Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 55 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 15 post(s) |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
2474
|
Posted - 2014.03.01 21:13:00 -
[1021] - Quote
Crazy KSK wrote: yeah the AB bonus would fit so much better with short neuts since it allows you to stay fast orbiting in scram range
you can't really do this. With the speed you would get out of the AB you wouldn't be able to hit anything unless you put ACs on the cruor.
It doesn't have a tracking bonus and it uses lasers. You better stay >5km or you will have problems hitting anything if you orbit. eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW |
Silivar Karkun
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
167
|
Posted - 2014.03.01 22:51:00 -
[1022] - Quote
then just change the AB bonus for an optimal range bonus, maybe increase its max velocity or something, but the AB bonus still sounds like out of place for a CALDARI bonus...... |
Jon Joringer
Zero-K
113
|
Posted - 2014.03.01 22:54:00 -
[1023] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:Nos range is half scram range. Which means that you will have to be point black to the target.
Not trying to say a ship should be designed with pimp mods in mind, but there are some fairly cheap, nice nos that reach to the edge of scram range. So it could work with some investment in the nos. Seems pretty similar to how I almost never see a DD fit without a faction web at least. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
560
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 00:02:00 -
[1024] - Quote
Jon Joringer wrote:Bienator II wrote:Nos range is half scram range. Which means that you will have to be point black to the target. Not trying to say a ship should be designed with pimp mods in mind, but there are some fairly cheap, nice nos that reach to the edge of scram range. So it could work with some investment in the nos. Seems pretty similar to how I almost never see a DD fit without a faction web at least.
total waste on a proper DD. only matters on link-abuse scrub rail DDs. |
Crazy KSK
Tsunami Cartel Gank for Profit
72
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 02:21:00 -
[1025] - Quote
Catherine Laartii wrote: Cruor would be much better served by dropping the web bonus for a neut range bonus. Or they could roll the two bonuses into one, and cheat a little bit...
dropping the web bonus would just make it a worse sentinel, giving it 75% to range and amount would give it 13,125km with neuts and 11,55 with nos, lessening the problem of being kited but that bonus could not be transfered to ashimmu or bhaal since 22,05km or 44,1km nos/neut would be very powerful especially on the bhaal Quote CCP Fozzie: ... The days of balance and forget are over.
|
Lucine Delacourt
The Covenant of Blood
94
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 03:45:00 -
[1026] - Quote
Silivar Karkun wrote:then just change the AB bonus for an optimal range bonus, maybe increase its max velocity or something, but the AB bonus still sounds like out of place for a CALDARI bonus......
I think you are getting a little too caught up in the bonus being attached to the Caldari Frigate skill. Being able to get twice as much speed out of an AB is the exact kind of advance in tech that fits well with the Sansha. The bonus is also awesome for playability. The proposed ship looks fun to fly, so stop trying to get it changed over something minor. |
Arthur Aihaken
Perkone Caldari State
2963
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 05:15:00 -
[1027] - Quote
So 51 pages in... what'd I miss? Yay or nay, or are we pegging our hopes on the second iteration? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Kapytul Gaynez
Hedion University Amarr Empire
8
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 05:27:00 -
[1028] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:So 51 pages in... what'd I miss? Yay or nay, or are we pegging our hopes on the second iteration?
Most people are intrigued and are waiting to see how they function once they hit the test server. Then a select few are trying to get bonuses changed for nit picking or completely irrelevant reasons. The exception is the Cruor. Most are confused/concerned by it's conflicting bonuses. |
Arthur Aihaken
Perkone Caldari State
2963
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 05:50:00 -
[1029] - Quote
I think we need to see the whole Pirate line-up before we can really give some honest feedback, ie: cruisers and battleships as well. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Medalyn Isis
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
51
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 09:26:00 -
[1030] - Quote
Kapytul Gaynez wrote:Arthur Aihaken wrote:So 51 pages in... what'd I miss? Yay or nay, or are we pegging our hopes on the second iteration? Most people are intrigued and are waiting to see how they function once they hit the test server. Then a select few are trying to get bonuses changed for nit picking or completely irrelevant reasons. The exception is the Cruor. Most are confused/concerned by it's conflicting bonuses.
So Sansha being the best speed tanking ships in the Eve universe doesn't seem out of place to you at all?
There are many valid complaints. For instance the a Gallente skill giving a missile bonus.... If you can't see how that is wrong then you need to stay away from balance.
Although it is not just that some of the bonuses are in direct contrast to the overarching concepts which exist within the game, there are also fitting and practical problems which I am aware of with the Succubus and Cruor.
As mentioned many times before, an afterburner bonus means that an afterburner is going to be a necessity on a ship which is renown for shield tanking. That means we are forced to drop a shield mod, and if we want to fit a MWD, then now we can't do that either unless we want to dual prop. Removing fitting options in a sand box is never desirable.
On top of that, we are also forced to reduce the shield further if we want to actually make use of the afterburner bonus as the more shield mods and rigs we fit, the more we lose in our speed tanking ability. The Sansha ships will just become a confused mess in terms of fitting, not to mention in terms of the lore.
I'll leave the Cruor to other people, although that would much better suit an afterburner bonus. Against small targets it may have some tracking problems, but at least it will allow it to get into range and stay there to nuet the target down. Personally though I prefer the 90% webs. |
|
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
1133
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 10:20:00 -
[1031] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote:
So Sansha being the best speed tanking ships in the Eve universe doesn't seem out of place to you at all?
There are many valid complaints. For instance the a Gallente skill giving a missile bonus.... If you can't see how that is wrong then you need to stay away from balance.
You're confusing lore with balance, in both cases.
I hope I'm not doing you a disservice, but it strikes me that much of the complaining about Sansha seems to be coming from highsec Incursion runners who just want a tankier or gankier Nightmare. |
Medalyn Isis
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
52
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 10:30:00 -
[1032] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:Medalyn Isis wrote:
So Sansha being the best speed tanking ships in the Eve universe doesn't seem out of place to you at all?
There are many valid complaints. For instance the a Gallente skill giving a missile bonus.... If you can't see how that is wrong then you need to stay away from balance.
You're confusing lore with balance, in both cases. I hope I'm not doing you a disservice, but it strikes me that much of the complaining about Sansha seems to be coming from highsec Incursion runners who just want a tankier or gankier Nightmare.
Incorrect, I am talking about both lore and also the performance of the ship. I'm not looking so much at balance as if anything an afterburner is possibly OP.
Also I do not run Incursions, although I do live out in null sec and make extensive use of Pirate ships, primarily Blood Raider and Sansha. I also respect the lore of the game, and really enjoy the Sansha and Blood Raider stories and philosophies on warfare and other such things and try to build my ships around such themes, a hit and run Sansha fleet does little for me, wheras on the other hand a hit and run Blood Raider war band is something which gets my interest.
I am hoping to find out one day how they are linked with each other, it is well known the blood raiders and sansha's have links with one another, and it would be a nice touch if the ships also reflected that.
A overarching lore which makes sense is one of the big draws of the game. |
Onslaughtor
Occult National Security
78
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 10:33:00 -
[1033] - Quote
After a lot of trial and error, and some help, I learned how to edit the pyfa database files. Now I feel I can give a proper proposal for Sansha ship with more than just mental number crunching.
Quote:1. Leave all bonuses the same. (The nightmare and Succubus could use a little more DPS but its not necessary.)
2. Move the two utility highs to one mid and one low. (This gives all 3 ships what they desperately need, more room to do their job while balancing tank, gank, and cap.)
3. Reduce the cap amount on the Phantasm and the Nightmare by 25%. (The Succubus doesnGÇÖt need this handicap, the Phantasm and the Nightmare can take this reduction for the extra slots they gain.)
4. Reduce the cargo hold on all 3 ships by 30%, 50%, and 50% respectively. (This cuts down on cap boosters for ASBs and normal boosters, forcing the ships to seek fleet assistance.)
5. Remove all drone bandwidth and drone bays from the ships that have. (Helps force the ships to seek fleet assistance.)
6. CPU needs to be reduced on the Phantasm and Nightmare by 15-20% and 20-25% respectively. Power Grid needs to be reduced on the Phantasm and Nightmare by 0-5% and 5-10% respectively. (After the removal of the 2 utility highs there is too much CPU and Power Grid left over.)
What this does is create a line of ships that tend to have tanks and dps levels that approach the ship class above it. In the case of the Nightmare, it is on-par with its other pirate Battleships because it can perform slightly better than them without any of their unique utility. I feel that this makes the ships not only distinctly Sansha but also makes them compelling as a ship.
For those who want to check my numbers and would like to test my proposed changes eve.db ^This is the edited Database I've been playing with. Only the slot layout and ?maybe? the 25% cap reduction changes are implemented. To install it just replace the eve.db file in the staticdata folder where you pyfa is located. Be sure to back up your old one.
And for those moaning about the Cruor. The web range bonus is awesome for small gangs. If it stays I WILL be using it, and probably a lot. |
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
1133
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 10:37:00 -
[1034] - Quote
I agree that the AB bonus might be OP at its current magnitude. But it's an interesting bonus that gives the ship a specific ability, worthy of a pirate faction ship. One of the problems with current Sansha and Guristas ships is that they're simply generic gank and tank ship, lacking the special abilities of superior factions, such as the mobility of Angels, the neuts and webs of Blood Raiders and Serpentis. Although the proposed Worm looks powerful, I'm still worried that it lacks the special something.
Sansha doesn't, the AB bonus breaks Sansha out of that hole. Lore is nice and all, so just rewrite it. Blah blah blah... repeated failures of Sansha Incursions blah blah broke the strength of the Sansha fleet blah blah forced a change in tactics to faster more survivable ships blah. There you go. |
Medalyn Isis
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
53
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 10:59:00 -
[1035] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:Lore is nice and all, so just rewrite it. Blah blah blah... repeated failures of Sansha Incursions blah blah broke the strength of the Sansha fleet blah blah forced a change in tactics to faster more survivable ships blah. There you go. .
Heh. But why not simply make a stand out fleet ship using the existing lore, much easier than rewriting the lore completely. The afterburner bonus is good, so save it for a faction where it makes a lot of sense such as blood raiders or something similar.
If the lore was altered as much as ship and module stats are altered these days then Eve might as well not bother having any lore at all. |
Medalyn Isis
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
53
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 11:03:00 -
[1036] - Quote
Onslaughtor wrote:After a lot of trial and error, and some help, I learned how to edit the pyfa database files. Now I feel I can give a proper proposal for Sansha ship with more than just mental number crunching. Quote:1. Leave all bonuses the same. (The nightmare and Succubus could use a little more DPS but its not necessary.)
2. Move the two utility highs to one mid and one low. (This gives all 3 ships what they desperately need, more room to do their job while balancing tank, gank, and cap.)
3. Reduce the cap amount on the Phantasm and the Nightmare by 25%. (The Succubus doesnGÇÖt need this handicap, the Phantasm and the Nightmare can take this reduction for the extra slots they gain.)
4. Reduce the cargo hold on all 3 ships by 30%, 50%, and 50% respectively. (This cuts down on cap boosters for ASBs and normal boosters, forcing the ships to seek fleet assistance.)
5. Remove all drone bandwidth and drone bays from the ships that have. (Helps force the ships to seek fleet assistance.)
6. CPU needs to be reduced on the Phantasm and Nightmare by 15-20% and 20-25% respectively. Power Grid needs to be reduced on the Phantasm and Nightmare by 0-5% and 5-10% respectively. (After the removal of the 2 utility highs there is too much CPU and Power Grid left over.)
What this does is create a line of ships that tend to have tanks and dps levels that approach the ship class above it. In the case of the Nightmare, it is on-par with its other pirate Battleships because it can perform slightly better than them without any of their unique utility. I feel that this makes the ships not only distinctly Sansha but also makes them compelling as a ship. An interesting proposal which I could support, although it seems a little lacklustre on paper, although like you say you have tested it out on Pyfa, and I don't have time to edit the database myself, so will take your word for it.
Personally I do like at least one additional high utility slot as it gives many more fitting options and more utility to the ship as the name implies, particularly on the frigate and cruiser. Although I can see why you have removed it in keeping with the theme of laser focused pure fleet ships. Also remember that the Sansha ships are already down one slot compared to other ships of their class, so there is room to add a completely new one.
I would suggest bumping up the damage bonus from 150% to 175%. As of now Serpentis already have a 200% bonus, and they also have an excellent Ewar ability. Heavy shields are good and all, but seeing as you are basing a theme around a pure focus on a super powered fleet ship, the damage dealing ability needs to reflect that. With the current trend of tiericide increasing the power of all ships, the pirate ships could get left behind. |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
655
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 14:37:00 -
[1037] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:So 51 pages in... what'd I miss? Yay or nay, or are we pegging our hopes on the second iteration?
i certainly am
Blood - neut/nos range bonus for synergy, a little more tank
Angels - needs sharper focus, stronger shield tank . nerf armour, remove drones/launchers, nerf speed , buff damage projection of turrets -maybe add a mwd sig reduction bonus
serpentis - 90% webs are OP .. nerf base T2 web strength too 45% is the best solution, more tank, DD should have drams drones
sansha - more base speed, better cap , oversized prop mods need too go
Gurista - ... -1 slot as per drone ships normally have .. so -1 high .. utility slot isn't that useful anyway - change the gallente bonus too drone damage bonus and leave drone HP too role bonus .. that way you can buff the drone tank without making drone damage too OP/ dominant over missile damage - role bonus should be the missile damage - stronger damage split between drones/missiles 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.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1319
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 16:46:00 -
[1038] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:So 51 pages in... what'd I miss? Yay or nay, or are we pegging our hopes on the second iteration?
Ever heard of the concept of weekend? And that ALl the deves involved in this thread are currently in New Eden Open covarage?
GEta rgip... this till take tiem to hit server and we are unlikely to see changes on the proposal before end of the week. "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1319
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 16:47:00 -
[1039] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Arthur Aihaken wrote:So 51 pages in... what'd I miss? Yay or nay, or are we pegging our hopes on the second iteration? i certainly am Blood - neut/nos range bonus for synergy, a little more tank Angels - needs sharper focus, stronger shield tank . nerf armour, remove drones/launchers, nerf speed , buff damage projection of turrets -maybe add a mwd sig reduction bonus serpentis - 90% webs are OP .. nerf base T2 web strength too 45% is the best solution, more tank, DD should have drams drones sansha - more base speed, better cap , oversized prop mods need too go Gurista - ... -1 slot as per drone ships normally have .. so -1 high .. utility slot isn't that useful anyway - change the gallente bonus too drone damage bonus and leave drone HP too role bonus .. that way you can buff the drone tank without making drone damage too OP/ dominant over missile damage - role bonus should be the missile damage - stronger damage split between drones/missiles
Stop and think a bit. NErfign the normal webs as you propose would but blasters BACK into stone age and make missiles even weaker.
Think a bit moreon the effect of your proposals.
"If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
655
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 17:11:00 -
[1040] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Harvey James wrote:Arthur Aihaken wrote:So 51 pages in... what'd I miss? Yay or nay, or are we pegging our hopes on the second iteration? i certainly am Blood - neut/nos range bonus for synergy, a little more tank Angels - needs sharper focus, stronger shield tank . nerf armour, remove drones/launchers, nerf speed , buff damage projection of turrets -maybe add a mwd sig reduction bonus serpentis - 90% webs are OP .. nerf base T2 web strength too 45% is the best solution, more tank, DD should have drams drones sansha - more base speed, better cap , oversized prop mods need too go Gurista - ... -1 slot as per drone ships normally have .. so -1 high .. utility slot isn't that useful anyway - change the gallente bonus too drone damage bonus and leave drone HP too role bonus .. that way you can buff the drone tank without making drone damage too OP/ dominant over missile damage - role bonus should be the missile damage - stronger damage split between drones/missiles Stop and think a bit. NErfign the normal webs as you propose would but blasters BACK into stone age and make missiles even weaker. Think a bit moreon the effect of your proposals.
losing 15% on T2 webs isn't that HUGE a difference to render blasters useless and missiles are a different issue anyway .. they need the TE/TC/TD change ..... but other than neuts all e-war base stats are usually much weaker than on a bonused ship .. the fact that 60% webs are very effective on an unbonused ship tells you just how OP webs are atm... the change would also make serpentis ships much more useful at 67.5% - 45% webs on other unbonused ships 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.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
|
Niko Lorenzio
United Eve Directorate
294
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 17:50:00 -
[1041] - Quote
The web range bonus on cruor doesn't make sense considering it will have to be really close to use the neut/nos. It should have a range bonus to those as well then. |
Aglais
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
474
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 18:40:00 -
[1042] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote:
There are many valid complaints. For instance the a Gallente skill giving a missile bonus.... If you can't see how that is wrong then you need to stay away from balance.
This is not a valid complaint given the hull it's on.
Remember that the Gallente did not collaborate with the Guristas to construct their ship line. The Guristas took Caldari ships, and revamped them. Who knows- maybe the handwaving for a Gallente skill giving a missile bonus is that they've incorporated systems that ordinarily augment hybrid turret damage into the missile bays (with modifications obviously), showing pirate ingenuity or somesuch?
I do not want the bonuses on the Worm to change just yet, and even moreso because someone thought that a bonus' origin "didn't fit with the lore", rather than "makes it OP as balls". Maybe the Nemesis was involved. Who knows. |
Crazy KSK
Tsunami Cartel Gank for Profit
72
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 19:01:00 -
[1043] - Quote
Harvey James wrote: Blood - neut/nos range bonus for synergy, a little more tank
Sentinel can't have two ships that do exactly the same
Harvey James wrote: Angels - needs sharper focus, stronger shield tank . nerf armour, remove drones/launchers, nerf speed , buff damage projection of turrets -maybe add a mwd sig reduction bonus
the dram should probably get some minor buffs but the other two are just fine right now
Harvey James wrote: serpentis - 90% webs are OP .. nerf base T2 web strength too 45% is the best solution, more tank, DD should have drams drones
I would love to have this web nerf on sisi for a month Id imagine nano ships would be too much fun to fly LOL
Harvey James wrote: sansha - more base speed, better cap , oversized prop mods need too go
the nightmare is one of the slowest ships in the game it totally needs a speed buff the phantasm too but the succubus as in the OP is just fine I think better cap they also need the two bigger ones just eat cap boosters like its candy oversized mods are all over eve and I think are a good game mechanic just imagine if tank mods where restricted how boring that would be
Harvey James wrote: Gurista - ... -1 slot as per drone ships normally have .. so -1 high .. utility slot isn't that useful anyway - change the gallente bonus too drone damage bonus and leave drone HP too role bonus .. that way you can buff the drone tank without making drone damage too OP/ dominant over missile damage - role bonus should be the missile damage - stronger damage split between drones/missiles
yeah all drone ships have it so Gusrista's should too yeah thats a good idea one should need to have gal frigate 5 to get the full damage bonus(gallente are no missile race either) while not hurting noobs too much the missile bonus is pointless imo those 50dps I happily trade for more tank or neuts every time Quote CCP Fozzie: ... The days of balance and forget are over.
|
Aglais
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
475
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 19:15:00 -
[1044] - Quote
Crazy KSK wrote:Harvey James wrote: Gurista - ... -1 slot as per drone ships normally have .. so -1 high .. utility slot isn't that useful anyway - change the gallente bonus too drone damage bonus and leave drone HP too role bonus .. that way you can buff the drone tank without making drone damage too OP/ dominant over missile damage - role bonus should be the missile damage - stronger damage split between drones/missiles
yeah all drone ships have it so Gusrista's should tooyeah thats a good idea one should need to have gal frigate 5 to get the full damage bonus(gallente are no missile race either) while not hurting noobs too much the missile bonus is pointless imo those 50dps I happily trade for more tank or neuts every time
Bold Point 1: This is a garbage generalization applied mainly to T1 and T2 ships which I've just made a post about, and how pirate faction ships interact with them in terms of improvement. If Pirate faction ships are to be superior I see no better way to do that than to unlink them with the horrible malus of -1 arbitrary slot. (Though if you'll look at my previous post, I do think the third high should become a mid if anything does happen to it.)
Bold Point 2: I have done math. You are no longer doing a piddly 50DPS with missiles. Your two launchers are doing ~91 DPS. This is superior to the Punisher. That's without a BCS, too. If you slap on a BCS, you're doing 103. While your drones do ~111. The missiles on the new Worm are not useless- not by a long shot. You know how the Bellicose is a bit of a missiles/drones blend? Yeah. The Guristas ships are going to be kind of like that, with the balance tipped slightly more in favour of drones than missiles. Step out of the past, and look at the new ship without bias towards it's lackluster first iteration.
And for the love of ****stop trying to justify the removal of the missile bonus with "HURR DURR GALLENTE DONT INTO MISSILE U STUPID IF U THIKN THEY DO". This is a Gurista frigate. At least come up with a better argument than "but gallente don't use missiles". |
Streya Jormagdnir
Alexylva Paradox
328
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 19:24:00 -
[1045] - Quote
Onslaughtor wrote:After a lot of trial and error, and some help, I learned how to edit the pyfa database files. Now I feel I can give a proper proposal for Sansha ship with more than just mental number crunching. Quote:1. Leave all bonuses the same. (The nightmare and Succubus could use a little more DPS but its not necessary.)
2. Move the two utility highs to one mid and one low. (This gives all 3 ships what they desperately need, more room to do their job while balancing tank, gank, and cap.)
3. Reduce the cap amount on the Phantasm and the Nightmare by 25%. (The Succubus doesnGÇÖt need this handicap, the Phantasm and the Nightmare can take this reduction for the extra slots they gain.)
4. Reduce the cargo hold on all 3 ships by 30%, 50%, and 50% respectively. (This cuts down on cap boosters for ASBs and normal boosters, forcing the ships to seek fleet assistance.)
5. Remove all drone bandwidth and drone bays from the ships that have. (Helps force the ships to seek fleet assistance.)
6. CPU needs to be reduced on the Phantasm and Nightmare by 15-20% and 20-25% respectively. Power Grid needs to be reduced on the Phantasm and Nightmare by 0-5% and 5-10% respectively. (After the removal of the 2 utility highs there is too much CPU and Power Grid left over.)
What this does is create a line of ships that tend to have tanks and dps levels that approach the ship class above it. In the case of the Nightmare, it is on-par with its other pirate Battleships because it can perform slightly better than them without any of their unique utility. I feel that this makes the ships not only distinctly Sansha but also makes them compelling as a ship. For those who want to check my numbers and would like to test my proposed changes eve.db^This is the edited Database I've been playing with. Only the slot layout and ?maybe? the 25% cap reduction changes are implemented. To install it just replace the eve.db file in the staticdata folder where you pyfa is located. Be sure to back up your old one.And for those moaning about the Cruor. The web range bonus is awesome for small gangs. If it stays I WILL be using it, and probably a lot.
I feel as though what makes pirate faction ships great is that they have bonuses which generally synergize well with fleets (web bonuses, neut bonuses, resist bonuses, etc) but also make them formidable enough in small squads. These suggested changes look pretty solid, though I would point out that the drone nerf seems pretty heavy-handed. There's not a single battleship that lacks a drone bay, so I'd say give the Nightmare at least a 50m3 drone bay and 25 MB bandwidth so it can at least field a flight of lights a time.
The slot layout changes I completely agree with, and it seems like having too many utility hislots makes the Sansha ships sort of compete with the Blood Raider ships as laser-neuting platforms. The cap reductions are fine considering the addition of more mids and lows which can support the cap use.
I do like the AB bonuses on the the Succubus and Phantasm though, it just feels out of place on the Nightmare.
I am also a human, straggling between the present world... and our future. I am a regulator, a coordinator, one who is meant to guide the way.
Destination Unreachable: the worst Wspace blog ever |
Shepard Wong Ogeko
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
722
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 21:04:00 -
[1046] - Quote
Aglais wrote: And for the love of ****stop trying to justify the removal of the missile bonus with "HURR DURR GALLENTE DONT INTO MISSILE U STUPID IF U THIKN THEY DO". This is a Gurista frigate. At least come up with a better argument than "but gallente don't use missiles".
Fine, how about justifying it with the fact that it would be the only time in the entire game that a Gallente skill is used to buff missiles. The ship uses Caldari skills, so the missiles could more sensibly be attached to that. Or it could just stay with a flat hull bonus like it uses currently. If the ship was just going to rely on Gallente skills, then I guess using Gallente skills to bonus missiles would be the only option. But it isn't. And everyone is questioning it because it just looks like it is put on as an after thought without any consideration for how the skill is used in a broader sense.
Or, even better, we could realize like we did with past ship balancing that split weapons are not optimal, and use the Gallente skill to boost drones like usual, and forget boosting missiles in favor of some other non damage bonus to give the ship more utility than dumping out a bunch of damage.
Even with the current weird drone bonus and the completely bizarre Gallente missile bonus, the Worm will easily be out classed by most Assault Frigates. They will do as much damage, and as fast or faster, and the T2 resists will come pretty close to what the Worm's Caldari shield resists provide.
If the Worm is meant to be a slow but tanky brawler, 5 lights with the usual Gallente 10%/level damage bonus and a couple DDA's is enough. The hull bonus should be something like a scram bonus to keep faster ships from just running away.
And if CCP is dead set on going to the few-but-powerful drone scheme, at least use the Gallente bonus to give the drones better velocity/tracking/range. Those are the bonuses that make the other Gallente drone boats so awesome now. The raw damage bonus doesn't mean much if it takes the drones forever to reach the target or can't track it. |
Lucine Delacourt
The Covenant of Blood
94
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 21:22:00 -
[1047] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote:So Sansha being the best speed tanking ships in the Eve universe doesn't seem out of place to you at all?
There are many valid complaints. For instance the a Gallente skill giving a missile bonus.... If you can't see how that is wrong then you need to stay away from balance.
Although it is not just that some of the bonuses are in direct contrast to the overarching concepts which exist within the game, there are also fitting and practical problems which I am aware of with the Succubus and Cruor.
As mentioned many times before, an afterburner bonus means that an afterburner is going to be a necessity on a ship which is renown for shield tanking. That means we are forced to drop a shield mod, and if we want to fit a MWD, then now we can't do that either unless we want to dual prop. Removing fitting options in a sand box is never desirable.
On top of that, we are also forced to reduce the shield further if we want to actually make use of the afterburner bonus as the more shield mods and rigs we fit, the more we lose in our speed tanking ability. The Sansha ships will just become a confused mess in terms of fitting, not to mention in terms of the lore.
I'll leave the Cruor to other people, although that would much better suit an afterburner bonus. Against small targets it may have some tracking problems, but at least it will allow it to get into range and stay there to nuet the target down. Personally though I prefer the 90% webs.
1. Sansha getting better performance out of any piece of tech makes perfect sense.
2. Besides the obvious fact that the Gallente played no role in designing the Worm, you are also ignoring that the bonus is for Therm missiles(Gal flavored) and that the Lachesis(Gal) has a missile bonus. So even by your asinine rules it works.
3. You seem to be implying that you can currently fit a succubus without a prop or that afterwards some people might dual prop it. Neither of those makes a lick of sense. Maybe you should not tell others what business they have in balance debates.
4. To make full use of the AB bonus and frigs naturally small sig means you either armor tank or active shield tank. When fighting cruisers and up you can still use a MSE just fine.
5. You don't think a super AB, Super nuet/nos, armor/sig tank Cruor would be just a little OP? |
Crazy KSK
Tsunami Cartel Gank for Profit
72
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 22:38:00 -
[1048] - Quote
Aglais wrote:
Bold Point 1: This is a garbage generalization applied mainly to T1 and T2 ships which I've just made a post about, and how pirate faction ships interact with them in terms of improvement. If Pirate faction ships are to be superior I see no better way to do that than to unlink them with the horrible malus of -1 arbitrary slot. (Though if you'll look at my previous post, I do think the third high should become a mid if anything does happen to it.)
sure make it better then the ishkur letting it have that slot as a high slot would not make much of a difference true as a mid slot however it might be a bit much tank
Aglais wrote: Bold Point 2: I have done math. You are no longer doing a piddly 50DPS with missiles. Your two launchers are doing ~91 DPS. This is superior to the Punisher. That's without a BCS, too. If you slap on a BCS, you're doing 103. While your drones do ~111. The missiles on the new Worm are not useless- not by a long shot. You know how the Bellicose is a bit of a missiles/drones blend? Yeah. The Guristas ships are going to be kind of like that, with the balance tipped slightly more in favour of drones than missiles. Step out of the past, and look at the new ship without bias towards it's lackluster first iteration.
I would love to see that math laid out in eft and in game a hookbill with 2 launchers shooting rage nova rockets (10% bonus per level) no damage mods or implants (all5 skills for eft) I get 67 and 62,8dps(skills are not perfect) and a punisher with 3 gatling pulse laser II using conflag does 109dps(again no damage mods) 72 with 2 guns if you meant that
Aglais wrote: And for the love of ****stop trying to justify the removal of the missile bonus with "HURR DURR GALLENTE DONT INTO MISSILE U STUPID IF U THIKN THEY DO". This is a Gurista frigate. At least come up with a better argument than "but gallente don't use missiles".
don't put words in my mouth, thanks Quote CCP Fozzie: ... The days of balance and forget are over.
|
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
1852
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 22:55:00 -
[1049] - Quote
Please stop using that outdated chart. It's offensive to factual discussion and more than slightly misleading. This is the correct chart to use. |
Onslaughtor
Occult National Security
79
|
Posted - 2014.03.02 23:04:00 -
[1050] - Quote
After discussing this with Ghost Hunter (CEO of the biggest Sansha RP corp). I feel he hit the purpose of the Sansha hulls on the head.
Ghost Hunter wrote: the sansha gimmick is that their ships are a functional weight size above what their actual designation is
the succubus needs a clearer role designation so more overbearing firepower as a destroyer should suffice
the phantasm is a battlecruiser in a cruiser's skin, it outclasses its own weight size and gives most BCs a run for their money if its meant to be the literal spearhead, emphasizing a tackle and hold role might suffice better
the nightmare is just an overbearingly accurate damage platform that can be retrofitted into a ferocious active tank it's a marauder literally they prototyped the marauder concept with the nightmare
used a test bed then left behind when everyone else got more powerful upgrades
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 55 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |