NIharbinger: tracking links NIdrake: remote sensor booster
this way they have a role in fleets without beeing an expensive version of the pre-tiericite BCs. Just nerfing the cane to introduce the old one as navy is kind of moot. why nerfing the cane in the first place? the easier way would have been to just raise the material costs of the pre-tiericite BCs until they are as expensive as this navy BCs will be. |
DragonZer0
Sons Of Alexander AL3XAND3R.
6
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 19:56:00 -
[82] - Quote
Looking over most of them they look decently solid tell you come to the drake...
The F*** are you thinking?! Only 800pg that almost as bad as the Nighhawk which need a major pg boost as it base is only 710 cant do jack with that |
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
62
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 19:59:00 -
[83] - Quote
Turning them into support ships = rubbish idea tbh....
Take the Harbinger for example. Why on earth would you fly a 200m faction battlecruiser to provide some cap transfer? Get in a Guardian, provide cap transfer with a neat extra perk of being able to provide armour too.
Support roles that like belong in the support classes like Recon/Logistics imo. |
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
616
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 20:02:00 -
[84] - Quote
DragonZer0 wrote:Looking over most of them they look decently solid tell you come to the drake...
The F*** are you thinking?! Only 800pg that almost as bad as the Nighhawk which need a major pg boost as it base is only 710 cant do jack with that
it can fit a full rack of HAMs, a MWD and an LSE. What exactly are you whining about? |
Ersahi Kir
Freelance Mining Company
90
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 20:03:00 -
[85] - Quote
The biggest issue that I have with any of these is that the myrm wasn't chosen as the galente boat. A navy myrm would be pro, even if it wasn't a drone boat.
The only other thing that sticks out to me is the targeting range on the drake may be just a tad low for a ship with a range bonus.
/6 gun myrm would make me a very happy person //myrm looks so neat ///MYRM! |
Zen Sarum
Hour of Reckoning
11
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 20:04:00 -
[86] - Quote
Underwhelmed... These should have been faster dangerous and expensive ships with a real role (role being damage projecting attack cruiser/ navy cruiser killer!) with decent slots.. for the price I'd rather be in a cynabel SFI GIla or any of the attack battlecruisers.
Harbinger is ok mostly due to T2 medium pulse lasers + scotch + tracking bonus = lol so T1 has nice turrets, with the extra turret NI is not bad but could do with a 20% optimal range role bonus with a smaller bay (25/25). 6H 5M 8L. 180m/s -10% sig radius
Drake should have been a missile spewing drakenmonster 10% missile velocity and 5% ROF. It should have favoured speed over tank. In return for a loss of drone bay. Role bonus of 20% bonus to missile duration would have been nice. 7H 6M 6L, 7 launchers. 180m/s sig radius is ok.
Myrmidon (should have been a MYRM navy issue not brutix) 10% bonus to hybrid damage 7.5% Medium Hybrid Turret tracking bonus per level. Role bonus of +50% fall off, with a smaller (50/50) drone bay and no drone bonus. 7H 5M 7L. 7 turrets, 195m/s -10% sig radius
Hurricane should have been a high damage kiting sniper/brawler +5% to medium projectile damage and 10% bonus to medium projectile range per level. Role bonus of -200% signiture radius with MWD use. 8 H, 5 M, 6 L, 7 turrets, 3 launchers, 200m/s -10% sig radius
|
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
62
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 20:05:00 -
[87] - Quote
I'd certainly not object to seeing the Myrm model used - always liked the model, would be quite cool to see a Myrm not reliant on drones - something to be a real contrast to the normal one. Imagine Gallente pilots would quite like a Myrm with 6 guns, 5% rate of fire and an ehp bonus? :) |
Ersahi Kir
Freelance Mining Company
90
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 20:09:00 -
[88] - Quote
I don't see the ability to fit a gang link on these ships. Is this being removed as an option for utility highs from the normal versions, or just something that wasn't listed? |
Mr Dobalina
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 20:12:00 -
[89] - Quote
Aggghhhh why the hell do you guys keep using a cammo paint scheme on spaceships? It doesn't make them any less visible in space. |
May Wanderdriven
EVE University Ivy League
5
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 20:17:00 -
[90] - Quote
Vladimir Norkoff wrote:May Wanderdriven wrote:Catherine Laartii wrote:May Wanderdriven wrote:Why on earth there is no cap bonus for the harbinger navy? don't you guys know that cap is life? what's wrong with you? why do you insist of ruining the Amarr? Pretty sure that with the recent ship rebalances for amarr that CCP finally understood that the only sensible, straighforward way to fix amarr is to half the cap usage on the guns, instead of, you know, screwing over the ships by giving them bonuses to allow them to use the actual laser weapon in question. Or, more likely, they could just be rolling full steam ahead without even considering that and they'll all become useless hulks with the exception of the drone/neut boats. If they are doing that, then by all means, do it. But the problem with that is that the amarr may be losing it's diversity. Still it's far less worse than having no cap AT ALL. I'll want to hear from CCP about it to believe it though. Errr.... You people do realize that this Navy Harb got an additional mid slot and more grid, right? So you can fit a cap booster in addition to your old fit. And last I checked, cap booster > no booster in PvP. So this is much much better than the cap bonus. But I'm sure if you whine and cry enough they can swap the tracking bonus for your old cap bonus, and then you can fit a tracking computer in the mid to get your tracking... :-/ Back in the day Ivy League actually taught players not to be complete idiots. What happened?
Yes, I do realize that, and I think that the ship could have a much greater variety with a cap bonus instead of a tracking bonus. Reason being that I CAN put a TC in the mid, but I can go for E-War or more webs (or something else), and then I don't have to worry as much about cap. Why should I be forced to stay with the cap booster?
Oh and Mr Floydy, the Harbinger has a 10% reduction in Medium Energy Weapon capacitor need. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |