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 .. 60 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 16 post(s) |
Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
287
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 12:56:00 -
[91] - Quote
MyrddinBishop wrote:mynnna wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:mynnna wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:Why is the Ishtar not getting some fitting buff, the vexor has +100 power grid and +15 CPU The vexor is gun bonused and sort of expected to use them, the ishtar is not. You can fit a 1600mm plate based tank and "basically anything you want" to the vexor already if you don't make much use of the highs, or you can fill your highs with utility modules at the cost of a lighter tank and tighter fitting. It's a fair trade off. And what is the reason the navy vexor has the same power grid and +10 CPU over the vexor yet only has 2 unbonused turrets, where as the Ishtar got an extra turret. Okay, can't argue with you there. I really think that the Ishtar needs some sort of buff to fitting. I fully expected it to get some sort of love in this regard with this balance pass and am disappointed that it has not. I think that the comparison to the Faction Cruiser equivalent is a fair one to make. The Vexor Navy Issue(VNI) and the Ishtar have very similar bonuses to drones. However, it is a toss up and maybe even more of a nod toward using the VNI just because of fitting. I don't believe this should be the case. I feel that the nod towards preference should not be towards the Faction Cruiser but toward the HAC. I think this could be done simply by expanding the fitting to be more in line with the VNI. VNI Fittings: 800 PWG, 310 CPU Ishtar Fittings: 700 PWG, 285 CPU Just under 10% more CPU and well over 10% more PWG is pretty signigicant and I would like to see this addressed or at the very least I hope to hear the reasoning behind making the Ishtar or even some of the other HACs either very similar in power or even having the Faction Cruisers be slightly better than there equivilant HAC.
This whole balance pass looks much like the battleship pass... a rush job....:((((( unlike the Navy cruisers which seem to have a lot more thought put into them. Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
darius mclever
51
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 12:58:00 -
[92] - Quote
Two step wrote:Sac should get some sort of scram/disrutper/web range/strength bonus instead of the mostly useless cap bonus.
that cap bonus is actually pretty nice for its tanking role. especially when active tanked for small/solo work. add the cap battery changes from a few patches ago. planned nos changes will also help. |
Diesel47
Bad Men Ltd.
686
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:03:00 -
[93] - Quote
>> Give the Cerb a rapid light missile bonus aswell. << |
Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
287
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:05:00 -
[94] - Quote
darius mclever wrote:Harvey James wrote:CCP Rise have you tried to fix the cerberus? seriously does it need to spew missiles out too 200km ?
look at the caracal that is the model you need to look at here and also the corax these have nice combos.... missile explosion velocity is perfect for a kitey missile ship
Also more speed on these things please The cerb used to have 250k range, which was especially nice to annoy falcons to death. IMHO it needs the range.
well if we had the TD missile change (when are we getting that btw CCP?) it would be fine without it. Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
darius mclever
51
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:08:00 -
[95] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:darius mclever wrote:The cerb used to have 250k range, which was especially nice to annoy falcons to death. IMHO it needs the range. well if we had the TD missile change (when are we getting that btw CCP?) it would be fine without it.
How would a module that lowers the effective range of the cerberus, help the cerberus? |
Akturous
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
159
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:09:00 -
[96] - Quote
First impressions, I like the changes, I particularly like the change to the Ishtar, not sure on giving the Sac more drones though, remember you can't balance everything with drone bay. I'd still like to see more capacitor across the board for all ships and the cap bonus on the Deimos changed out for something else.
Ishtar needs CPU, it's kind of ridiculous how short on CPU it is. I have no idea why it gets so little.
ALL HACS need better lock range. The **** poor lock range on these things interfears with their intended specialised role, for example the Muninn is supposed to be a sniper, but its lock range is 55km... Not enough.
Vaga needs more CPU if you want it to fit an ASB. It needs more PG as well frankly, the TE nerf has hit Auto kiting hard and it hasn't got the powergrid to fit Artillery, the SFI does a shield arty boat better which is sad. Unless you want to pigeon hole it into dual 180 XL ASB config.
Given the sort of mildness of these changes, I presume Tech 3's will be getting the nerf bat straight up the clacker. Vote Item Heck One for CSM8 |
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
605
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:10:00 -
[97] - Quote
The bonuses for gal cruiser and HAC on the ishtar should be swapped. Right now the ishtar is super good even with hac 2, while some others like the zealot need hac 2 to function well. |
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
605
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:11:00 -
[98] - Quote
Diesel47 wrote:>> Give the Cerb a rapid light missile bonus aswell. <<
Yes pls |
Teens in Jeans
Endstati0n The Retirement Club
5
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:14:00 -
[99] - Quote
So what was the problem to give AHACs the rolebonus "imune to EWAR" ?
Tech2 HeavyAssaultCruiser are the ship no1 which should be a counter to falcon and co. |
David Kir
Tailender
50
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:15:00 -
[100] - Quote
Akturous wrote:First impressions, I like the changes, I particularly like the change to the Ishtar, not sure on giving the Sac more drones though, remember you can't balance everything with drone bay. I'd still like to see more capacitor across the board for all ships and the cap bonus on the Deimos changed out for something else.
Ishtar needs CPU, it's kind of ridiculous how short on CPU it is. I have no idea why it gets so little.
ALL HACS need better lock range. The **** poor lock range on these things interfears with their intended specialised role, for example the Muninn is supposed to be a sniper, but its lock range is 55km... Not enough.
Vaga needs more CPU if you want it to fit an ASB. It needs more PG as well frankly, the TE nerf has hit Auto kiting hard and it hasn't got the powergrid to fit Artillery, the SFI does a shield arty boat better which is sad. Unless you want to pigeon hole it into dual 180 XL ASB config.
Given the sort of mildness of these changes, I presume Tech 3's will be getting the nerf bat straight up the clacker.
I'm quite afraid that the Vaga won't be getting any more PWG. Just think of it, it'd become a cheaper, more mobile Sleipnir, with the same tanking capacity. |
|
Pesadel0
the muppets DARKNESS.
74
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:15:00 -
[101] - Quote
David Kir wrote:Jureth22 wrote:thanks for ruining the vagabond.also,eagle changes are mostly insignificant.back to drawing board Ruining the Vagabond? I hope you're trolling: the contrary would mean you're stupid.
Well iam with david restringing the vaga to a shield bonus is ****...
And lol at people buying hacs at 2 weeks ago. |
Ivory Kantenu
Sons of The Forge SpaceMonkey's Alliance
43
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:15:00 -
[102] - Quote
The Sacrilege still stands, to me, as the odd man out.
While adding HMs to its possible armory, HMs are still kind of in a bad place here. Their Damage is rather lackluster on a ship that comes with a HAM Bonus, and most people will try to avoid using HMs on a ship that's always been a brawler, and instead opt in for Tech II LR HAMs.
Would tacking on, say, an explosion velocity bonus to the Sac make it far too strong? How about missile velocity? I wouldn't mind being able to throw HAMs a good deal further with this platform, and not worry about HMs at all.
Also, the Amarr and Gallente HACs really could do with a small boost to their targeting ranges. Another 5km on the Amarr ones would be absolutely fantastic for sure, especially if the HMs stick. It always bothered me that I could throw something further than I could lock on to what I'm throwing it at. :) Learn the basics of Wormhole Selling: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=101693&find=unread
|
Gnoshia
Section 8. Fatal Ascension
46
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:17:00 -
[103] - Quote
Aaaaand the cerberus is still useless lol |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
1143
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:18:00 -
[104] - Quote
why did you keep the outdated mwd cap bonus?
you replaced that bonus on the thorax with a tracking bonus... why leave the deimos the same
here is the version i would like to see.
Quote:DEIMOS - Like the Thorax, Deimos now has 4 mids and gives up the extra high. It also goes faster and aligns faster.
Role Bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty
Gallente Cruiser Bonuses: 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage 7.5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret tracking
Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses: 10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret falloff 5% Medium Hybrid Turret damage
Slot layout: 5H(-1), 4M(+1), 6L; 5 turrets, 2 launchers Fittings: 1030 PWG(+40), 350 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1350(+190) / 1750(-290) / 2000(-531) Capacitor (amount) : 1700(+325) Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 220(+12) / .475(-.055) / 11460000 / 7.54s(-.875) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50 / 50 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 65km / 270 / 6 Sensor strength: 15 Magnetometric Signature radius: 160 There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... Hybrid tech I ammo boost |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
1096
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:19:00 -
[105] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Why is the Ishtar not getting some fitting buff, the vexor has +100 power grid and +15 CPU
Bingo...The Ishtar has always had huge CPU issues, and this does nothing to change that. And forget about the Ishtar being used in action that requires high speed. You can't kite with it, and you can't close with it to brawl. |
David Kir
Tailender
50
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:20:00 -
[106] - Quote
Pesadel0 wrote:David Kir wrote:Jureth22 wrote:thanks for ruining the vagabond.also,eagle changes are mostly insignificant.back to drawing board Ruining the Vagabond? I hope you're trolling: the contrary would mean you're stupid. Well iam with david restringing the vaga to a shield bonus is ****... And lol at people buying hacs at 2 weeks ago.
Wait what?
I actually like the new Vagabond, it looks like a beast!
|
GallowsCalibrator
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
353
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:20:00 -
[107] - Quote
Gnoshia wrote:Aaaaand the cerberus is still useless lol
You have a pretty strange definition of useless. |
Aloe Cloveris
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
106
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:20:00 -
[108] - Quote
Deimos with fattest sig by a huge margin, easiest one to track.
Considering AHAC gangs rely on sig tanking, so basically Muninns and Zealots forever. Nothing changes.
Also, Gallente base sensor strength unimpressive as ever. Wouldn't want to present a challenge to Falcons/BBs/EC- drones, that'd be unfair! |
Diesel47
Bad Men Ltd.
687
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:21:00 -
[109] - Quote
David Kir wrote:Akturous wrote:First impressions, I like the changes, I particularly like the change to the Ishtar, not sure on giving the Sac more drones though, remember you can't balance everything with drone bay. I'd still like to see more capacitor across the board for all ships and the cap bonus on the Deimos changed out for something else.
Ishtar needs CPU, it's kind of ridiculous how short on CPU it is. I have no idea why it gets so little.
ALL HACS need better lock range. The **** poor lock range on these things interfears with their intended specialised role, for example the Muninn is supposed to be a sniper, but its lock range is 55km... Not enough.
Vaga needs more CPU if you want it to fit an ASB. It needs more PG as well frankly, the TE nerf has hit Auto kiting hard and it hasn't got the powergrid to fit Artillery, the SFI does a shield arty boat better which is sad. Unless you want to pigeon hole it into dual 180 XL ASB config.
Given the sort of mildness of these changes, I presume Tech 3's will be getting the nerf bat straight up the clacker. I'm quite afraid that the Vaga won't be getting any more PWG. Just think of it, it'd become a cheaper, more mobile Sleipnir, with the same tanking capacity.
It wouldn't really be as strong as a sleip, and the command ships are going to be rebalanced later too. So you shouldn't compare them just yet. |
James1122
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
79
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:22:00 -
[110] - Quote
Have been waiting for HAC buff for forever so thank you :) Will need SISI and eft before i can give proper feedback so the below is just my gut feeling.
I Like the 50% reduction bonus alot :) makes kiting/nanoing more viable.
SAC changes are good but i do believe after the med weapons buff Heavy missiles will need a revisit.
Zealot was already a good ship and nothing of note really has changed so no comment there
Cerb looks pretty epic now (maybe OP ?) will need to wait till eft and SISI though to see how it turns out
Eagle i'm mixed on. Changes are good, but i can't help but feel that its still going to be dead in the water against ABC snipers. I also still can't imagine its going to be any good at brawling either.
Diemost midslot was very much needed. My major concern here is the big hit to its armour. I feel this ship may just be a bit too weak in the EHP department.
Ishtar change is awesome. Glad that happened! Only gripe is at having an extra turret but no extra PG :S
I have very mixed feelings about the Vaga. It was already completly outclassed and dominated by the Cynabal, I'm scared that the change you've made is going to make the Vaga a 1 trick pony with LASB fits being the only realy fitting viable for it. Especially considering a lot of the T1 cruisers can take on a standard buffer tank Vaga.
Munnin changes are also very good. (personally would have liked +1 mid) but this change makes it a real competitor with the zealot for being a Brawly AHAC
I guess my overal opinion though is that i am a little underwhelmed. The ships themselves are fine but i find them just a bit lacking when combared to t1 cruisers, navy cruiser, bcs (abcs especially). I guess i just feel overall they could do with a litle more speed and EHP. Two Step for CSM |
|
Carka Gerschen
Ubiquitous Hurt
2
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:22:00 -
[111] - Quote
So just for my understanding. The Ishtar actually loses a slot and doesn't gain any fitting resources. It is already impossible to fit decently without going for a nanofit. I guess that is the thing you want with them, with no other viable options there.
Regards,
Carka |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1121
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:23:00 -
[112] - Quote
Huh.. this is odd..
Changes and there isn't anything i think is majorly wrong with them.. Mostly its good changes.
I think you should remove the drone bay bonus from this ishtar (and later the ishkur) because really, that bonus seems to just be a "**** you" to anyone that doesn't have the skill to V.
I like how you're discouraging the awful use of AC's for kiting with giving the vaga a shield boost bonus.
(Only thing i don't agree with is lumping the sac in with the Eagle and the cerb.. The sacrilige has always been a more useful Ahac than those two >=[ ]
BYDI recruitment closed-ish |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
275
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:23:00 -
[113] - Quote
It'd be nice to see speed, tracking and range on the ishtar. I'm guessing that control range bonus is only for combat drones, like the current one, which would make no sense. It kind of sucks to see a drone ship being either a sentry drone ship or a combat drone ship (nexor, dominix). Sentries are cool and all, but it would be nice to have better damage application from combat drones sometimes. the bay per level bonus also is a complete joke (medium rep amount plz, come on). |
Akturous
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
160
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:25:00 -
[114] - Quote
Taking a second look at fitting on the Muninn, this thing is still very very bad. You need 2 ACR's to fit 720s and a 1600 plate with a 10mn AB and you get 3120 alpha and 355 dps (not including the changes) with 2 gyros (so lows would be DC, RAR, Explosive and Kin hardener, 1600 plate).
This is pretty pathetic alpha with close range ammo on a specialist arty platform considering the Loki manages 4.5k alpha and double the tracking with the same fitting. I think the Muninn needs another turret and the fittings to fit a full rack of 720s and a 1600 with AB with 1 ACR, then it might see some use outside of BL novelty/old times sake gangs. Vote Item Heck One for CSM8 |
Harimata
Hedion University Amarr Empire
10
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:25:00 -
[115] - Quote
Can you explain the reasoning behind the Muninn change? The 6/3/6 layout strongly encourages it to be armor fit, which creates a lot of overlap between the it and zealots/diemos/etc. What role is it meant to fill? Would it be able to compete with a standard zealot or a post-buff diemos in those roles?
The other thing to mention is that a rupture has a 5/4/5 layout, making both shield and armor fits viable. Why not have a 6/4/5 layout on a Muninn for the same flexibility? This would keep the whole racial continuity thing going strong.
|
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
1271
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:25:00 -
[116] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:Why is the Ishtar not getting some fitting buff, the vexor has +100 power grid and +15 CPU Bingo...The Ishtar has always had huge CPU issues, and this does nothing to change that. And forget about the Ishtar being used in action that requires high speed. You can't kite with it, and you can't close with it to brawl. It would also seem that CCP Rise has a Sentry drone fetish, this is twice now we get a bonus that pretty much applies only to sentry drones. And that is weird considering the MWD role bonus all the HAC got. Ideas for Drone ImprovementTwitter Account-á @Omnathious |
Andrea Griffin
590
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:26:00 -
[117] - Quote
This is one of the few chances we have to inject something new and interesting to ship mechanics. You're putting in a lot of effort into the ship rebalancing crusade, and that's great, but so many of the ships feel the same. HACs in the current and slated future state aren't any different. "It has more EHP and does more damage." The MWD sig radius isn't all that special either; many other ships have it.
Can we please at least try to do something interesting with these ships? Something that no other line of ships can do?
This is the Great Balancing Apocalypse - I very much doubt that Eve will have a chance to do this again for years. CCP Sreegs is my favorite developer. |
Rynnik
In Exile. Imperial Outlaws.
107
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:27:00 -
[118] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:ISHTAR...
Fittings: 700 PWG, 285 CPU
Please review Ishtar fitting, and if determined that a buff there is not warranted would you mind taking a couple of lines to explain why? |
Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
291
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:28:00 -
[119] - Quote
darius mclever wrote:Harvey James wrote:darius mclever wrote:The cerb used to have 250k range, which was especially nice to annoy falcons to death. IMHO it needs the range. well if we had the TD missile change (when are we getting that btw CCP?) it would be fine without it. How would a module that lowers the effective range of the cerberus, help the cerberus?
errr.. because they would add to TE's TC's etc.... think about it.... Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Capqu
Love Squad
134
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 13:28:00 -
[120] - Quote
looking forward to round 2 rise since you don't seem to get anything right first time around http://pizza.eve-kill.net |
|
|
|
|
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 .. 60 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |