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 .. 89 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 23 post(s) |
Mariner6
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
177
|
Posted - 2013.08.03 21:21:00 -
[1471] - Quote
T2 are specialized right? By the time you should be flying HAC's you should be able to choose from the 4 races. I don't need the same thing from each race like in T1. That said, the Diemost should be a specialized brawler and very scary at zero. Sadly its not. It is squishy and while orbiting close in it struggles to hit. This whole rail thing is fine I guess but really? If I want to do that I'll choose another platform for it, and rightly so because that fall off bonus to my rail guns is just awesome right? This is such a confused ship. Its a specialist, make it so. Leave the kity stuff to other ships.
The Diemost is expensive and the only way people will risk a "win or die" ship is if it can perform. Kiting ships have so many advantages in this game its overwhelming. It needs all its EHP back and for pete's sake not another niche active armor rep boat. There goes yet another fleet ship out of the Gal inventory. Do something different with it and give it a bonus to AB velocity. Make it the one and only truly dual prop specialized boat. I'd gladly trade some raw DPS bonus for a tracking bonus to add to the mix. Then it will be vicious in the right hands.
But for all that is good and right please don't kill me with yet another active armor rep Gal boat.
|
ReZoon
The Arcanum
7
|
Posted - 2013.08.03 21:24:00 -
[1472] - Quote
meh.....
For the prices, I'd still rather fly a T3, BS, or faction.
|
Sol Mortis
An Heroes
15
|
Posted - 2013.08.03 21:31:00 -
[1473] - Quote
Just about anything is better than the MWD capacitor penalty bonus.
One thing people keep saying over and over is that we want a tracking bonus on the Deimos. The MWD bonus was the obvious candidate to replace that, but I understand not wanting too many weapon bonuses on the ship.
A great Idea I've seen many times is replacing the falloff bonus with a tracking bonus. falloff doesn't really help hybrids very much on either rails or blasters. Blaster falloff is mostly inside web range anyway, and rail optimal is easy to push out to 24km; added range is hardly ever an issue for either weapon system on these ships. Anybody needing to shoot farther than that will use large weapons on a BS or ABC.
Tracking instead of falloff is a huge boon in blaster/web range. It really fits the identity of gallente as being the best at close range. It also helps more with medium rails at the ranges I expect to use them in. The falloff bonus is pushing deimos damage projection out beyond where I would even be if I was kiting with rails in point range, and is a fairly unattractive bonus on rails which don't have too much falloff to begin with. I'd much rather be more mobile in point range, able to keep my speed up fairly high and still be hitting.
My ideal set of bonuses would be: Deimos Gallente Cruiser: 5% hybrid damage per level / 7.5% hybrid tracking per level
Heavy Assault Cruiser: 5% hybrid damage per level / 7.5% armor repair amount per level
I think tracking makes most sense as cruiser bonus since the thorax has it. If you really want more variety between blasters and rails, tracking benefits both equally. |
Large Collidable Object
morons.
2170
|
Posted - 2013.08.03 22:07:00 -
[1474] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Role[...] [HACs are tough but mobile cruisers that can take a lot of punishment. What we want to do is extend that tenacity to some of their other systems, namely electronics and capacitor.
So why did you give them a role bonus that doesn't help them in that role and still leaves them ouclassed by T1 BCs and even some T1 cruisers, given you didn't bother upgrading their base speeds etc.. to competetive levels?
Jesus - I better start selling off my stack of Curses before you start balancing those... You know... morons. |
Tibus Bravour
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.03 22:45:00 -
[1475] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote: The Eagle is a little harder to judge, but I think it's probably more towards the side of being too strong than being too weak. The Eagle is definitely more of a fleet ship than a small scale skirmisher, but it got much much better for that role in this pass. Added sensor stats, lower sig, added fitting, and most importantly the trade of a utility high for an extra mid means that we are expecting ahac style eagle fleets to be very strong, especially when you consider the rail buff. We'll have to see how it goes but we are not worried about the Eagle.
This makes me think CCP Rise hasn't read a single post in this thread. 90% of them include feedback about how the Eagle is garbage and not a single one agrees with him. Nearly all include some criticism of the laughable speed it has and "added sensor stats"....yikes. |
Diesel47
Bad Men Ltd.
856
|
Posted - 2013.08.03 23:07:00 -
[1476] - Quote
^ yep.
I think either he didn't read anything, or he did and just ignored it all. |
Fewell
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
12
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 01:32:00 -
[1477] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:Harvey James wrote:MeBiatch wrote:if you upped the falloff on the vega to 12.5% per level that would fix the "range" issues people are having with the ship.
so that would end up being an extra 62.5% increase to falloff crs 50% that we see now. its not much but it should make the difference. The main issue with the vaga is that you can't even fit 425's which costs it 9km range and some dps ok so how much pg is it short on? It's got no PG. It'd be fairly dangerous to give it the pg to fit 425's with the shield boost bonus. If you want the ship to kill things that aren't frigates, but not kill all the things, replace the shield boosting bonus with another falloff bonus. |
To mare
Advanced Technology
227
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 02:59:00 -
[1478] - Quote
vaga its lacking PG but more than that it lack CPU especially if they want us to fit it for active tank, as i said before a LASB really offer little to no improvement over a dual LSE setup and X-LASB its impossible to fit w/o fitting mods. give it more fitting to make a decent fit or change the bonus to something that fit the idea of the vagabond better than a tank bonus |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
1198
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 03:37:00 -
[1479] - Quote
Mariner6 wrote:T2 are specialized right? By the time you should be flying HAC's you should be able to choose from the 4 races. I don't need the same thing from each race like in T1. That said, the Diemost should be a specialized brawler and very scary at zero. Sadly its not. It is squishy and while orbiting close in it struggles to hit. This whole rail thing is fine I guess but really? If I want to do that I'll choose another platform for it, and rightly so because that fall off bonus to my rail guns is just awesome right? This is such a confused ship. Its a specialist, make it so. Leave the kity stuff to other ships.
The Diemost is expensive and the only way people will risk a "win or die" ship is if it can perform. Kiting ships have so many advantages in this game its overwhelming. It needs all its EHP back and for pete's sake not another niche active armor rep boat. There goes yet another fleet ship out of the Gal inventory. Do something different with it and give it a bonus to AB velocity. Make it the one and only truly dual prop specialized boat. I'd gladly trade some raw DPS bonus for a tracking bonus to add to the mix. Then it will be vicious in the right hands.
But for all that is good and right please don't kill me with yet another active armor rep Gal boat.
that would be pretty awesome like a 5% to afterburner max velocity
i would like that more then the repair bonus. There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... Hybrid tech I ammo boost |
DaeHan Minhyok
Multiplex Gaming Li3 Federation
8
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 04:03:00 -
[1480] - Quote
Changes look interesting.
so why do the Amarr get a better missile bonus than the caldari? If I'm not mistaken missiles are kind of a cladari thing, but the cerb only gets a 5%bonus to kinetic while the sac gets 5% to ALL missile damage types, something seems wrong with this picture....
but then caldari always gets dumped on. |
|
Devon Weeks
Deadspace Defense Initiative Initiative Associates
26
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 04:06:00 -
[1481] - Quote
Quote:but then caldari always gets dumped on.
Ok... is there any race that DOESN'T feel dumped on? |
To mare
Advanced Technology
227
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 04:07:00 -
[1482] - Quote
DaeHan Minhyok wrote:Changes look interesting.
so why do the Amarr get a better missile bonus than the caldari? If I'm not mistaken missiles are kind of a cladari thing, but the cerb only gets a 5%bonus to kinetic while the sac gets 5% to ALL missile damage types, something seems wrong with this picture....
but then caldari always gets dumped on. maybe you missed that the cerberus have 6 launchers and the sacrilege only 5? |
baltec1
Bat Country
7481
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 05:22:00 -
[1483] - Quote
Diesel47 wrote:^ yep.
I think either he didn't read anything, or he did and just ignored it all.
He is ignoring people who want an overpowered mess. This is a good thing. |
Battlingbean
Star Frontiers Dirt Nap Squad.
17
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 05:22:00 -
[1484] - Quote
OK, so ships with larger drone bays get one less slot than those with lesser drone bays. I get that, it makes sense. So then shouldn't ships with absolutely no drone bay get an extra slot? Maybe give Zealot, Cerberus(remove drones) and Eagle a utility high slot. |
Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
172
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 05:54:00 -
[1485] - Quote
Battlingbean wrote:OK, so ships with larger drone bays get one less slot than those with lesser drone bays. I get that, it makes sense. So then shouldn't ships with absolutely no drone bay get an extra slot? Maybe give Zealot, Cerberus(remove drones) and Eagle a utility high slot.
The slot reduction is based on drone bonuses, not the size of the drone bay. |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
1425
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 05:58:00 -
[1486] - Quote
Shereza wrote:Battlingbean wrote:OK, so ships with larger drone bays get one less slot than those with lesser drone bays. I get that, it makes sense. So then shouldn't ships with absolutely no drone bay get an extra slot? Maybe give Zealot, Cerberus(remove drones) and Eagle a utility high slot. The slot reduction is based on drone bonuses, not the size of the drone bay. That makes no sense either. If that were true the vexor would not be -1 slot, only be vexor navy issue would be.
It supposedly has something to do with a fabled "utility" that drone ships have. Ideas for Drone ImprovementTwitter Account-á @Omnathious |
Battlingbean
Star Frontiers Dirt Nap Squad.
17
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 06:04:00 -
[1487] - Quote
Well I figured It was bandwidth related. |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
153
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 07:57:00 -
[1488] - Quote
Battlingbean wrote:Well I figured It was bandwidth related.
No, it's a bit outdated tbh, from a time before mods to effect drones. But since that one-slot-less became part of dogma for ships they've brought out drone rigs, drone modules for high, medium and low slots, a 5 drone limit to non-capital ships, the bandwidth feature and a whole slew of additional drone bonuses for ships so I'm not certain the missing slot still stacks up in all cases and would prefer a ship-by-ship approach to assessing it rather than the blanket coverage we currently get. |
W0lf Crendraven
The Tuskers
126
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 11:09:00 -
[1489] - Quote
Any slot related design is bad, would make sense if all weapons were similar and all boni would work together in a similar way. You have to lok at performance before you judge, is the ishtar able to have competetive ehp/dps/speed, or a good active tank? If yes, well then its fine. |
Diesel47
Bad Men Ltd.
859
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 12:04:00 -
[1490] - Quote
To mare wrote:DaeHan Minhyok wrote:Changes look interesting.
so why do the Amarr get a better missile bonus than the caldari? If I'm not mistaken missiles are kind of a cladari thing, but the cerb only gets a 5%bonus to kinetic while the sac gets 5% to ALL missile damage types, something seems wrong with this picture....
but then caldari always gets dumped on. maybe you missed that the cerberus have 6 launchers and the sacrilege only 5? just to clarify with max skill the sac have 8.3 effective launchers all damage type the cerb have 8 effective launchers all damage type and 10 effective launchers kinetic
Sac can actually use drones. |
|
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
122
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 15:15:00 -
[1491] - Quote
Yes drones, but what does that have to do with missile damage? The Cerberus has the extra missile and can quite easily fit 3 BCUs. If you fit 3 BCUs on a Sac you'll have no tank and a very slow boat. The Cerb has a decent amount of extra range too.
I'm really liking both on paper at the moment, I'd not suggest for a second that the Sac is by far a better ship due to it's bonuses. They've just got different roles. Cerb is going to be a pretty awesome mid range dps ship if you are in a gang with tackle, combined with some Recon ships it'll be deadly. |
Perihelion Olenard
174
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 15:15:00 -
[1492] - Quote
The nice thing about the active shield booster and armor repairer improvement is that combined with these resists, these HACs will be decent defensively. That is, until they encounter neuts. Neuts are everywhere, unfortunately. I wear my sunglasses at night. |
Tepalica
ACME-INC
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 17:27:00 -
[1493] - Quote
Oh boy, 75 pages of the second HAC discussion....I feel like I need to make a few propositions for the HAC re-balance on the remote chance that any dev is still following this thread...
Sorry for the long read in advance, I had a lot on my mind
My two main concerns here are Sacrilege and Deimos.
Sacrilege, much like the Damnation is getting bonuses for heavy missiles which shows that you are expanding the Khanid ship doctrine, but it's obvious this is a recent idea because the Vengeance assault frigate has no bonuses to light missiles and missile range and regardless of the heavy missile bonus additions to the Sacrilege, I am convinced it will remain primarily a HAM platform which means close range combat. Close range combat requires a bit more speed - let's not forget that it's an armor boat and with your changes to armor rigs that affect self repairing, Sacrilege could retain its role as a close range small gang brawler with very good self-repair capabilities even if you removed its awsome cap bonus, but the fact remains it has only 5 low slots.
I believe you should give the sacrilege a 6th low slot without butchering the highs and mids, and also, buff it's speed by at least another 20m/s because compared to Cerberus (which already has 220m/s speed with the ability to fit nanofibers without nerfing it's tank), the Sacrilege seems a bit underpowered. Considering Sacrilege is an armor boat, I would say a base speed of even 230 or 240m/s would not be overpowered...
The main thought behind these 2 simple changes I proposed is to make the Sacrilege a ship that people would WANT to train for because let's not forget that out of all HACs, Sacrilege is the biggest pain in the ass to train for, and right now, even with your suggested changes, it just remains little more than an eye candy.
As for the Deimos....oh god, where do I even start?
Deimos is supposed to be a specialized high dps blaster platform which, with the proposed medium long range turret buff might actually become a decent small - mid range kiting platform....
Deimos has many problems with the biggest one being that what ever task you set it to do, there is already some ship out there that does it better except perhaps close range (melee range) damage output which a Deimos pilot has literally no way of applying unless the target was already pointed and webbed by someone else (and let's not forget that the Vigilant is better than Deimos in almost every possible way, particularly with it's awsome dps what was supposed to be the main strength of the Deimos) Compared to the Deimos, Cynabal and Vagabond are faster and can apply their damage quite easily with barrage ammo if the pilot judges that going into melee range would be too perilous - Deimos will never be sniping anything with it's falloff bonus and one look at the Eagle is enough to see that it is a sniping ship that is actually much much tougher than the Deimos which is supposed to be an ALL IN blaster brawler - Deimos shield/armor amount is horrible as well...
The 4th medium slot you gave to Deimos opens up an interesting possibility of fitting it like a Vagabond (MWD, long point and 2 shield extenders) but that is a setup which would suck because of the T2 Gallente shield resist setup - this setup works with the vagabond which has very uniform shield resists by default and it's very small kinetic hole can easily be fixed with a single rig and trying something similar with the Deimos would be horrible! The Deimos needs a lot of work to become something that should be feared or at least something an EvE pilot would want to fly...
The biggest problem here are the ship bonuses - being a brawler I believe the Deimos should get a local rep bonus AND a tracking speed bonus because getting into blaster + void/antimatter range seriously screws with tracking and a some extra tracking will help a lot with any Deimos rail fits.
Something like this:
Gallente Cruiser Bonuses: 7.5% bonus to armor repairer effectiveness 7.5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret tracking speed
Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses: 10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret falloff 10% Medium Hybrid Turret damage
The community wants the MWD cap bonus to go away, and the devs are determined to keep it, so I propose a solution here! Make the Deimos MWD cap bonus be it's special ability - a flat 25% increase to MicroWarpdrive capacitor bonus and everyone will be happy....right?
Your proposed Deimos speed change is a step in the right direction. Since Serpentis Vigilant is better at dps than Deimos, I propose you just give Deimos it's utility high slot back with an increase to the ship powergrid so we can fit something useful there (and if at all possible do this without removing the 4th medium slot) Lastly, Deimos shield/armor amounts are criminally low, I propose you shave off 800 points of Deimos hull amount and re-distribute those points equally into shields and armor (400 points to each).
I am aware these changes are radical, and may seem too much to many people, but I am convinced Deimos needs these radical changes if you are determined to make it into a USEFUL ship! Otherwise, it is obvious Deimos will remain a ship no one wants to fly, not even as a bait ship. |
Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
414
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 17:41:00 -
[1494] - Quote
RISE something being picked up on in the CS thread is the resist quantity imbalance between minmatar ships and the rest.. care to take a look? and perhaps sort out the crazy gaps in resists like 0% on EM and then 90% EM 10% EXP etc.... 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. |
Mei Khlolov
Constantine. Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
1
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 17:49:00 -
[1495] - Quote
The current proposed Deimos changes are as close to perfect as they're gonna get. I get frustrated with my fellow gallente pilots as they want every goddamn ship to brawl. How many brawlers does a race need?
If you've just gotta change the deimos more, please don't hurt its kiting ability. It looks awesome as it is now (including MWD bonus!) |
Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
414
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 17:58:00 -
[1496] - Quote
Well Rise has already said that the deimos will now get a rep bonus along with more armour hp 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. |
Mei Khlolov
Constantine. Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
2
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 18:33:00 -
[1497] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Well Rise has already said that the deimos will now get a rep bonus along with more armour hp
Which is cool if they've decided on it, I just hope he doesn't nerf the shield hp, nor the cap too hard. |
FleetAdmiralHarper
The Caldari Independent Navy Reserves
14
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 18:42:00 -
[1498] - Quote
HiddenPorpoise wrote:I like it, but why is the Diemos(t) loosing tank?
to make sure it keeps in trend with its unofficial real name XD
besides its still really powerful, and the noobs havent figured out that all you need to do to survive and attack from one, is put your hand over you eyes and press the "return fire button" XD. |
Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
416
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 20:15:00 -
[1499] - Quote
The vaga should get a shield HP buff and a little armour/structure to help it shield boost. 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. |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1072
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 20:30:00 -
[1500] - Quote
Shereza wrote:Kane Fenris wrote:i proposed this at the start of the first thread but oly got laughed at..... and eve got called dumb/stupid (tracking has to be huge enough you can hit from 15-18km +)
it would be not quite like the old vaga but distinct from the cyna and would get rid of the overlap of those ships. I'd like to play devil's advocate and ask the question, "So if the vagabond gets a tracking bonus and a heavy boost in power grid in order to function as an 'arty kiter' just how would that affect its performance in close-range combat roles? I mean from my perspective more grid means more plates/extenders and more buffer, and more tracking means better damage application against faster targets in close making it a potential frigate murder machine rather than an 'arty kiter.'
1st, Blasters wouldn't track so much better than now despite numbers saying differently, at some point when tracking numbers are enough you don't apply any more dmg than your guns can do and blasters already track pretty well with +25% tracking ammo
2nd Ever tried to fit blasters for fleets and zip zap all around while shooting with blasters?-then for fleets forget the mwd, so this makes not one but two wasted bonus. At least an ishtar can sit there drop sentries and assign to command ship, Deimost with blasters will just wait for something to land on top of it, if it ever tries to do anything else it will die. Phobos is the perfect example of how bad Deimos can be for fleets, while the role is different and despita having a much higher resist profile and thus tank, from my experience at every single time I've seen some on grid they die so easily it's almost ridiculous, they're fat with mwd you can't miss them unless you don't shoot, they're so slow to get the job done those pretty much die as fast as any other T2 ship but without being able to do something significant for their fleet. Of course I'm talking of large fleets and dynamic situations, not a small gang at the gate roaming gang or supers tackle.
You can't do your fleet job very well, or at least the ship will not be successful unless idiots jumping on top of your fleet, once you've fitted your MWD you're using an ACR rig for a 1600plate your DCU you don't have that much free slots so how would the eventual increase in PG/Cap base stats make it any better for anything else than just fit properly rails and have a tracking bonus to make them work?
You mean fit double 1600 a DCU 1 hardener 1 ENP and 1 MFS? -hell if you do that in your Diemost you better be at gates with rapiers/huggins/lokis double webbing your targets or you'll never get in range before the thing dies to every one else but your guns. Even a shield Domi moves faster.
*removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
|
|
|
|
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 .. 89 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |