Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 [50] 60 70 80 90 100 .. 171 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 42 post(s) |
Cassandra Aurilien
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
68
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 21:38:00 -
[1471] - Quote
chaosgrimm wrote:Cassandra Aurilien wrote: At the range where a tracking bonus would actually accomplish anything on a AC Mach - you'd be better off bringing a blaster boat. In mid-falloff range (even with the lower falloff you are suggesting) tracking simply isn't an issue against most targets. Almost any other bonus would make more sense. For PVE, I run my Mach quite close to it's targets as it is, if you are flying it rather than orbiting, it has no issues hitting NPC BS's under 10KM.
In order to fit the Mach as the best arty platform, you have to make sacrifices in terms of what you are fitting, more so than just about any other Faction BS when fitted for range. (Much earlier in the thread there were people complaining about that, using 6% implants, etc...) The Vargur is a more natural arty platform, in my opinion.
Lol no.... Mach will almost always be able to make use of that tracking bonus given its speed, if not anything else. Because ur talking about PvE, mach is def the better arty platform. Even if u wanna give up a low for fitting, you arnt going to fit more than 4 gyros, and maybe 1 te. still gives u a slot left for whatever. The cycle time is low for 1400s and you can split the dmg across 7 turrets to lower your overkill. Not to mention, mach has much better turret dps and better drone bandwidth.
I disagree, but you're welcome to your opinion.
To me, the role of a Vargur and a Mach aren't that similar. The Mach is based on speed & movement, the Vargur on it's Bastion mode - complete immobility... (Hence, why I don't see the need to differentiate them.)
Their offensive profile is similar, but in terms of their use, they are not similar.
|
Last Wolf
Umbra Wing
158
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 21:44:00 -
[1472] - Quote
Fabulous Rod wrote:Last Wolf wrote:The only thing the Snake loses it its ability field 5 heavy e-war or logistic drones.
Everything else it will do better, including shooting at frigs. Your 87.5% missile damage increase will put more dps on frigs than you have lost with light drones.
Edit: same thing with cruisers and medium drones. You clearly don't know what the hell you are talking about. If you are using your missile salvos to kill frigates in a Rattlesnake, you are doing it wrong. That is highly inefficient in terms of overall DPS. Seems like I am constantly arguing with bad and incompetent players who don't even understand how the game actually plays out in reality.
My current Rattle with rigors/2xTP and 4 unbonued launchers w/ navy missilese 2 salvos most frigs. 90% of the time I don't have to bother because my sentries pop them before they even get close.
As far as PvP, the most expensive ship I've ever PvP'd in would be a Sleipnir, Absolution or Cynabal. Warning: Sarcasm Above. |
Divi Filus
New Xenocracy
55
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 21:44:00 -
[1473] - Quote
Fabulous Rod wrote:more DPS-centric thinking.
Fabulous Rod wrote:That is highly inefficient in terms of overall DPS. So here's me, confused again. |
Ebag Trescientas
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 21:45:00 -
[1474] - Quote
Mike Voidstar wrote: There isnt a whole bunch of extra training for the gurista line. Gallente hulls is all-- drones are universally useful, and anyone trained in Caldari hulls should have some missile skill. Missiles are pretty easy to train for, and with the new changes they will be useful even with the smallest sizes on the largest hulls if you are coming from the gallente side of things.
Gurista isn't much extra training if you're coming from the Caldari side. If you prefer Gallente hulls, then shields and missiles don't do you much good.
Gurista are pretty unusual ships, using missiles + drones + shields. I don't know of any other ships in game designed to fit those specifically, some can be re-purposed to work that way, but it's an unusual combination.
I personally don't have a problem with the SP spent for Guirista's though, as even if I never fly a RS again (which, of course, I will), I'm well setup for a large number of ships, with very minimal training required in order to switch hulls.
The SP changes to the RS are pretty minimal, you're going to train all the skills that are no longer (as) useful no matter what. Complaints about Gila changes are more well founded as sentries aren't exactly cheap to fully train, and are no longer usable. |
chaosgrimm
Universal Production and Networking Services
93
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 21:50:00 -
[1475] - Quote
Cassandra Aurilien wrote: .... Their offensive profile is similar, but in terms of their use, they are not similar.
Sorry for keeping this going but I do enjoy forum discussions xD.
So you are in agreement that the offensive profiles are similar.
But now look at the differences in the offensive profiles between the pally and the nm as well as the kronos and the vindi.
Don't the mach and the vargur deserve that lvl of uniqueness? |
Fabulous Rod
Darkfall Corp
39
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 21:52:00 -
[1476] - Quote
Divi Filus wrote:Fabulous Rod wrote:more DPS-centric thinking. Fabulous Rod wrote:That is highly inefficient in terms of overall DPS. So here's me, confused again.
the snake doesn't need to lose any DPS at all, anywhere, it only need to gain it to come in-line. This can easily be accomplished with more high/mid/low slots and will also prevent many Guristas pilots angry from being angry at CCP for drastically changing their ship.
Some people actually use torpedos on a rattlesnake because the velocity bonus is very helpful. Try killing frigates with torpedos. These planned changes make the Rattlesnake very limited for no good reason.
The super drone idea is dumb and totally unnecessary. 5 drones is still better than 2 in the vast majority of scenarios. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
5242
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 21:55:00 -
[1477] - Quote
Fabulous Rod wrote:
The super drone idea is dumb and totally unnecessary. 5 drones is still better than 2 in the vast majority of scenarios.
You keep repeating that lie like you expect it to be true eventually. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
-áPsychotic Monk for CSM9.
|
Divi Filus
New Xenocracy
56
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 22:07:00 -
[1478] - Quote
Fabulous Rod wrote:Divi Filus wrote:Fabulous Rod wrote:more DPS-centric thinking. Fabulous Rod wrote:That is highly inefficient in terms of overall DPS. So here's me, confused again. the snake doesn't need to lose any DPS at all, anywhere, it only need to gain it to come in-line. This can easily be accomplished with more high/mid/low slots and will also prevent many Guristas pilots angry from being angry at CCP for drastically changing their ship. Some people actually use torpedos on a rattlesnake because the velocity bonus is very helpful. Try killing frigates with torpedos. These planned changes make the Rattlesnake very limited for no good reason. The super drone idea is dumb and totally unnecessary. 5 drones is still better than 2 in the vast majority of scenarios.
Alright, Rod, you've said your pieceGÇöhow about let's hear from some of the other "many Guristas pilots angry" (sic)? Because I'm a Guristas pilot, myself, and I'm not angry; just the opposite, in fact. And this thread has already heard from a good many other Guristas pilots who don't seem to bent out of shape about the changes, either. A number of them have said much the same thing I have.
As far as the DPS issue goes, you're all over the map. You're on record as saying that no one picks a Rattler for high DPS, then you say (above) that it needs to gain DPS. When it's pointed out that it is gaining DPS, you blast this as being a "DPS-centric view" and complain that it's losing DPS from secondary sources (i.e. light and medium drones) that many RS pilots, among them myself, don't even feel the need to bother using in the first place. Then you ignore arguments that the buffs to the Snake's launchers offers new opportunities for dealing with sub-battleship targets, and that the ability of sentries to blap frigates before they close in remains unchanged. (As for trying to kill frigates with torpsGÇöwhy would I ever bother? If you can't kill them with your sentries or make do with a 1/3 DPS reduction in your light drones, perhaps you should consider a different weapon system.)
The suggestion that the "super drone" idea offers nothing that 5 drones can't provide is absurd. It suffices to note that the 275% bonus to HP greatly mitigates one of the traditional weaknesses of sentry ships (i.e. bombs), and makes heavies more resilient against smartbombing; this in turn contributes to greater viability in PVP. I offer this as only one example. |
Fabulous Rod
Darkfall Corp
39
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 22:16:00 -
[1479] - Quote
Divi Filus wrote:Fabulous Rod wrote:Divi Filus wrote:Fabulous Rod wrote:more DPS-centric thinking. Fabulous Rod wrote:That is highly inefficient in terms of overall DPS. So here's me, confused again. the snake doesn't need to lose any DPS at all, anywhere, it only need to gain it to come in-line. This can easily be accomplished with more high/mid/low slots and will also prevent many Guristas pilots angry from being angry at CCP for drastically changing their ship. Some people actually use torpedos on a rattlesnake because the velocity bonus is very helpful. Try killing frigates with torpedos. These planned changes make the Rattlesnake very limited for no good reason. The super drone idea is dumb and totally unnecessary. 5 drones is still better than 2 in the vast majority of scenarios. Alright, Rod, you've said your pieceGÇöhow about let's hear from some of the other "many Guristas pilots angry" (sic)? Because I'm a Guristas pilot, myself, and I'm not angry; just the opposite, in fact. And this thread has already heard from a good many other Guristas pilots who don't seem to bent out of shape about the changes, either. A number of them have said much the same thing I have. As far as the DPS issue goes, you're all over the map. You're on record as saying that no one picks a Rattler for high DPS, then you say (above) that it needs to gain DPS. When it's pointed out that it is gaining DPS, you blast this as being a "DPS-centric view" .
no, I'm saying the changes to the rattlesnake are in a DPC-centric view. It does need to gain DPS to come in-line but there is no good reason to take away DPS from its light and medium drones. Give me one good reason why the snake shouldn't be able to keep its bonus on light and medium drones.
These changes aren't nearly about balance as they are about forcefully making ships different from each other. This isn't about balance, its about the "new and shiny" on ships being ill-perceived as overlapping with Gallente. If they want "new and interesting" they should just make new ships instead of ruining old ones. Maybe you are content with the meager changes to snake but there is absoloutly no reason it needs to have its bonus and light and medium drones removed and its drone bay shrunk to bare-minimum operational capacity. |
Arthur Aihaken
Arsenite
3355
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 22:35:00 -
[1480] - Quote
Make it stop, aaggggghhhhh!!! I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11263
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 22:39:00 -
[1481] - Quote
Fabulous Rod wrote:
no, I'm saying the changes to the rattlesnake are in a DPC-centric view. It does need to gain DPS to come in-line but there is no good reason to take away DPS from its light and medium drones. Give me one good reason why the snake shouldn't be able to keep its bonus on light and medium drones.
It will already rip apart frigates and cruisers, giving it even more firepower with light drones and it will curbstomp any frigate in seconds. It would seriously be unbalanced. It would effectivly be an anti everything. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Cassandra Aurilien
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
68
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 22:39:00 -
[1482] - Quote
chaosgrimm wrote:Cassandra Aurilien wrote: .... Their offensive profile is similar, but in terms of their use, they are not similar.
Sorry for keeping this going but I do enjoy forum discussions xD. So you are in agreement that the offensive profiles are similar. But now look at the differences in the offensive profiles between the pally and the nm as well as the kronos and the vindi. Don't the mach and the vargur deserve that lvl of uniqueness?
I don't mind... It's a civil discussion, which is always nice... (Sorry for the long reply, as well.)
I'll speak to the Pali/NM, as I use both... (And I love my NM )
Previous to the Marauder rebalance, it was simple:
The NM was generally considered to be the go to for Tach lasers, the Pali was generally considered to be the best for pulses. The tracking bonus on the NM allowed it to use Tach lasers at mid range, while the Pali's old bonus to stasis webbing was ideal for pulses.
Both could function with either weapon system, and there were advantages to fitting either on both hulls, of course. NM fits tended to come out a little ahead on firepower, as they could fill their lows with HS without issues. (But cap for a NM pilot was always an issue.)
Now, it's a bit more complex...
Previous to this balance, the Paladin's new bonuses set it up to be simply better than the Nightmare. The NM's tracking bonus was still useful, but the optimal range bonus on the Pali is useful for both Tach's & pulses. Add to that the better cap, lower cap use of armor reps, higher base speed, higher base lock range, bastion mode (the NM, while mobile, was not especially mobile) & the Pali was the better choice for most things.
With this rebalance to the NM, the two ships come into a bit more balance. The NM's AB bonus & base speed boost will allow it to control range & stay mobile. The extra low gives a bit more flexibility in fitting.
In order to balance the hull, they had to add an additional bonus, which didn't previously exist. (The Pali & the NM do have an overlapping bonus, it's just been folded into the base bonus to it's weapon system.)
The Mach already has mobility... Really, the Mach has 1 completely different bonus not listed as a bonus... 161 m/s speed. That's a built in 46% speed bonus.
I'm not especially opposed to changing the falloff bonus, but I don't think that tracking is it. At most ranges where you really need it (with AC's, not Arty), as I said, I think you'd be better off with blasters. Personally, I'd rather love to see that 46% speed bonus turned into a 100% speed bonus, but that would be more than a bit OP...
Edit: Also, it would still have the exact same duplicating bonuses with the Vargur, it would just be tracking duplicated, instead of falloff. |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
574
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 22:43:00 -
[1483] - Quote
Fabulous Rod wrote:
no, I'm saying the changes to the rattlesnake are in a DPC-centric view. It does need to gain DPS to come in-line but there is no good reason to take away DPS from its light and medium drones. Give me one good reason why the snake shouldn't be able to keep its bonus on light and medium drones.
These changes aren't nearly about balance as they are about forcefully making ships different from each other. This isn't about balance, its about the "new and shiny" on ships being ill-perceived as overlapping with Gallente. If they want "new and interesting" they should just make new ships instead of ruining old ones. Maybe you are content with the meager changes to snake but there is absoloutly no reason it needs to have its bonus and light and medium drones removed and its drone bay shrunk to bare-minimum operational capacity.
Except they are not 'ruining' it in any objective sense. Its focus has just been changed a bit.
It will do more overall DPS. It still has options for engaging ships of all sizes, and will be doing more DPS in all weight classes. It still has a monster tank. The only thing it is losing that isnt being replaced by something else is large ewar drones, and all three people that use them seem fine with that.
A ship known for its monster tank and excellent damage application is still a ship with monster tank and excellent damage application, just in a different way, and not even a way that makes you retrain anything you didnt need before. |
elitatwo
Congregatio
216
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 22:58:00 -
[1484] - Quote
Anyhow can we discuss real issues that have come to light, like CPU on the Rattlesnake and capacitor on the Nightmare? signature |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11263
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 23:01:00 -
[1485] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:Anyhow can we discuss real issues that have come to light, like CPU on the Rattlesnake and capacitor on the Nightmare?
Not in much depth until we get to abuse them on sisi. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Cassandra Aurilien
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
68
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 23:04:00 -
[1486] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:Anyhow can we discuss real issues that have come to light, like CPU on the Rattlesnake and capacitor on the Nightmare?
Cap has always been a problem on the NM. There are a few ways around it - XL-ASB or a cap booster, depending on your preference. |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
2114
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 23:14:00 -
[1487] - Quote
I believe Rise even went so far as to say that capacitor issues on Sansha ships are intentional. |
elitatwo
Congregatio
217
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 23:36:00 -
[1488] - Quote
Cassandra Aurilien wrote:elitatwo wrote:Anyhow can we discuss real issues that have come to light, like CPU on the Rattlesnake and capacitor on the Nightmare? Cap has always been a problem on the NM. There are a few ways around it - XL-ASB or a cap booster, depending on your preference.
Maybe baltec was right and I wait until they hit SiSi. signature |
Cassandra Aurilien
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
68
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 23:41:00 -
[1489] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:Cassandra Aurilien wrote:elitatwo wrote:Anyhow can we discuss real issues that have come to light, like CPU on the Rattlesnake and capacitor on the Nightmare? Cap has always been a problem on the NM. There are a few ways around it - XL-ASB or a cap booster, depending on your preference. Maybe baltec was right and I wait until they hit SiSi.
I agree. He's a wise man, by his posts. |
elitatwo
Congregatio
217
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 23:42:00 -
[1490] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:I believe Rise even went so far as to say that capacitor issues on Sansha ships are intentional.
I did read that, thanks.
Yet I believe that was for the power level those ships had at the time of Apocrypha. Everything has been buffed in that area and none of the sansha ships are consideres dps-solo-wft-bbq-pwn-mobiles. signature |
|
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
2116
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 23:51:00 -
[1491] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:Alvatore DiMarco wrote:I believe Rise even went so far as to say that capacitor issues on Sansha ships are intentional. I did read that, thanks. Yet I believe that was for the power level those ships had at the time of Apocrypha. Everything has been buffed in that area and none of the sansha ships are consideres dps-solo-wft-bbq-pwn-mobiles.
Nope. Rise said it in this year's batch of pirate threads. |
Cassandra Aurilien
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
68
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 23:54:00 -
[1492] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:elitatwo wrote:Alvatore DiMarco wrote:I believe Rise even went so far as to say that capacitor issues on Sansha ships are intentional. I did read that, thanks. Yet I believe that was for the power level those ships had at the time of Apocrypha. Everything has been buffed in that area and none of the sansha ships are consideres dps-solo-wft-bbq-pwn-mobiles. Nope. Rise said it in this year's batch of pirate threads.
In terms of pure firepower & projection, they are still pretty strong... 1000+ DPS at 40KM without implants isn't shabby, by any means. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
5242
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 23:55:00 -
[1493] - Quote
Cassandra Aurilien wrote:Alvatore DiMarco wrote:elitatwo wrote:Alvatore DiMarco wrote:I believe Rise even went so far as to say that capacitor issues on Sansha ships are intentional. I did read that, thanks. Yet I believe that was for the power level those ships had at the time of Apocrypha. Everything has been buffed in that area and none of the sansha ships are consideres dps-solo-wft-bbq-pwn-mobiles. Nope. Rise said it in this year's batch of pirate threads. In terms of pure firepower & projection, they are still pretty strong... 1000+ DPS at 40KM without implants isn't shabby, by any means.
The only good glass cannon ships are Stealth Bombers, and we all know why. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
-áPsychotic Monk for CSM9.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11265
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 23:57:00 -
[1494] - Quote
Cassandra Aurilien wrote:elitatwo wrote:Cassandra Aurilien wrote:elitatwo wrote:Anyhow can we real issues that have come to light, like CPU on the Rattlesnake and capacitor on the Nightmare? Cap has always been a problem on the NM. There are a few ways around it - XL-ASB or a cap booster, depending on your preference. Maybe baltec was right and I wait until they hit SiSi. I agree. He's a wise man, by his posts.
I wouldn't say wise, I belive that megathrons belong in frigate gangs. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
2116
|
Posted - 2014.04.23 00:09:00 -
[1495] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:I wouldn't say wise, I belive that megathrons belong in frigate gangs.
Even wise men have bizzare quirks.
|
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1187
|
Posted - 2014.04.23 00:11:00 -
[1496] - Quote
I have again removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them. As always I let some edge cases stay. Please people, keep it on topic and above all civil!
The Rules: 3. Ranting is prohibited.
A rant is a post that is often filled with angry and counterproductive comments. A free exchange of ideas is essential to building a strong sense of community and is helpful in development of the game and community. Rants are disruptive, and incite flaming and trolling. Please post your thoughts in a concise and clear manner while avoiding going off on rambling tangents.
4. Personal attacks are prohibited.
Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.
11. Discussion of forum moderation is prohibited.
The discussion of EVE Online forum moderation actions generally leads to flaming, trolling and baiting of our ISD CCL moderators. As such, this type of discussion is strictly prohibited under the forum rules. If you have questions regarding the actions of a moderator, please file a petition under the Community & Forums Category.
26. Off-topic posting is prohibited.
Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued. ISD Ezwal Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
5243
|
Posted - 2014.04.23 00:13:00 -
[1497] - Quote
baltec1 wrote: I wouldn't say wise, I belive that megathrons belong in frigate gangs.
If the boat fits. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
-áPsychotic Monk for CSM9.
|
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University Minmatar Republic
616
|
Posted - 2014.04.23 00:31:00 -
[1498] - Quote
On a slightly related note.
What was the story about people were being banned for perma shield repping sentries in missions a few years back ? |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11266
|
Posted - 2014.04.23 00:47:00 -
[1499] - Quote
Hasikan Miallok wrote:On a slightly related note.
What was the story about people were being banned for perma shield repping sentries in missions a few years back ?
Dont recall this one. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University Minmatar Republic
616
|
Posted - 2014.04.23 00:51:00 -
[1500] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Hasikan Miallok wrote:On a slightly related note.
What was the story about people were being banned for perma shield repping sentries in missions a few years back ? Dont recall this one.
long, quite old, thread here
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=84360 |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 [50] 60 70 80 90 100 .. 171 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |