Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
The Spod
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
71
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 14:01:00 -
[1] - Quote
Keep it simple, stupid: GÇó every boat is a base faction BS GÇó every boat gets a racial ewar bonus +1 mid
Fitting for dummies: GÇó to be a stronger faction ship, use utility mid GÇó to be ewar ship with faction gank, fit ewar GÇó find your favorite
Ships: Gurista, +1 mid and ecm: hookbill, ospreyni, scorpionni Angel, +1 mid and tp: firetail, stabberfi, tempestfi Serpentis, +1 mid and damp: comet, thoraxni, megani Sansha, +1 mid and td: slicer, omenni, apocni
Pretty straight forward. Sansha boats would look pretty sweet solo, angel boats would get a juicy nerfbat, gurista boats would look very impressive, serpentis boats could use a slight fine tuning. |
Qweasdy
Absolute Massive Destruction Cult of War
3
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 14:10:00 -
[2] - Quote
Why do you say pirate ships and then list navy issue ships as examples? |
The Spod
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
71
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 16:12:00 -
[3] - Quote
"every boat is a base faction BS, every boat gets a racial ewar bonus +1 mid"
base faction BS listed |
Moirai Thunder
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 16:14:00 -
[4] - Quote
This doesn't make sense... |
Lucine Delacourt
The Covenant of Blood
26
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 17:16:00 -
[5] - Quote
Some individual ships in that group look interesting but on the whole I would say it is a net loss for diversity. |
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
233
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 17:35:00 -
[6] - Quote
why for cruisers would ccp make an added recon class. Already have 2 of them. What these be with e-war emphasis.
And why don't we do something radical like fix eaf before making new ewar frigates. You see...ccp has been here before. Inty was less than perfect, af's were red headed step children, we asked to fix them and ccp gave us pirate frigates. And all they did was show even more cleary how frigs a few years back were not doing well.
|
Alundil
The Unnamed.
307
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 19:11:00 -
[7] - Quote
Au natural????? Like, no shaving/waxing? I don't think I can get behind that at all. Clone mechanics enchancements Deep Space Probe Revival |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
3264
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 19:56:00 -
[8] - Quote
If you touch my Serpentis ships I will dip you in hot oil!!! (in-game of course). Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. |
The Spod
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
71
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 21:16:00 -
[9] - Quote
edited for clarity |
The Spod
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
71
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 21:28:00 -
[10] - Quote
Zan Shiro wrote:why for cruisers would ccp make an added recon class. Already have 2 of them. What these be with e-war emphasis.
And why don't we do something radical like fix eaf before making new ewar frigates. You see...ccp has been here before. Inty was less than perfect, af's were red headed step children, we asked to fix them and ccp gave us pirate frigates. And all they did was show even more cleary how frigs a few years back were not doing well.
These would be "faction ships that can be recon if they want, or just better faction ships". You have the option of using the ewar bonus or just using the utility slot.
T2 recons should be more powerful in their specialized EWAR role, possibly sporting two bonused ewar types per ship but no real damage source. This would ultimately que towards rebalancing combat recons, which would be kind of a good idea anyhow. |
|
bloodknight2
Talledega Knights PLEASE NOT VIOLENCE OUR BOATS
278
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 21:36:00 -
[11] - Quote
OH god...oh god...oh god...please, don't **** the nightmare this way =(
|
Drake Doe
SVER True Blood Public Disorder.
272
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 21:41:00 -
[12] - Quote
-1 the last thing I want for blood raiders and serpentis is the loss of the web bonus. "The homogenization of EVE began when Gallente and Caldari started sharing a weapon system."---Vermaak Doe-- "Ohh squabbles ohh I love my dust trolls like watching an episode of Maury with less " Is he my Dad " but more of " My Neighbor took a dump on my lawn " good episode! *pops more corn*" ---Evernub-- |
The Spod
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
71
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 21:42:00 -
[13] - Quote
Lucine Delacourt wrote:Some individual ships in that group look interesting but on the whole I would say it is a net loss for diversity.
I argue it would be a net gain for diversity, as you would replace the current predictable, streamlined niche pirate "roles" with an utility slot and even a strong fitting branch in ewar.
You could for example take the new nightmare and just fit more tank on it to make it a better fleet ship in general, OR to fit a tracking computer along the napoc core range bonus to make it a 245km sniper, OR to fit TD to make it disrupt enemy fleet while dishing out the damage. You could even armor tank it with a rack of TD's along decent damage basis.
Now the nightmare has pretty much two options for fleet stuff: mid range projector or sniper range specialist. |
The Spod
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
71
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 21:46:00 -
[14] - Quote
Drake Doe wrote:-1 the last thing I want for blood raiders and serpentis is the loss of the web bonus.
Serpentis: you can fit another web in the utility mid. The 90% web bonus is overpowered. Blood raiders: collateral streamlining damage, would be better fitting to angel ships anyhow, giving the angel ships a kiting tool along TP for artillery ranges.
|
The Spod
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
71
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 21:47:00 -
[15] - Quote
bloodknight2 wrote:OH god...oh god...oh god...please, don't **** the nightmare this way =(
Nightmare would be rather good at fleet stuff like this. The napoc doctrine has been around for a while, now imagine napocs that cost more but bring bonused TD's or even more tracking computer damage projection to the field.
Note that the new nightmare would be armor tank oriented by this category. |
Drake Doe
SVER True Blood Public Disorder.
272
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 22:09:00 -
[16] - Quote
The Spod wrote:Drake Doe wrote:-1 the last thing I want for blood raiders and serpentis is the loss of the web bonus. Serpentis: you can fit another web in the utility mid. The 90% web bonus is overpowered. Blood raiders: collateral streamlining damage, would be better fitting to angel ships anyhow, giving the angel ships a kiting tool along TP for artillery ranges. If 90% webs is op I'm sure that it will be removed from marauders before winter. 90% webs aren't overpowered, but we'll find out as soon as pirate ships are rebalanced. The blood raider line is made up off ships that depend on webs to keep their target in neut range, so why take that away from them? "The homogenization of EVE began when Gallente and Caldari started sharing a weapon system."---Vermaak Doe-- "Ohh squabbles ohh I love my dust trolls like watching an episode of Maury with less " Is he my Dad " but more of " My Neighbor took a dump on my lawn " good episode! *pops more corn*" ---Evernub-- |
The Spod
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
71
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 22:20:00 -
[17] - Quote
90% webs have not been suggested for marauders by CCP 82% webs, yes. Difference is almost double the efficiency.
Blood lineup is well arguable to put the web bonus into good use, and IMHO the ships are pretty fine as they are. They are the only pirate faction doing the expected thing in the context of the proposal. As is, I've left them untouched in the OP.
Angels should lore wise and gameplay wise have a good use for the strong web bonus and/or the TP bonus. TP allows better artillery kiting by painting the target bigger for long range guns, web allows closing in and orbiting fast (as the angel NPC's like to do). Both bonuses would best suit angels.
For the purpose of the OP, I provide the very strict general guidelines for making pirate faction ships and the reasons to consider these as a possible starting point. Details can be further iterated, for example serpentis would definitely need some work.
|
bloodknight2
Talledega Knights PLEASE NOT VIOLENCE OUR BOATS
278
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 22:42:00 -
[18] - Quote
The Spod wrote:bloodknight2 wrote:OH god...oh god...oh god...please, don't **** the nightmare this way =(
Nightmare would be rather good at fleet stuff like this. The napoc doctrine has been around for a while, now imagine napocs that cost more but bring bonused TD's or even more tracking computer damage projection to the field. Note that the new nightmare would be armor tank oriented by this category.
So, you are telling us you want to remove the only BS in this game with bonus to laser AND who can fit a shield tank and turn it into a curse/pilgrim with more EHP for 4x the cost? |
Drake Doe
SVER True Blood Public Disorder.
273
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 22:46:00 -
[19] - Quote
The Spod wrote:90% webs have not been suggested for marauders by CCP 82% webs, yes. Difference is almost double the efficiency. The post specifically explains that 90% webs are considered over the top by CCP.
Blood lineup is well arguable to put the web bonus into good use, and IMHO the ships are pretty fine as they are. They are the only pirate faction doing the expected thing in the context of the proposal. As is, I've left them untouched in the OP.
Angels should lore wise and gameplay wise have a good use for the strong web bonus and/or the TP bonus. TP allows better artillery kiting by painting the target bigger for long range guns, web allows closing in and orbiting fast (as the angel NPC's like to do). Both bonuses would best suit angels.
For the purpose of the OP, I provide the very strict general guidelines for making pirate faction ships and the reasons to consider these as a possible starting point. Details can be further iterated, for example serpentis would definitely need some work. An 8% difference isn't necessarily huge, depending on the speed of the webbed hull, as for angels that would a very appropriate bonus because of their bonuses pushing them towards a kiting role, however most people would be unwilling to lose damage or range for application, especially in cases where application isn't an issue, as for serpentis, the ships are geared towards brawling, which is why falloff is bonused instead of optimal, and why the rats try to get so close. "The homogenization of EVE began when Gallente and Caldari started sharing a weapon system."---Vermaak Doe-- "Ohh squabbles ohh I love my dust trolls like watching an episode of Maury with less " Is he my Dad " but more of " My Neighbor took a dump on my lawn " good episode! *pops more corn*" ---Evernub-- |
The Spod
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
71
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 22:49:00 -
[20] - Quote
bloodknight: curse/pilgrim are used for td navy apoc (the new nightmare core) for damage projection
New nightmare would have multiple possible roles: GÇó improved napoc GÇó napoc with a bonused td GÇó strong td platform with tank GÇó strong td platform with damage And more.
|
|
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
452
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 22:52:00 -
[21] - Quote
bloodknight2 wrote:The Spod wrote:bloodknight2 wrote:OH god...oh god...oh god...please, don't **** the nightmare this way =(
Nightmare would be rather good at fleet stuff like this. The napoc doctrine has been around for a while, now imagine napocs that cost more but bring bonused TD's or even more tracking computer damage projection to the field. Note that the new nightmare would be armor tank oriented by this category. So, you are telling us you want to remove the only BS in this game with bonus to laser AND who can fit a shield tank and turn it into a curse/pilgrim with more EHP for 4x the cost?
Yeah, i'm gonna go with this guy.
I bought the Nightmare BECAUSE it had shields.
I did NOT buy it despite having shields.
I spent most of my years being a Caldari missile boat pilot. Decided to go for something else, and decided on the Nightmare.
I wanted instant damage with a shield tank. The reason I went Nightmare is so I didn't have to worry about buying ammo all the time.
Hell.. I've been using the same sets of navy crystals for probably 4-6 months worth of lvl 4 missions. (casually that is)
If you take away my shield tank, or take away DPS in exchange for TD. Or take away my tracking bonus for TD.
I will hunt someone down and castrate them... |
The Spod
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
71
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 22:53:00 -
[22] - Quote
Drake doe: 100 speed is reduced to 10 with 90% 100 speed is reduced to 18 with 82%
10/18 or 5/9 is the relative difference. The 82% webs are almost half as efficient as the 90% ones. |
Drake Doe
SVER True Blood Public Disorder.
273
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 23:04:00 -
[23] - Quote
Like I said, the difference in speed lowered is close to negligent. If they're less than half as efficient as 90% webs, wouldn't the velocity factor be less than 45%, they're actually 8% less effecient, since the difference in speed reduction is 8%. "The homogenization of EVE began when Gallente and Caldari started sharing a weapon system."---Vermaak Doe-- "Ohh squabbles ohh I love my dust trolls like watching an episode of Maury with less " Is he my Dad " but more of " My Neighbor took a dump on my lawn " good episode! *pops more corn*" ---Evernub-- |
Hatsumi Kobayashi
V0LTA Verge of Collapse
271
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 23:23:00 -
[24] - Quote
Not a bad idea per se, but the various types of electronic warfare are so terribly balanced between each other that it would be a bad idea to change the pirate ships without first giving ewar a look. STANDING ON THE VERGE OF PROLAPSE |
The Spod
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
71
|
Posted - 2013.09.21 10:58:00 -
[25] - Quote
Hatsumi Kobayashi wrote:Not a bad idea per se, but the various types of electronic warfare are so terribly balanced between each other that it would be a bad idea to change the pirate ships without first giving ewar a look.
Absolutely.
Though how to balance ewar or to give each type a significant distinctive use is a tough play. Same applies to the base faction hulls, e.g. tempest fleet issue being machariel base would cause a hilarious amount of tears right now :) |
The Spod
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
71
|
Posted - 2013.09.21 11:02:00 -
[26] - Quote
Drake Doe wrote:Like I said, the difference in speed lowered is close to negligent. If they're less than half as efficient as 90% webs, wouldn't the velocity factor be less than 45%, they're actually 8% less effecient, since the difference in speed reduction is 8%.
It's the same syntax you would use with tank. A 90% resist is twice as efficient as a 80% resist, because it reduces incoming damage to half of what 80% does. A 90% web is twice as efficient as 80% web since it reduces speed to half of what 80% does. |
NightmareX
Rebirth. The Devil's Warrior Alliance
206
|
Posted - 2013.09.21 16:49:00 -
[27] - Quote
Removing the 90% web from the Vindicator to take an example is not a very bright idea as the Vindicator is a massive DPS ship. And to keep that as a pure DPS ship, it needs to be able to apply its damage very good. Therefor it needs 90% and not 82% web effect.
Not only that, by doing it your way with the Vindicator, i will lose one important thing that is also a part of being able to keep doing DPS, and that is to keep the lock on my enemies and not getting jammed. And thats why my Vindicator normally is fitted with 1x ECCM in the med slot.
Yes, i use MWD, Disruptor, Webber, ECCM and a Cap Booster in my med slot now.
Removing the 90% web bonus and then makes us to use 2x webs instead will remove that ability.
So no, i dont support your idea for the Vindicator.
Also, the ships who have a 90% web bonus are usually very expensive ships, so you are actually paying alot to get the web bonus.
Webs have already been nerfed earlier. Earlier the Vindicator had 99% web effect witch was overpowered. Here is a list of my current EVE / PVP videos.
Rebirth 4: http://tinyurl.com/ktfyalo Bringers of Hatred: http://tinyurl.com/BOHINFOD The true story about -The Marmite Collective-: http://tinyurl.com/me2r47c |
Verity Sovereign
Sovereign Fleet Tax Shelter
559
|
Posted - 2013.09.21 18:38:00 -
[28] - Quote
Its not the worst suggestion I've seen, I don't think I want the homegenizing, but it would help stop certain pirate factions from being OP'd (*cough* angel *cough*) relative to the others - if you assume the Ewar is equal among the races.
ie: How many bring minnie ewar ships? how many bring caldari ewar ships?
I don't like it enough to +1, so I'll say +0.5 |
Dark Drifter
UK Corp RAZOR Alliance
83
|
Posted - 2013.09.21 21:13:00 -
[29] - Quote
The Spod wrote:Here's a very simple take on pirate ships. "What you would expect them to be." Possibly a reasonable starting point for a rebalancing, or at least one that should be considered? Premises- Pirate ships are supposed to be better than faction ships
- NPC pirate rats can be described as "equivalent to their nemesis faction ships that use ewar along conventional weapons".
Solution, TL;DRMake pirate ships better faction ships that incentivize the use of ewar along conventional weapons. (end of TL;DR) This would simply make pirate ships in player hands what you see in NPC hands, and what you could, in a lot of sense, expect. However, the specific solution I propose here is a bit more refined: incentivizing the use of ewar and making the ships better can be done in one simple step by adding an utility midslot and ewar bonus on the hull of a bog standard faction ship. The extra midslot can be used for all sorts of things including tank, ewar, sensors, damage projection, you name it. This adds variety: where the current pirate BS are beelined towards an identifiable niche by design, the new pirate ships would be just faction ships with more fitting options, including strong ewar. What I mean by the current niche being identifiable is: you now know that the rattlesnake is tanky with drones, the machariel is fast with autocannons/artillery, the vindicator hurts and webs, the blood ships neut, the sansha ships are laserboats with shield. This proposal would bring variety and true fitting options: you can either expect the new pirate ship to have ewar capability OR he could have fitted extra tank OR a dualprop OR sniping computers OR... with the utility midslot. He could be an EWAR tanking mofo with severe dps, severe ewar but a noticeable lack of balls in not tanking conventionally for a fair hull punch contest. The proposed ship lineup draft"Take a faction ship stats core, add utility slot and ewar" Angel: (fast with lots of utility, TP or web bonus) Machariel is a tempest fleet issue with an extra midslot and TP bonus (TeFI needs a buff to agility while at it) Cynabal is a stabber fleet issue with an extra midslot and TP bonus Dramiel is a firetail with an extra midslot and web bonus Serpentis: (notice that web bonus is gone, but you can fit another web in the utility mid) Vindicator is a megathron navy issue with an extra midslot and damp bonus Vigilant is a thorax navy issue with an extra midslot and damp bonus Daredevil is a comet with an extra midslot and damp bonus Gurista: (suppressive ECM, missile range) Rattlesnake is a scorpion navy issue with an extra midslot rolled into stronger hull stats and an ECM bonus Gila is a caracal navy issue with an extra midslot and an ECM bonus Worm is a hookbill with an extra midslot and an ECM bonus Sansha: (wins sniper/kiter wars by range and TD) Nightmare is an apocalypse navy issue with an extra midslot and TD bonus Phantasm is an omen navy issue with an extra midslot and TD bonus Succubus is a slicer with an extra midslot and TD bonus Blood: These fit the intended role, neutralizing ships with decent turret dps. Bonus strenghts could scale by ship class to make ewar appealing even for battleships. Example follows, numbers drafted off the top of my head and arbitrary: Frigates have 50%, cruisers 75%, battleships 100% efficiency bonus to their ewar in the sense of "how many unbonused modules does one bonused module replace". Thus, a machariel would have 200% efficiency target painters meaning a whopping 2 TP's in the slot of one, or 4 TP's in the slot of two. Similiarly, Nightmare TD's would shut down gunboats single handedly, being the equivalent of 2 unbonused ones.
the power list go's
civilian (normal racial hulls) faction (navys) T2 / T3 pirate tourni
comparing a vindi to a n-mega is just ******** |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |