Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Hiram Alexander
Seraphim Securities
62
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 23:07:00 -
[1] - Quote
Devs will probably still be playing with the numbers all the way to 'xmas', but these new test-server figures that have come out really do make for interesting reading.
Obviously, they're not final, and could just as easily revert back to the 'Imba' values they had before, but this is the link I took from twitter, which in turn came from Eve-ru, it seems. I'll be corrected if that's wrong.
Naga loses a low slot, Talos loses web bonus, lots of interesting numbers in there actually -- that will mean nothing of course, until final -- but well worth a browse, and a thought or two... |
Kalot Sakaar
CragCO
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 23:16:00 -
[2] - Quote
HIlarious. No drones to the Talos and loses its ability to control range in a fight with the web. Now its completely worthless. Just shows how lost CCP is with Gallente ships. Might as well rename it cannon fodder. |
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
82
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 23:16:00 -
[3] - Quote
The new build confirms some balancing changes to the new Tier 3 BCs:
The ships will be even thinner (less HP across the board), but more agile. The Talos also faster. All ships will have tighter CPU, the Naga and Talos also less PG.
The Talos looses dronebay and webbonus, gets tracking bonus.
The Oracle looses range and trackingbonus, gets damage and cap usagebonus
The Naga looses a lowslot, hybrid tracking and torpedo explosion velocity bonus and stand with one bonus per weapon system - hybrid range and torpedo velocity, and 3 lowslots bringing it in line with the other 3.
In addition: All ships formely listed with agility nerfs recives (the correct) agility buff |
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
82
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 23:18:00 -
[4] - Quote
Kalot Sakaar wrote:HIlarious. No drones to the Talos and loses its ability to control range in a fight with the web. Now its completely worthless. Just shows how lost CCP is with Gallente ships. Might as well rename it cannon fodder.
I dont know. I get the distinct feeling that these ships are not intended for solouse. They are wolfpack gankers of big things - at least thats how it looks to me. |
mkint
231
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 23:22:00 -
[5] - Quote
Reilly Duvolle wrote: All ships formely listed with agility nerfs recives (the correct) agility buff I have the horrible horrible feeling that if the first pass of release notes wasn't leaked to the public, CCP would have accidentally the whole thing. |
Kalot Sakaar
CragCO
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 23:34:00 -
[6] - Quote
Reilly Duvolle wrote:Kalot Sakaar wrote:HIlarious. No drones to the Talos and loses its ability to control range in a fight with the web. Now its completely worthless. Just shows how lost CCP is with Gallente ships. Might as well rename it cannon fodder. I dont know. I get the distinct feeling that these ships are not intended for solouse. They are wolfpack gankers of big things - at least thats how it looks to me.
Regardless of whether in a fleet or not, as this thing burns with MWD on to the target it will go poof. Even if he warps to zero. Less HP but expected to fight close in and brawl? No way to fight a blaster boat without generous tank. Just can't survive. Just another Diemost. Even if he warps to zero, how can it hold a nano fit whatever. It will be out of scram/web range before he locks. Oh wait, his really long range blasters might... oh never mind.
But I guess your right. It will be good for suicide ganking freighters and such. Worthless for much else. |
Thomas Orca
Intaki Armaments Tactical Narcotics Team
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 23:37:00 -
[7] - Quote
Kalot Sakaar wrote:Reilly Duvolle wrote:Kalot Sakaar wrote:HIlarious. No drones to the Talos and loses its ability to control range in a fight with the web. Now its completely worthless. Just shows how lost CCP is with Gallente ships. Might as well rename it cannon fodder. I dont know. I get the distinct feeling that these ships are not intended for solouse. They are wolfpack gankers of big things - at least thats how it looks to me. Regardless of whether in a fleet or not, as this thing burns with MWD on to the target it will go poof. Even if he warps to zero. Less HP but expected to fight close in and brawl? No way to fight a blaster boat without generous tank. Just can't survive. Just another Diemost. Even if he warps to zero, how can it hold a nano fit whatever. It will be out of scram/web range before he locks. Oh wait, his really long range blasters might... oh never mind.
And to think we were so close to a blaster ship that could be used for something other than station games. |
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
82
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 23:40:00 -
[8] - Quote
Kalot Sakaar wrote: But I guess your right. It will be good for suicide ganking freighters and such. Worthless for much else.
I was actually thinking about capitals and supercapitals. Beeing fast and agile, can unsupported capitals even track them? |
Tore Vest
Vikinghall
47
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 23:55:00 -
[9] - Quote
Bye tallos.... Hi there tornado |
Amro One
One.
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 23:58:00 -
[10] - Quote
You guys are all morons. |
|
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 00:02:00 -
[11] - Quote
Let us hope those changes is merely the beginning. I wish the ships entering TQ were actually balanced with current stuff (mostly with tier1 BC and - to a lesser extent - with CS and BS) 2008, CCP Zulu(park): "command ships are fine as is" 2011, CCP Greyscale: "is the Nighthawk actually underpowered?" Nice progress, guys. |
gfldex
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 00:36:00 -
[12] - Quote
Reilly Duvolle wrote:I was actually thinking about capitals and supercapitals. Beeing fast and agile, can unsupported capitals even track them?
If you bring 4 faction painters on those capitals and the BCs are not to close you can track them. Given that the new Moros with a siege mod II will do 13000dps, you don't need to hit them more then once ... slightly. :) |
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
84
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 00:49:00 -
[13] - Quote
gfldex wrote:Reilly Duvolle wrote:I was actually thinking about capitals and supercapitals. Beeing fast and agile, can unsupported capitals even track them? If you bring 4 faction painters on those capitals and the BCs are not to close you can track them. Given that the new Moros with a siege mod II will do 13000dps, you don't need to hit them more then once ... slightly. :)
I dunno. These ships fitted with a 10MN afterburner and basic speedimplants/a couple of nanos will do close to 1000 m/s without the sigblom of an MWD. Add new commandlinks and you are looking at 1300-1400 m/s. And with a sigradius of between existing BCs and cruisers. |
Soldarius
Peek-A-Boo Bombers
58
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 03:03:00 -
[14] - Quote
aye, they are definitely quick. I found the Naga fit to be spot on as it was. Could fit 8x T2 seige launchers, 3 BCS II, tackle, prop mod, some hardeners, and a cap booster, and still throw a nanofiber in that utility low. But even with all level 5 skills, it was a very tight fit. Had BS alpha and dps, with extreme maneuvarability for a BC to compensate for the crap range of torps.
Perfectly viable in a number of situations. But if it gets caught, it diaf. Not too keen on the lack of drones either. A single frigate would r4pe it. Now Talos loses drones as well? It's Gallente for cripes sake! Gallente without drones is just wrong. "How do you kill that which has no life?" |
Corina Jarr
Spazzoid Enterprises Purpose Built
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 03:08:00 -
[15] - Quote
My only issue is that in their current state none have any drones (even lights). |
Yvan Ratamnim
Phoenix Evolved Part Duo
31
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 03:21:00 -
[16] - Quote
Talos loosing web just honestly killed it for me, that was the 1 interesting thing will stick with tornado as probably everyone else |
Kaede Kimura
Epsilon Inc STORM.
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 03:27:00 -
[17] - Quote
Yvan Ratamnim wrote:Talos loosing web just honestly killed it for me, that was the 1 interesting thing will stick with tornado as probably everyone else If by interesting you mean overpowered, then yeah. |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
240
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 03:31:00 -
[18] - Quote
FYI, they've lost about 250m/s in speed (with MWD acitve) Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
DarkAegix
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
208
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 04:37:00 -
[19] - Quote
I've lost all interest in the Talos. |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
157
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 06:16:00 -
[20] - Quote
how can it be a rebalance if they aren't released... are you fing kidding me? you sad sad children |
|
Daniel L'Siata
Don't Regret Until Next Keg Dragoons.
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 06:49:00 -
[21] - Quote
I honestly thought the first run of stats was very well balanced. Less than impressed with this now. |
Jada Maroo
Mysterium Astrometrics BRABODEN
393
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 06:53:00 -
[22] - Quote
I don't see how you could think the first leak was balanced, seeing as those ships alone (as they were) would have forced a reduction in freight values by about half. No one ship should have that sort of effect. I don't want to see them made useless though either. |
Nikollai Tesla
Crytec Enterprises SRS.
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 06:55:00 -
[23] - Quote
Talos completly blows, it should get to get its drone bay and web bonus. That made the ship actually useful. Explain to me to why use a Talos over a Tornado now.
|
Whiteknight03
WESAYSO Industries
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 07:09:00 -
[24] - Quote
The torp explosion bonus would have been quite useful and probably necessary on the Naga. I can see the reduction in low slots and all, but why reduce the torp equivalent to tracking when giving other ships in the new lineup a tracking bonus? |
Aralieus
Shadowbane Syndicate
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 07:16:00 -
[25] - Quote
I really don't understand what these ships are supposed to be used for. Some have said anti-cap platforms but with the nerf caps are getting I wont be surprised if you see caps with sub-cap support more often and then the tier 3 BC's will be horribly out performed by whatever is fielded which is usually hell-cats, ahacs, drake blob etc etc. Cant run missions that are worth running in them do to the paper thin tank. A tier 2 BC will outperform it in every way. Take the Oracle and Harbinger for example, Harby has a base armor HP of 5,469 while Oracle has(as it is now which I'm sure will change but by how much I'm not certain) a base armor HP of 2,160. Seriously? Harby has 375 CPU, Oracle has 345. WTF?
It really doesn't matter how big the guns you can fit on there, your going to die very quickly with as it stands a very thin tank. I really don't know what direction CCP is going with these ships but from my perspective it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. These ships are purely 'shinies' and eye candy for all the folks that have been crying 'we need more FIS' Which I totally get and agree with, we do need more FIS content but this is a desperate reach to pacify those crying all over this forum. These ships have no role whatsoever and are pointless. Oderint Dum Metuant |
Evelgrivion
Gunpoint Diplomacy
70
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 07:20:00 -
[26] - Quote
Daniel L'Siata wrote:I honestly thought the first run of stats was very well balanced. Less than impressed with this now.
They out-DPSed essentially everything that wasn't bigger than a tier 3 battleship while having high mobility and buffer tanks more or less on par with a normal battlecruiser; they weren't balanced, they were hilariously overpowered.
That being said, there is room to tweak them further. They need to be useful as a glass cannon ship which necessitates a degree of dictating the terms of engagement, but they also need to be capable of being killed. This isn't going to be an easy balance to strike. The Naga probably needs the full bonuses for hybrids and missiles back, though, if not necessarily to the same level.
Perhaps a damage penalty in the form of reduced rate of fire is in order? |
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
86
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 10:44:00 -
[27] - Quote
Aralieus wrote: It really doesn't matter how big the guns you can fit on there, your going to die very quickly with as it stands a very thin tank.... These ships have no role whatsoever and are pointless.
I'll hold judgement until I can try them out. Stealthbombers w/bombs suffers from a lack of HP too, anything can kill them. That doesnt stop alliances from employing them en masse against large sub-capital blobs. Likewise, a smallish gang of T1 frigates can easily kill a battlehip or three if they are lucky enough to catch them unsupported by smaller vessels. I see the new Tier 3 BCs in pretty much the same circumstances, only scaled up. |
Super Chair
Hell's Revenge
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 12:23:00 -
[28] - Quote
Whiteknight03 wrote:The torp explosion bonus would have been quite useful and probably necessary on the Naga. I can see the reduction in low slots and all, but why reduce the torp equivalent to tracking when giving other ships in the new lineup a tracking bonus?
^ This ^
I'd honestly rather see the Hybrid Range bonus and a torp explosion velocity bonus if they had to tone down its bonuses (id really like to see both tracking/range bonuses for both systems, I don't like it when caldari boats are pidgeonholed into can use misilles and can use guns, but another boat does them 2x better...) |
Shadowsword
The Rough Riders Ares Protectiva
54
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 13:09:00 -
[29] - Quote
Kaede Kimura wrote:If by interesting you mean overpowered, then yeah.
With the Naga having for all intends and purposes only one bonus (you won't mix missiles and rails because damage mods won't affect both), the only tier 3 BC that (will probably) retain the capability to fit a dual large shield extender + damage mods + MWD + disruptor is the Tornado. It's going to be OP in a very blatant way. It's so obvious, I wonder what CCP Tallest is thinking... |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
112
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 13:51:00 -
[30] - Quote
They should make them into oversized destroyers .. huge dps and tracking with really flimsy tanks (read: tier1 cruiser tanks). Would be ideal as fire-support or in swarms just like destroyers are and be a hard counter to anything cruiser sized (including Fighters/F.Bombers).
And no, 90% webs on a "free" ship is not balanced .. one down payment and insurance keeps the webs active ad infinitum. Dumbest idea CCP has had in quite a while. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |