| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 |
21. Sticky:[Retribution Point Release] Combat Battlecruisers - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Reaver Glitterstim wrote: I factored that in actually. In most cases a rate of fire bonus is about equivalent to a damage bonus because it increases the firing cost. um... If you are worried about ammo cost, maybe you shouldn't PvP. You are r...
- by Mund Richard - at 2013.02.19 12:32:00
|
22. [Retribution 1.1] Armor Tanking 2.0 - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Alxea wrote: Allison A'vani wrote: Quote: Change the penalty on all active armor rigs (Aux Nano Pump, Nanobot Accelerator, and the new Nanobot Overcharger) to increase the powergrid use of local armor reps by 10% instead of reducing s...
- by Mund Richard - at 2013.02.19 11:22:00
|
23. Sticky:[Retribution Point Release] Combat Battlecruisers - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Also, 5% Rate of Fire bonus gives more dps than 5% damage does (33% I believe instead of 25%) , and only the minnies get RoF bonus on BC level.
- by Mund Richard - at 2013.02.19 10:55:00
|
24. Sticky:[Retribution Point Release] Combat Battlecruisers - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Amber Solaire wrote: The Prophecy was the least used BC......with the new changes, you have guaranteed it will be the least used The new changes are a total joke Missile launchers, but a drone bonus, on an energy weapon-using ship? Once, I want...
- by Mund Richard - at 2013.02.19 00:57:00
|
25. Sticky:[Retribution Point Release] Combat Battlecruisers - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Valleria Darkmoon wrote: Mund Richard wrote: Wishing it had one more mid so that it can brawl, I can understand. I wish it had myself. As much as I love utility highs, the Ferox is hurt a bit by being the only BC with 8 highslots, thus less ...
- by Mund Richard - at 2013.02.18 22:25:00
|
26. Sticky:[Retribution Point Release] Combat Battlecruisers - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Mundi Kundoni wrote: As a blops user and battlecruiser fanatic I love love love the changes so far! In fact just bought a third account on one of your deals and training it to fly amarr drones with a view to helping out a newbie mate out with a...
- by Mund Richard - at 2013.02.18 22:00:00
|
27. Sticky:[Retribution Point Release] Combat Battlecruisers - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Cap'n Thich wrote: I'm sorry but I'm kind of tired of my favorite ships being nerfed... most BC's are nearly pointless to fly and after the patch its just going to be the same or worse in my opinion. Much more efficient to just fly cruisers now...
- by Mund Richard - at 2013.02.18 21:57:00
|
28. Dev Blog: No Brakes - Ship Balancing in Retribution 1.1 - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
DarthNefarius wrote: Patch notes wrote: GÇóPowergrid use of all Large Armor Repairer modules has been decreased by 10%. GÇóPowergrid use of all Medium Armor Repairer modules has been decreased by 20%. Does this all prefix mean REMOTE Large...
- by Mund Richard - at 2013.02.18 21:47:00
|
29. [Retribution 1.1] Armor Tanking 2.0 - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Nevyn Auscent wrote: Unless I'm misreading you all were also only taking the base booster module. Then add in the rigs/Deadspace Amps(Which are also common) & that problem on the base Deadspace shield boosters gets multiplied by the amp rat...
- by Mund Richard - at 2013.02.18 21:45:00
|
30. [Retribution 1.1] Armor Tanking 2.0 - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Hakan MacTrew wrote: That would be because I used stock 'baseline' modules, sans skills. I believe we need to balance both skills and modules, but not against each other per say. Comparing at all 5's does not solve the issue of module disparity...
- by Mund Richard - at 2013.02.18 21:38:00
|
31. Sticky:[Retribution Point Release] Combat Battlecruisers - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Laura Belle wrote: this is how i see it - taking the ferox and turning it into a pocket-rokh Slot layout: 8 H (+1), 8 M(+3), 1 L(-3), 8 turrets (+2) Fittings: 1200 PWG (+125), 530 CPU (+55) Rokh has a slot layout of 6 mids and 5 lows. So ...
- by Mund Richard - at 2013.02.18 21:09:00
|
32. Sticky:[Retribution Point Release] Combat Battlecruisers - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Nova Satar wrote: a t2 HAM drake currently has around 600dps and 16km range. With all other BC set to be at 650-750 dps, why is the drake losing one of launchers ontop of this? It'll be looking at 520dps tops. Please look at it again. The drak...
- by Mund Richard - at 2013.02.18 15:26:00
|
33. Sticky:[Retribution Point Release] Combat Battlecruisers - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Dav Varan wrote: Your question was already answered. Lose a mid if needed to reduce the tankability. nm anyway , I see the horse has bolted. A new day, a new idiom I learn about. I'm not disagreeing with your aesthetic btw, I do dislike the D...
- by Mund Richard - at 2013.02.18 14:05:00
|
34. Dev Blog: No Brakes - Ship Balancing in Retribution 1.1 - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
Nevyn Auscent wrote: Because they are the result of an uncategorised bug I imagine. As the bug was the cause of the change. Rather than part of module balancing efforts. "Bad" design decisions ages ago leading to another decision undervaluing...
- by Mund Richard - at 2013.02.18 13:06:00
|
35. [Retribution 1.1] Armor Tanking 2.0 - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
(used C-types as "starts with", bound to have errors I HOPE ) Corpus LAR starts at 2.2 Corpum MAR starts at 2.2 Corpii SAR starts at 2.2 Gist XLSB starts at 3.25 Gist LSB starts at 2.654 Gistum MSB at 4.028 (WTF) Gistii SSB starts at 3.9...
- by Mund Richard - at 2013.02.18 12:41:00
|
36. [Retribution 1.1] Armor Tanking 2.0 - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Hakan MacTrew wrote: All the deapspace armour repariers work on the following cap efficiency ratios: C) 2.2/gj B) 2.4/gj A) 2.6/gj X) 2.8/gj The only real changes are cap draw and rep amount, which all maintain the same ratio. Pith boosters: ...
- by Mund Richard - at 2013.02.18 12:31:00
|
37. Sticky:[Retribution Point Release] Combat Battlecruisers - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Dav Varan wrote: 8 missile launchers ( to match the model awesomness ). Ok. Since every (non-drone) BC (bar the Ferox) has the same number of slots (7 high, 10 low+mid) Do you want to lose a low slot? A mid slot? And you are also losing the u...
- by Mund Richard - at 2013.02.18 12:07:00
|
38. Sticky:[Retribution Point Release] Combat Battlecruisers - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Reaver Glitterstim wrote: Lasers are a very popular weapon system, despite being absolutely the easiest to prepare for and tank against. Dunno, for T1 ships, I'd say generally hybrids are easier to tank, as both tank systems have it in the mid...
- by Mund Richard - at 2013.02.18 11:56:00
|
39. Dev Blog: No Brakes - Ship Balancing in Retribution 1.1 - in EVE Information Portal [original thread]
Mike Whiite wrote: As I mentioned in Battlecruiser Reballence thread, I'm a little worried the Drake will loose it's appeal aside for Blob warfare. HAM Drake doesn't look bad even for smallscale imho: 1) it has 6 mids, unlike any other BC for...
- by Mund Richard - at 2013.02.18 11:47:00
|
40. [Retribution 1.1] Armor Tanking 2.0 - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Nevyn Auscent wrote: Hakan MacTrew wrote: Also redo your maths assuming 1 T1 Repair boost rig for armour, maybe also do maths with a T2 rig. Then do the shield maths with a Deadspace Amp, as they are common enough to be used in sustained t...
- by Mund Richard - at 2013.02.17 22:46:00
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |