Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Sho Menao
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
15
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:05:16 -
[61] - Quote
I like how battlecruisers are still killable with logistics compared to Tech 3s and HACs to a slightly lesser extent due to their base resists, making it engaging gameplay where people take losses. These changes don't make BCs much more viable in the fleet combat context for this reason. If they had the dps to crack high resist ships so that they function as higher dps mobile platforms they'd be a more viable alternative. The projection is cool since it can make up for the lower speeds, but increased damage would help open up the meta.
As it stands, for wealthier organizations there still is no particular reason to use these. And they still get utterly owned by most things due to their sig radius. |
GeeBee
Paragon Fury Tactical Narcotics Team
88
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:06:21 -
[62] - Quote
Looking forward to this, hopefully we get back to some good battlecruiser action.
When Dominion first started battlecruisers were the mainstay for my alliance, eventually everyone outgrew them, hopefully these changes help them come back a bit.
I am worried that the bombing meta is still going to take a heavy toll on battlecruiser (and battleship) usage and would like to see the numbers tweaked on bombs to reduce the number of bombs that can be detonate at once(before they destroy each other) currently the math works out to 6-8 depending on skills or racial bonuses, this is enough damage that the sig radius / ehp of a standard fit battlecruiser is about dead. I would like to see the number of bombs cut in half to allow fleets more ability to mitigate the bombers. This will allow a fleet to be less anti-bomber specific for killing bombers before the bombs go off to remove the blast and more ability to survive a bomb run and repair. |
Ayiana Valerii
Aliastra Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:08:30 -
[63] - Quote
Good changes but, IMO, at least one of the BCs needs neut bonus(es). |
Chance Ravinne
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services The WINGSPAN Logo Alliance
488
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:08:56 -
[64] - Quote
Mizhir wrote:Any changes on their lockrange / MMJD so they can actually use their MMJD offensively without having to use slots for targeting range modules?
Still awesome changes.
Several did get lock range increases, though it's not universal.
You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
|
Mr Spaxi
meatshield bastards The Bastards.
47
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:09:24 -
[65] - Quote
Chessur wrote:I really like where these changes are going. However I do have one questions regarding the turret projection bonuses. For turret boats such as lasers, the falloff bonus of 25% if essentially useless. While on the other hand, the optimal bonus for AC using ships is also- complete useless. The only weapon system that somewhat benefits from a split range bonus would be hybrids. Would there be any consideration to just changing the bonuses on each ship? IE. 50% optimal on laser boats, 50% falloff bonus on AC ships?
Also, for the missile based ships, again HAM's and HMLs struggle so hard to apply damage. Cyclone and Drake are going to be feeling a little left out in their ability to apply their DPS to targets with out some type of application bonus. Any considerations on giving them one?
There is no such thing as an AC ship. They can be fit with both Arties (which benefit from optimal more) or Ac (which benefit from falloff more).
Blog
The Bastards are recruiting! Check us out @ www.the-bastards.net or join our channel @ DBastards.
Fly hard!
|
Mr Black Uchonela
Mayhem Devolved Pirate Coalition
11
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:10:14 -
[66] - Quote
I dont understand Fozzie
i thought BC rebalance was cancelled due to Gorskis heinous crimes against you? (when he was jamming you on your typhoon roam with (larkin?)) please explain |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1189
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:10:37 -
[67] - Quote
some nice buffs too certain ships especially harbinger, but some big overbuffs too the navy bc's i mean a drake that has more tank than a raven, smaller sig aswell, with only 25% less range on HAM's than torps, really?? .. when are HAM's getting that range nerf? and better mobility than a navy brutix WTF????
Ferox changes are interesting, more of a shield brutix now .. ish, would expect it too be quicker than the drake though, tiny mass difference isnt good either, i would also expect a lower sig as it basically an attack bc now, which also begs the question why not just move the current ABC's too T2 and make the 4 more speedy bc's proper attack bc's.. this would open up a greater range of stats, being speed lower sig better agility etc.. more variety of sig radius is needed at least here.
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, nerf sentries, -3 slots for droneboats
Nerf web strength, Make the blaster eagle worth using
|
Trii Seo
Executive Outcomes
873
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:11:41 -
[68] - Quote
I now feel bad for welping all my hurricanes before that buff...
The king is dead, long live the king!
Glory to Maximilian Singularity the Sixth, First of his Name!
Proud pilot of the Imperium
|
Esnaelc Sin'led
AdAstra. Beach Club
22
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:11:52 -
[69] - Quote
Arkon Olacar wrote:Could you explain why this is bad? A little reasoning might help understand your bold point
For the three non-kinetic damage types, the drake does ~5% less dps than a caracal. The raw dps increase when using kinetic is (partially) countered by the resist profiles of most of the common fits you'll see in nullsec, so the drake usually only does ~5-10% more effective dps using kinetic than a caracal selecting the correct ammo type.
It would be less of an issue if the bonus was universal across all missile based caldari ships, but right now it sticks out like a sore thumb.
Edit: Need food, but if you really care I can dig out the numbers later.[/quote]
Why would missile boats be the only boats capable of projecting any damage type with no penalty at all ?
Lazors = EM/TH Hybrids = KN/TH Projo = Well ok, they have EMP / Fusion and Plasma. But it's not pure damage type and you have 50% reduced range. And if ever you want to shoot Kin you would end up with Sabot.
Kinetic has always been Caldari's damage type. |
Alundil
Isogen 5
1018
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:12:25 -
[70] - Quote
Altirius Saldiaro wrote:Very good changes. I look forward to these. Not with that hood you don't.
I'm right behind you
|
|
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
2480
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:15:02 -
[71] - Quote
Dr Cedric wrote:Bronson Hughes wrote:Khador Vess wrote:return of the drakefleet... awesome Forget Drakefleet. Welcome FeroxFleet. EDIT: Not only FeroxFleet...but symetrically-placed turret FeroxFleet! WAHOO! This man is the smartest eve-player I've ever seen. What he says! Think about it. The Ferox will be able to project over 100km without breaking a sweat (probably using mid-range ammo), do so with superior application over BS-class rails (better tracking and sig res), it will finally have enough midslots to be versatile, and it technically got a fitting boost as it now only has to support 6 turrets but didn't lose any grid (not to mentioned it gained CPU).
And it'll do all of this while finally sporting a symmetric turret layout. (Can you tell that was an issue for me?)
I for one welcome our new FeroxFleet overlords.
FeroxFleet will be the poor man's Eagle/Vulture fleet. Heck, slap on a warp speed rig and it'll warp (but not align, obviously) pretty much like an Eagle.
Relatively Notorious By Association
My Many Misadventures
A brief history of C&P Thunderdome
|
Sporx Utensil
Colossus Enterprises
21
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:15:41 -
[72] - Quote
I like the general direction, well done.
I would still like to see greater lock range on the missile boats, but such is life we'll continue to fit sebos i guess. -1 mid slot.
I also think we'd see a lot more of these in skirmish gangs if they had more mobility. You have added significant mobility and I applaud that but I don't think it is enough to get the T2's on the battle grid more often.
All good though, well played, I like the direction. |
Buzz Kill
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:15:52 -
[73] - Quote
Dont forget about the command ships |
FT Cold
The Scope Gallente Federation
32
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:17:11 -
[74] - Quote
A step in the right direction, I'm very happy about these changes. Consider applying these changes to command ships as well, anything that isn't a sleip is kind of a one trick pony. Also, It'd be nice to see the cyclone get an application bonus instead of a range bonus. I know the current meta disfavors brawlers, but it would be an extremely good way to keep it differentiated from the drake hull and offset it's low DPS. |
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots Black Legion.
373
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:17:37 -
[75] - Quote
This ought to breathe some new life into the whole line of battlecruisers. Now if only I had an alliance to fly them in... |
twit brent
Black Anvil Industries SpaceMonkey's Alliance
42
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:19:19 -
[76] - Quote
I think the cyclone needs a little more. At least another midslot and maybe another launcher too. |
Nou Mene
Out of Focus Odin's Call
8
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:21:26 -
[77] - Quote
solon101 wrote:Quesa wrote:For the love of everything that is holy and right in this world, can we please, PLEASE, PLEASE stop pigeonholing Caldari to Kinetic damage? yes totally agreed
and make laser shoot kin+explo, oh and hybrids do em + explo..... missiles are the only weapon that can shoot one and only one dmg type... you think thats (plain) bad? t2 ammo for every dmg type, also. |
Alundil
Isogen 5
1018
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:21:57 -
[78] - Quote
Karti Aivo wrote:except of the drake / clone i dont think they get the needed projection
the turret based ones should probably get 30 or 35% to match up, or get 5-10% tracking on top to justify using the biggest tier guns
otherwise those look pretty good Except none of these changed ships are the ones that can use Large weapons.
Combat/Navy Battlecruisers addressed in this patch = medium weapons Attack Battlecruisers (Talos/Naga/Oracle/Tornado) = large weapons
I'm right behind you
|
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
506
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:23:25 -
[79] - Quote
Samira Kernher wrote:Looks awesome. Glad I'll be having Amarr BC V finish before the patch! Stitch Kaneland wrote:Thank Bob. The fleet cane is different than the t1 cane in a significant way. Range bonuses should be good enough for the longer range weapons and ok for shorter range weapons. I guess scram kiting blaster brutix is no longer a thing.
My fleet arty cane will be a force to be reckoned with now. Arthrillery 3 incoming. I'm scared about fighting you once these hit.
*evil laugh*
Its ok, im sure someone (we know who) will just bring more rooks or curses
Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role
|
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
2482
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:24:33 -
[80] - Quote
Alundil wrote:Karti Aivo wrote:except of the drake / clone i dont think they get the needed projection
the turret based ones should probably get 30 or 35% to match up, or get 5-10% tracking on top to justify using the biggest tier guns
otherwise those look pretty good Except none of these changed ships are the ones that can use Large weapons. Combat/Navy Battlecruisers addressed in this patch = medium weapons Attack Battlecruisers (Talos/Naga/Oracle/Tornado) = large weapons I think they meant the biggest size medium guns (i.e. 250mm rails, 720mm arties, etc.), not the biggest size guns (i.e. battleship guns).
Relatively Notorious By Association
My Many Misadventures
A brief history of C&P Thunderdome
|
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1972
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:24:48 -
[81] - Quote
Last thing I can think of just now, ferox could stand even more lock range with the scale of those range bonuses on the guns. Another 15-25 would be good. |
Kalam Harkair
Fractured Glory
2
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:25:00 -
[82] - Quote
I've a curious about max targeting ranges, specifically with the Hurricane vs. Cyclone. Why does the Hurricane (bonus for medium projectiles) have a max targeting range further than the Cyclone (bonus for heavy missiles)?
If the Cyclone uses HMLs it can't, without assistance, target out to it's max missile range. |
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
96
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:30:14 -
[83] - Quote
All-in-all I like the changes, good job Fozzie!
I do have a question though: Why do the drake and cyclone (and their faction/t2 versions) lack bonuses to Rapid Light Missile Launchers? |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1695
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:31:09 -
[84] - Quote
These changes look great, Fozzie. What's even better is that they closely track what some knowledgeable and articulate players have been advocating for months. Always good to see usage metrics and reasonable player feedback taken into consideration.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
Ripley Kaga
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
2
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:31:48 -
[85] - Quote
Why not also buff the cargo bays as well? A Hecate can hold more cap boosters then a myrm atm and this very much affects ships that are active tanked. Even adding something like a charge hold and making players manually move them into the cargo hold would sufficient. |
Evai Tsuki
Lom Corporation SpaceMonkey's Alliance
12
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:34:49 -
[86] - Quote
I'm a little baffled that the prophecy still has only 75 bandwidth, but other than that these changes look great. |
Mizhir
Matari Exodus The Camel Empire
74589
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:38:45 -
[87] - Quote
Chance Ravinne wrote:Mizhir wrote:Any changes on their lockrange / MMJD so they can actually use their MMJD offensively without having to use slots for targeting range modules?
Still awesome changes. Several did get lock range increases, though it's not universal.
But even the Ferox, which is the one with the longest lockrange, wouldn't be able to lock far enough.
One Man Crew - Collective Solo PVP - Video is out!
|
GeeBee
Paragon Fury Tactical Narcotics Team
88
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:38:59 -
[88] - Quote
On the Topic of the Drake Kinetic Pigeon hole - Could we get a 5% bonus to other damage types(per level)? this would help restore some of the versatility from when a launcher was removed and the bonus changed from 5% kinetic to 10%. |
Aiyshimin
Fistful of Finns Triumvirate.
539
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:40:11 -
[89] - Quote
Application buff was exactly what was needed, props on that. Drone MWD speed is also a very good solution.
Like others already mentioned, bigger locking range improvements would have increased their variety in MMJD tactics (from evasive to offensive), and few of the BCs have ridiculously big signatures.
Anyway, fairly optimistic about how these changes were made! |
Moraguth
Ranger Corp Vae. Victis.
134
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 18:40:37 -
[90] - Quote
I don't understand how a huge increase to the mass of a ship (Prophecy, I'm looking at you), is considered a buff/benefit?
I got a Feature Added!
Stop calling an Abaddon "abba-dawn". It is "uh-bad-in"
dictionary.com/abaddon
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |