Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
van Uber
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 14:22:00 -
[31] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:let me see here.
Dominix - swiss army knife. you can fit it for offense, bait, and logi.
typhoon - BAIT, bump, good dps, or dps and neuts.
scorpion - lots of ecm.
geddon, - puls lazer melter
brutix - good blaster boat, can be nano fit for lulz - see also suicide ganking.
ferox - pod and frig ganking.
cyclone - good mission boat, nice shield boost bonus.
prophecy - BAIT.
Anyway, those are all tech 1 tier 1 ships. YOU may think they have no role, but they have a role if you define one for them. Personally they are all good bait if you ask me.
So why should I fly a Ferox over a Drake again? So I can chase pods better? Sounds awful fun. |
Max Von Sydow
Droneboat Diplomacy
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 14:23:00 -
[32] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Alara IonStorm wrote: At the expense of ...
Why not both? When you are repping you aren't mining, not fit for it at all, so that bonus doesn't apply and vice versa. They are mutually excluding bonuses. Because you don't get 3 bonuses on a T1 and that bonus would b e better served with a purpose. As such only 2 of the 4 races get it. So transfer it over to ORE where it belongs and make the Procurer worth while and the Osprey at the same time.
Someone suggested somehwere that CCP should make an ORE frigate and an ORE cruiser to compensate for a removal of mining bonuses on the T1 cruisers and T1 frigates. that also gave me an idea that we could also make the T1 mining frigs the hacker and analyzer frigates a lot of us have always wanted. |
mmorpg lol
Carebear Reducation
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 14:44:00 -
[33] - Quote
I find it funny that people want to buff the exqueror becuase it is hard to fit. Cap boosters are blatently the way to go with this ship seeing as it has a very useful bonus to cargo bay. As for its tank, its not great but it is what one would expect from a looking at the oni. It is a baby logi and it treated as such works very well, but if you try using it as you would the T2 logi, it will not be able to pull that role off. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
72
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 17:00:00 -
[34] - Quote
Doesn't fit enough magic pills to make it hilarious. CSM do you think? No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
March rabbit
Ganse Shadow of xXDEATHXx
33
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 17:29:00 -
[35] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Caulk H0lster wrote: If I was flying a Cyclone, for example, I probably wouldn't be very afraid of a Drake pilot I saw ratting with a character less than a year old or so.
"If they had no PVP gear and if they had less skills than me ... then I would feel confident about fighting them." What? this is SOLO PVP
and this is the reason i never take all those pvp-ers seriously....
|
Callic Veratar
Power of the Phoenix
39
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 17:48:00 -
[36] - Quote
I like the idea of removing the mining bonus from existing frigates and cruisers. Make the mining cruisers light logistics. That way a new player can get into logistics without having to drop 100M on a T2 cruiser. The frigates could work as exploration module ships or even super-light logistics.
As a replacement for the mining ships, I would recommend 4 new race-specific mining industrials. Give them all a 20% mining laser role bonus and another pair of bonus from range, cap-use, drones, cargo, or tanking.
The NPE give you the Racial Industrial skill book, so if someone wants to mine, they could get into these ships immediately. |
Teamosil
Good Time Family Band Solution
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 17:55:00 -
[37] - Quote
I'd like to see more unusual or utility bonuses tacked on to the t1 cruisers personally. Something that would give them more of a role for later players for odds and ends. Like a gas cloud harvester bonus. Or ramp up one's cargo capacity and drop it's align time to make a ghetto mini hauler that is a bit more robust than an indy. Or archaeology and hacking bonuses. I dunno. I like the idea of being able to optimize your play by utilizing a lot of different ships for specific tasks. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
72
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 18:04:00 -
[38] - Quote
Teamosil wrote:I'd like to see more unusual or utility bonuses tacked on to the t1 cruisers personally. .. Like a gas cloud harvester bonus. ..
I agree but before that I would like to see a complete gas harvesting ship
Definitely think something similar to a thrasher with hacking and analysing bonuses instead of weapon ones would be great. CSM do you think? No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
Vachir Khan
TriSeq Defence Group
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 18:04:00 -
[39] - Quote
Removing the tiers and changing the different ships into specialisations is just a smart and logical thing to do. So they should all be somewhat equal in "power" but have their own niche, rather than being AND different AND worse/better. Will take a lot of planning and balancing but I do believe that by doing so we won't need new ships as such, instead we'll be able to make better use of the ships that already exist. So in the end it'll cost CCP less time and effort to make it happen compared to introducing new ships. Excellence is not a skill, it's an attitude. |
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
202
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 18:46:00 -
[40] - Quote
van Uber wrote:Obsidian Hawk wrote:let me see here.
Dominix - swiss army knife. you can fit it for offense, bait, and logi.
typhoon - BAIT, bump, good dps, or dps and neuts.
scorpion - lots of ecm.
geddon, - puls lazer melter
brutix - good blaster boat, can be nano fit for lulz - see also suicide ganking.
ferox - pod and frig ganking.
cyclone - good mission boat, nice shield boost bonus.
prophecy - BAIT.
Anyway, those are all tech 1 tier 1 ships. YOU may think they have no role, but they have a role if you define one for them. Personally they are all good bait if you ask me. So why should I fly a Ferox over a Drake again? So I can chase pods better? Sounds awful fun.
hey, with the new pod mails coming soon TM. you too will want to kill as many pods as possible to post on your killboards and revel in the amount of isk you cost someone.
|
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
75
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 19:20:00 -
[41] - Quote
Vachir Khan wrote:Removing the tiers and changing the different ships into specialisations is just a smart and logical.
Quoted to OP CSM do you think? No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
Velicitia
Open Designs
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 19:56:00 -
[42] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: From a mining perspective, I think that T1 cruisers are an important first step, if only to show people how boring it can be before they commit to skills for a mining barge.
At the expense of the only Repair Bonused Cruiser before a T2 Logi. EVE has no combat effective Logistics before T2. From same thread. _____________________ A Mining Bonus is a Waste of a Bonus that could go to something better and a Waste of Time for anyone who wants to be a Miner. What they need to do is lower the Skill Time involved in getting a Procurer. It takes a week and a half so to get a Retreiver. You are in a Procurer for about a day before you move up. The Procurer Mines the same as an Osprey so bring the Training time in Line with it instead of wasting valuable bonus space and Training time on a Combat ship. The best added benefit is that right now industry favors Caldari Characters, now everyone has a chance to get in on the ORE Action.
Reason Procurer mines less than a Osprey is ...
... wait for it...
.... T2 mining modules.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
1046
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 20:03:00 -
[43] - Quote
I think it's worth pointing out that we have tiers and then we have tiers.
What I think most people think of when we're talking ship tiers is the progression in level and build requirements, and the increase in abilities that one would expect to come with such increases. These made sense back in the day when it was tough going to build a battleship, and when it was far from obvious that you'd blast through to lvl IV GÇô V in the skill because you're training at 2700 SP/h.
On the other hand, for most ship categories, the tiers also hide different roles, but these aren't really tiers in the classic sense. So I think that a lot of the back and forth we've seen in this thread is people aggressively agreeing with each otherGǪ
So isn't this a question of GÇ£remove the old progression, because it is no longer relevant to modern gameplay realities, and instead focus on the roles seen within these tiersGÇ¥? I.e. both parties are actually largely in agreement, just from different perspective. The issue the old tier thinking causes is that it, for no particularly useful reason, makes some ships weaker than others and GÇ£disallowGÇ¥ them to be made better in ways that would further support their role.
For instance, among the frigates, we have six fairly distinct roles: mining, astrometrics, ewar, speedy combat, combat with primary racial weapon and combat with secondary racial weapon. It gets a bit muddy with the races that don't really have a primary or secondary weapon, but by and large, these are the classes of ships (and when turned into T2 ships, these roles are largely maintained and refined further). However, due to the tier system, the mining frigate GǣmustGǥ be weak as hellGǪ just because it's low-tier. The tiers restricts what can be done with the hull, since buffing it would make it better in some way than its higher-tier cousins. Likewise, the Gǣsecondary weapon combat frigateGǥ is forced to be worse (stats-wise) than the primary-weapon one, again, just because of the now largely irrelevant tier system.
Same thing with the cruisers GÇö four rather distinct roles, but the lower-tier ones are forced by history to be pitiful specimens, even though they could probably use a buff or attribute reshuffle or two to further clarify (and function better within) their roles. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Jenshae Chiroptera
75
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 20:21:00 -
[44] - Quote
Tippia wrote:I think it's worth pointing out that we have tiers and then we have tiers. .
- Both parties agree from different perspectives.
- Old tier thinking "prevents" improvements to ships in their supporting roles.
- Remove the old system as it no long applies to the modern game.
Maybe it is getting late here but I found your post a bit ... (untidy?) ... writing style I guess? Anyway, just tried to highlight the salient points that I could spot in it. CSM do you think? No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
Templar Dane
Amarrian Retribution
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 21:32:00 -
[45] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:let me see here.
Dominix - swiss army knife. you can fit it for offense, bait, and logi.
typhoon - BAIT, bump, good dps, or dps and neuts.
scorpion - lots of ecm.
geddon, - puls lazer melter
brutix - good blaster boat, can be nano fit for lulz - see also suicide ganking.
ferox - pod and frig ganking.
cyclone - good mission boat, nice shield boost bonus.
prophecy - BAIT.
Anyway, those are all tech 1 tier 1 ships. YOU may think they have no role, but they have a role if you define one for them. Personally they are all good bait if you ask me.
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
77
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 01:42:00 -
[46] - Quote
Templar Dane wrote:... Only morons are against buffing [weak] ships.
... but what about the economy! Why those Tier 1 battle cruisers would cost more! You might start getting value for your ISK! It would be a travesty! With more competing ships on the market the more expensive ones might cost less! Oh woe is us! Think of the poor margin traders! CSM do you think? No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
van Uber
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 08:59:00 -
[47] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:van Uber wrote: So why should I fly a Ferox over a Drake again? So I can chase pods better? Sounds awful fun.
hey, with the new pod mails coming soon TM. you too will want to kill as many pods as possible to post on your killboards and revel in the amount of isk you cost someone.
Possibly. But not with a Ferox. Harpy and Eagle would do that so much better. An even more interesting option would be the Cormorant after the expansion.
So the only reason to fly a Ferox over a Drake is its slightly better abiility to pop pods, but at the same time there are a handful of ships that does that far better than the Ferox.
So in the end, still no Ferox. |
Terminal Insanity
Convex Enterprises
44
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 09:07:00 -
[48] - Quote
I still see people flying Ferox's and Cyclones. I think they need to be given a more role-specific task though. When it comes to regular roams, everyone goes Drake/Canes. It would be nice if the Ferox/Cyclone tier had something it was better at then their older sisters. Obviously not raw combat, but maybe a certain flavor of combat? Or, just make the Cyclone a better tank and less firepower? This would leave the Hurricane in the middle, with the Tornado ahead with high damage / no tank |
Erim Solfara
inFluX.
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 11:08:00 -
[49] - Quote
There's been a recent thread about this in Ships and Modules if you'd searched for it. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=24582
I'm just gonna copy my main post from there for the sake of this discussion;
I've been mulling over this again since the announcement of the new bruisers. My thoughts are that the tier system does have some noteworthy merit to new players, but is far too pervasive at the moment, so I would suggest this change.
The starting point for balancing ships should be that all ships in a class are equally potent, albeit with their own specialities in that class. For instance, the Omen and Maller should be similarly useful, with the use of either depending on choice of gank or tank.
Secondly, once a class has approximately 3 ships in it, it should then be considered that a stepping stone into that class is required, and a low tier option or two should be added.So using Amarr cruisers as the example, once the Maller, Omen, and Abitrator are balanced against each other, the Augoror would remain low-tier and low-cost.
Frigates (again, Amarr for simplicity), would have the Punisher, Inquisitor, and the Crucifier at the top, with equal potential. Beneath them would be the Magnate, Executioner, and Tormentor. You'd have three viable combat options for older players, with their roles intact, an entry-level combat frigate (Executioner) as an upgrade for the burgeoning combat pilot, and similar entry-level ships for two other professions.
This is a well populated ship class, so it works out nicely. What about when the class has alot fewer ships in it?
Let's take battlecruisers as an example; currently we have tier 1s and tier 2s, and essentially, tier 1s are useless as the training time and cost difference between them for anything other than a very cash-strapped and rushing new player is meaningless.
With the new 'logic', you would assume the class didn't have enough ships to warrant a low tier option (cruisers basically serve the bruisers in this way anyway), and balance them accordingly. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
80
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 14:10:00 -
[50] - Quote
*Does some more flying back and forth with painted protest hull.* CSM do you think? No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
80
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 03:58:00 -
[51] - Quote
Well ... is there anything more to say about it? I don't have anything. I just hope the staff have seen it and taken this into consideration. CSM do you think? No matter the changes, high sec people chose the safests. Lots of stick and they will leave. Half the problem is the players in null sec; we do not want to be there with you. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |