Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1002
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 18:00:48 -
[1] - Quote
Gallente
vexor - change drone bonus to medium drones, 50/100 bay Navy vexor - reduce drone bonus to 7.5% damage Deimos - remove a turret , buff 5% damage bonus to 7.5% catalyst - remove a turret and high for a 3rd midslot ishtar - reduce drone bonus to 7.5% damage and reduce heavy drone tracking/speed bonus to 5% 125/250 bay
Guristas i feel the 2 superdrone experiment is just OP and should be replaced with the normal 5 drone system and all droneboats have -1 slot for a reason these should follow that too, removing a lowslot each restricts the dps output from getting OP
Worm - switch the missile damage to a role bonus, then use the 10% light drone damage bonus as the gallente bonus per lv 25/50 bay, remove a lowslot
Gila - switch the missile damage to a role bonus, then use the 10% medium drone damage bonus as the gallente bonus per lv 50/100 bay, remove a lowslot
Rattlesnake - switch the missile damage to a role bonus at 25% as 50% is too much and outshines the navy scorp easily, then use the 10% Heavy/Sentry drone damage bonus as the gallente bonus per lv 125/250 bay , remove a lowslot
Serpentis i still think 90% webs are far to OP and a combination of nerfing web strength to 45% max should fix it.
vigilant and vindicator - reduce damage bonus
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 ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please
|
BadAssMcKill
ElitistOps
913
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 18:17:22 -
[2] - Quote
Yea the rattlesnake sure needs to be worse than it is now |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1002
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 18:26:54 -
[3] - Quote
BadAssMcKill wrote:Yea the rattlesnake sure needs to be worse than it is now
Also I am curious as to how you came to the conclusion that these ships do too much damage
comparatively too other ships in the game of similar class or even higher .. for instance a gila can do 900dps easy which for a cruiser is extremely high even battlecruisers struggle too do that
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 ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please
|
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
70
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 18:28:16 -
[4] - Quote
Cool So why do you think these ships need changing. Why is the Deimos so OP in its correct form? What is making the Gila So OP by having that extra low slot? Any of them really....
Just saying They need less DPS without saying why you think they need changes is not a very constructive topic on an Ideas Discussion sub forum.
|
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1002
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 18:33:27 -
[5] - Quote
Tappits wrote:Cool So why do you think these ships need changing. Why is the Deimos so OP in its correct form? What is making the Gila So OP by having that extra low slot? Any of them really.... Just saying They need less DPS without saying why you think they need changes is not a very constructive topic on an Ideas Discussion sub forum.
cruisers doing more dps than combat battlecruisers kind of obsoletes them somewhat
-deimos is perhaps more edge case ... but a nos in exchange for a little dps is no bad thing it has fair amount of dps anyway. - i feel that cruisers should have lower dps on average then bc's and battleships
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 ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please
|
Dork Action
BACKUPLEGION
0
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 18:39:10 -
[6] - Quote
BS have projection to make up for it, BC just suck |
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
70
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 18:40:14 -
[7] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Tappits wrote:Cool So why do you think these ships need changing. Why is the Deimos so OP in its correct form? What is making the Gila So OP by having that extra low slot? Any of them really.... Just saying They need less DPS without saying why you think they need changes is not a very constructive topic on an Ideas Discussion sub forum. cruisers doing more dps than combat battlecruisers kind of obsoletes them somewhat -deimos is perhaps more edge case ... but a nos in exchange for a little dps is no bad thing it has fair amount of dps anyway. - i feel that cruisers should have lower dps on average then bc's and battleships
battle cruisers advantages are more tank the ability to MJD and fit gang links. For that the trade off is is maybe a bit less DPS compared to HAC's and Faction/Pirate and full Gank fit crusers.
The trade off the cruisers have is more dps agility for less tank.
I don't see anything wrong with them. and haven't they only just had a balance pass? |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1002
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 18:44:19 -
[8] - Quote
Tappits wrote:Harvey James wrote:Tappits wrote:Cool So why do you think these ships need changing. Why is the Deimos so OP in its correct form? What is making the Gila So OP by having that extra low slot? Any of them really.... Just saying They need less DPS without saying why you think they need changes is not a very constructive topic on an Ideas Discussion sub forum. cruisers doing more dps than combat battlecruisers kind of obsoletes them somewhat -deimos is perhaps more edge case ... but a nos in exchange for a little dps is no bad thing it has fair amount of dps anyway. - i feel that cruisers should have lower dps on average then bc's and battleships battle cruisers advantages are more tank the ability to MJD and fit gang links. For that the trade off is is maybe a bit less DPS compared to HAC's and Faction/Pirate and full Gank fit crusers. The trade off the cruisers have is more dps agility for less tank. I don't see anything wrong with them. and haven't they only just had a balance pass?
bc's warfare link is pretty useless or not worth using on them, MMJD is still quite new too them and doesn't really fit or work well on most of them, or you have too sacrifice somethings for it, they trade off mobility for tank and dps. cruisers trade tank, fitting, dps for speed, mobility
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 ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please
|
Yazzinra
Scorpion Ventures Rim Worlds Protectorate
53
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 19:04:25 -
[9] - Quote
Why do you hate Gallente? Also, HACs can't be compared to cruisers or battle cruisers.
That said, giving up a high for a third mid on the catalyst could be interesting, though I can only imagine the gankers reactions. |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1002
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 19:12:02 -
[10] - Quote
Yazzinra wrote:Why do you hate Gallente? Also, HACs can't be compared to cruisers or battle cruisers.
That said, giving up a high for a third mid on the catalyst could be interesting, though I can only imagine the gankers reactions.
:) im a fan of gallente ships i have a fair amount of them.. but you have too admit they are the dominant race atm .. its for a reason. HAC's are just supposed to be resilient cruisers... and yes nerfing the catalyst damage is no bad thing from a ganking point of view , in a pvp point of view the extra mid for a web is more useful too actually apply its dps
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 ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please
|
|
Leonard Nimoy II
Dark Force Protectorate Special Operators Federation Alliance
95
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 19:37:10 -
[11] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:I feel there are too many cruiser hulls that do more dps than combat battlecruisers do .. and some ships that are just OP on damage .. not including T3's as we know they need there nerf cycle first
Gallente vexor - change drone bonus to medium drones, 50/100 bay
Is this a joke? |
Iain Cariaba
662
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 19:47:05 -
[12] - Quote
Yazzinra wrote:Why do you hate Gallente? Also, HACs can't be compared to cruisers or battle cruisers.
That said, giving up a high for a third mid on the catalyst could be interesting, though I can only imagine the gankers reactions. They'll stop using catalysts and switch to thrashers, which will mean forums tears to nerf thrashers. Gankers will still gank, carebears will still rage, life will go on, just in minmatar ships instead of gallente.
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
|
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2564
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 20:02:08 -
[13] - Quote
All ships should do 10 DPS from there respective weapons that they there will be no OP or underpowered ships.
-
|
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1002
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 20:02:48 -
[14] - Quote
Leonard Nimoy II wrote:Harvey James wrote:I feel there are too many cruiser hulls that do more dps than combat battlecruisers do .. and some ships that are just OP on damage .. not including T3's as we know they need there nerf cycle first
Gallente vexor - change drone bonus to medium drones, 50/100 bay
Is this a joke?
why would it be a joke or a bad thing even ?? .. its a medium ship using battleship drones rather than drones its supposed too use .. also mediums have there advantages over heavies.. and the overall damage output of vexors are very strong atm .. a little too strong.. especially in shield dps setups..
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 ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please
|
BadAssMcKill
ElitistOps
913
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 20:07:22 -
[15] - Quote
You give up hard tackle, a strong tank and you can only use a 2 heavy 2 med 1 light setup
Do you even play this game |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1003
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 20:13:14 -
[16] - Quote
BadAssMcKill wrote:You give up hard tackle, a strong tank and you can only use a 2 heavy 2 med 1 light setup
Do you even play this game
and what is your actual point here? .. you don't make a lot of sense
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 ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please
|
Gay Pornstar
Surprisingly Deep Hole Try Rerolling
23
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 20:23:59 -
[17] - Quote
I think the issue here isnt that these ships are OP, but that battlecruisers suck.
There is an idea of a Gay Pornstar; some kind of abstraction. But there is no real me: only an entity, something illusory. And though I can hide my cold gaze, and you can shake my hand and feel flesh gripping yours and maybe you can even sense our lifestyles are probably comparable... I simply am not there.
|
BadAssMcKill
ElitistOps
913
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 21:06:52 -
[18] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:BadAssMcKill wrote:You give up hard tackle, a strong tank and you can only use a 2 heavy 2 med 1 light setup
Do you even play this game and what is your actual point here? .. you don't make a lot of sense
To get the dps you typically have to give something up, blasters for example have high damage but terrible range
|
Syrias Bizniz
Krautfleet
383
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 21:21:38 -
[19] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:I feel there are too many cruiser hulls that do more dps than combat battlecruisers do .. and some ships that are just OP on damage .. not including T3's as we know they need there nerf cycle first
Gallente vexor - change drone bonus to medium drones, 50/100 bay Navy vexor - reduce drone bonus to 7.5% damage Deimos - remove a turret , buff 5% damage bonus to 7.5% catalyst - remove a turret and high for a 3rd midslot ishtar - reduce drone bonus to 7.5% damage and reduce heavy drone tracking/speed bonus to 5% 125/250 bay
Guristas i feel the 2 superdrone experiment is just OP and should be replaced with the normal 5 drone system and all droneboats have -1 slot for a reason these should follow that too, removing a lowslot each restricts the dps output from getting OP
Worm - switch the missile damage to a role bonus, then use the 10% light drone damage bonus as the gallente bonus per lv 25/50 bay, remove a lowslot
Gila - switch the missile damage to a role bonus, then use the 10% medium drone damage bonus as the gallente bonus per lv 50/100 bay, remove a lowslot
Rattlesnake - switch the missile damage to a role bonus at 25% as 50% is too much and outshines the navy scorp easily, then use the 10% Heavy/Sentry drone damage bonus as the gallente bonus per lv 125/250 bay , remove a lowslot
Serpentis i still think 90% webs are far to OP and a combination of nerfing web strength to 45% max should fix it.
vigilant and vindicator - reduce damage bonus
Vexor is fine as it is. Navy Vexor is fine as it is. Deimos is currently powerful, but imo in a good spot. Catalyst is fine as it is. Ishtar needs a nerf. Not sure if this should be by nerfing the Ishtar itself or changing Sentries. For example i don't understand why Sentries, as a weapon system that is more in the BS range than in Cruiser / BC, have a 125m Signature Resolution.
Worm was pretty meh before patch, and you want it changed back to underwhelming performance? Same for the Gila and Rattler?
Also, if the Gila can get 900ish DPS and that is op, then why is there no proposed nerf to the Vigilant?
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
244
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 21:25:43 -
[20] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Tappits wrote:Cool So why do you think these ships need changing. Why is the Deimos so OP in its correct form? What is making the Gila So OP by having that extra low slot? Any of them really.... Just saying They need less DPS without saying why you think they need changes is not a very constructive topic on an Ideas Discussion sub forum. cruisers doing more dps than combat battlecruisers kind of obsoletes them somewhat
tell that to the drake...
as for ships that need nerfs lets see what has killed me to day
oh the strat way to op
and a cat killed me in a hauler so it also needs nerf
tengu ganked me in a ls mission so it should also be nerfed |
|
Meyr
Destructive Influence Northern Coalition.
365
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 22:52:09 -
[21] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:Yazzinra wrote:Why do you hate Gallente? Also, HACs can't be compared to cruisers or battle cruisers.
That said, giving up a high for a third mid on the catalyst could be interesting, though I can only imagine the gankers reactions. They'll stop using catalysts and switch to thrashers, which will mean forums tears to nerf thrashers. Gankers will still gank, carebears will still rage, life will go on, just in minmatar ships instead of gallente.
No, because Thrashers cannot be rapidly trained up to do almost 500 DPS with an inexpensive fit - they top out a bit under 400. Combined with the recently announced banning of command broadcasting across multiple clients, a change to the Catalyst's DPS would have ganker's tears flowing like Niagara Falls, and I don't think CCP is quite ready to harvest them is so large of a quantity just yet, even if trading a high for a mid would be a good idea, and bring the hull back into alignment with the description of its stated purpose - catching frigates. (Let's not even mention the travesty that is the Amarr destroyer's slot layout - WTF are you supposed to catch and kill with only one mid-slot?!) |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
544
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 22:57:25 -
[22] - Quote
Thrasher is [email protected] million cost.
Thread gave me a laugh though, well done McTroll |
Meyr
Destructive Influence Northern Coalition.
365
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 23:07:38 -
[23] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Thrasher is [email protected] million cost. Thread gave me a laugh though, well done McTroll
Fine, then - what is the DPS of a comparably-fit Catalyst, using the same fitting tool? I don't currently have access to EFT, as I'm on an iPad, so I'm going with the numbers I have available using an iPad app.
Put your numbers into context, genius, or keep silent.
How's that for McTroll? |
Sigras
Conglomo
981
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 23:31:06 -
[24] - Quote
wow, way to compare one statistic while ignoring all the others that are relevant to the ship...
The only T1 cruiser you listed is the vexor, and while it is a great cruiser, it doesnt hold a candle to the myrmidon which does 100 more DPS and has almost twice the HP as the vexor.
Everything else takes quite a bit more time to train into and is quite a bit more expensive.
It's almost as though you were intentionally making an unfair comparison in order to back up your point which has no basis in reality... |
Mharius Skjem
Opacity Circles
218
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 23:57:44 -
[25] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Tappits wrote:Cool So why do you think these ships need changing. Why is the Deimos so OP in its correct form? What is making the Gila So OP by having that extra low slot? Any of them really.... Just saying They need less DPS without saying why you think they need changes is not a very constructive topic on an Ideas Discussion sub forum. cruisers doing more dps than combat battlecruisers kind of obsoletes them somewhat -deimos is perhaps more edge case ... but a nos in exchange for a little dps is no bad thing it has fair amount of dps anyway. - i feel that cruisers should have lower dps on average then bc's and battleships
Combat battlecruisers are not bc's as such they are just heavy cruisers. Cruisers with more ehp, that's all.
A recovering btter vet, with a fresh toon and a determination to like everything that CCP does to Eve...
Don't take me too seriously though, I like to tease a bit on the forums, but that's only because I love you...
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
544
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 05:54:43 -
[26] - Quote
Meyr wrote:afkalt wrote:Thrasher is [email protected] million cost. Thread gave me a laugh though, well done McTroll Fine, then - what is the DPS of a comparably-fit Catalyst, using the same fitting tool? I don't currently have access to EFT, as I'm on an iPad, so I'm going with the numbers I have available using an iPad app. Put your numbers into context, genius, or keep silent. How's that for McTroll?
I was referring to op as the troll.
Cat does more on paper but thrasher gains selective damage making up for the drop, mostly. |
Syrias Bizniz
Krautfleet
387
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 11:03:53 -
[27] - Quote
Meyr wrote:Iain Cariaba wrote:Yazzinra wrote:Why do you hate Gallente? Also, HACs can't be compared to cruisers or battle cruisers.
That said, giving up a high for a third mid on the catalyst could be interesting, though I can only imagine the gankers reactions. They'll stop using catalysts and switch to thrashers, which will mean forums tears to nerf thrashers. Gankers will still gank, carebears will still rage, life will go on, just in minmatar ships instead of gallente. No, because Thrashers cannot be rapidly trained up to do almost 500 DPS with an inexpensive fit - they top out a bit under 400. Combined with the recently announced banning of command broadcasting across multiple clients, a change to the Catalyst's DPS would have ganker's tears flowing like Niagara Falls, and I don't think CCP is quite ready to harvest them is so large of a quantity just yet, even if trading a high for a mid would be a good idea, and bring the hull back into alignment with the description of its stated purpose - catching frigates. (Let's not even mention the travesty that is the Amarr destroyer's slot layout - WTF are you supposed to catch and kill with only one mid-slot?!)
Actually, the real consequence would be: They get Amarr Dessie, and still skill for blasters. Because the Catalyst doesn't have a damage bonus, and the Coercer has 8 turrets, too. |
Owen Levanth
Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration
351
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 12:42:32 -
[28] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:I feel there are too many cruiser hulls that do more dps than combat battlecruisers do .. and some ships that are just OP on damage .. not including T3's as we know they need there nerf cycle first
Gallente vexor - change drone bonus to medium drones, 50/100 bay Navy vexor - reduce drone bonus to 7.5% damage Deimos - remove a turret , buff 5% damage bonus to 7.5% catalyst - remove a turret and high for a 3rd midslot ishtar - reduce drone bonus to 7.5% damage and reduce heavy drone tracking/speed bonus to 5% 125/250 bay
Guristas i feel the 2 superdrone experiment is just OP and should be replaced with the normal 5 drone system and all droneboats have -1 slot for a reason these should follow that too, removing a lowslot each restricts the dps output from getting OP
Worm - switch the missile damage to a role bonus, then use the 10% light drone damage bonus as the gallente bonus per lv 25/50 bay, remove a lowslot
Gila - switch the missile damage to a role bonus, then use the 10% medium drone damage bonus as the gallente bonus per lv 50/100 bay, remove a lowslot
Rattlesnake - switch the missile damage to a role bonus at 25% as 50% is too much and outshines the navy scorp easily, then use the 10% Heavy/Sentry drone damage bonus as the gallente bonus per lv 125/250 bay , remove a lowslot
Serpentis i still think 90% webs are far to OP and a combination of nerfing web strength to 45% max should fix it.
vigilant and vindicator - reduce damage bonus
Thanks for telling us about your feelings. No go away with your stupid ideas.
Seriously, I went through each of your suggestions, and each seemed somehow worse then the last. Please just stop.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
14068
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 12:52:51 -
[29] - Quote
Meyr wrote:afkalt wrote:Thrasher is [email protected] million cost. Thread gave me a laugh though, well done McTroll Fine, then - what is the DPS of a comparably-fit Catalyst, using the same fitting tool? I don't currently have access to EFT, as I'm on an iPad, so I'm going with the numbers I have available using an iPad app. Put your numbers into context, genius, or keep silent. How's that for McTroll?
Perhaps you should learn how to gank before this goes much further.
Harvey James wrote:
cruisers doing more dps than combat battlecruisers kind of obsoletes them somewhat
Brutix puts out more firepower than a diemost.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Viribus
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
334
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 13:17:35 -
[30] - Quote
baltec1 wrote: Brutix puts out more firepower than a diemost.
less than one gun more, actually, since the two 5% bonuses the Deimos gets stack with each other, making it a little better than the brutix's 10% bonus. Works out to something like a 15% dps advantage over a Deimos, before drones (which make the difference smaller, obviously)
the deimos also gets more tank, way more mobility, more scan res, more sensor strength, better range, and a way smaller signature
that's pretty much the fundamental problem with BCs in a nutshell; they sacrifice way too much for a small advantage in DPS. Pretty much every cruiser hull in the game got buffed while the two most viable BCs got nerfed into the ground
thanks rise
watch me be a scurb and get owned
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |