Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 29 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 14 post(s) |
Gloria Lewis
Caldari lolpatrol B-D
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 20:02:00 -
[301]
Since a 3rd turret is out of the question here's what I propose:
* 3 highslots (-2 from current) ** 2 turrets, 2 launchers (same as current)
* 6 midslots (+1 from current) * 6 lowslots (same as current)
For a total of 15 slots; one slot less than the other dreads to make up for the role bonus it gets:
* Role bonus: +100% to capital turrets and torps damage * Per skill level: damage&ROF bonuses so it will do similar damage compared to the other dreads.
If the tank is still gimped with the extra midslot, maybe have it do more DPS than other dreads to make up for it or give it a shield boost bonus.
|
Brennah
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 20:16:00 -
[302]
Edited by: Brennah on 30/04/2009 20:18:50 this is shamelessly stolen from one of my alliance mates.
Originally by: perianwyr
yo i can fix this rp ****
"when thukkers joined up with the minmatar republic they said "you guys are dumb, did you see that video where we were shooting all those ****ing torpedoes out of our naglfars? that's because we made our naglfars a 3/3 missile/turret ship, you should do this". chief tribal ****sucker steve mcjimenez bloodaxe hrothgar decreed that, henceforth "we are gonna tell those sebiestor dudes to fix that damn slot layout for serious"
there, RP is fixed, reskin the nag model with 3 turrets, give it ROF bonus like the other dreads, allow it to use citadel torps so it still maintains its "versatility" but with no bonus' and fix its slot layout by losing a high and deciding if you want it to be an armor or shield tanker and moving the extra module slot there.
Re: The art, fix the ship, have it display 2 turrets until you can get the ship reskinned. We don't really care if it has 2 turrets displayed as long as it is actually firing three. We've told you what needs to be done to make the naglfar not suck, please make it happen and we'll use it instead of subsidising nag pilots to fly other dreads.
|
Sertan Deras
Gallente Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 20:21:00 -
[303]
Originally by: Brennah Edited by: Brennah on 30/04/2009 20:18:50 this is shamelessly stolen from one of my alliance mates.
Originally by: perianwyr
yo i can fix this rp ****
"when thukkers joined up with the minmatar republic they said "you guys are dumb, did you see that video where we were shooting all those ****ing torpedoes out of our naglfars? that's because we made our naglfars a 3/3 missile/turret ship, you should do this". chief tribal ****sucker steve mcjimenez bloodaxe hrothgar decreed that, henceforth "we are gonna tell those sebiestor dudes to fix that damn slot layout for serious"
there, RP is fixed, reskin the nag model with 3 turrets, give it ROF bonus like the other dreads, allow it to use citadel torps so it still maintains its "versatility" but with no bonus' and fix its slot layout by losing a high and deciding if you want it to be an armor or shield tanker and moving the extra module slot there.
Re: The art, fix the ship, have it display 2 turrets until you can get the ship reskinned. We don't really care if it has 2 turrets displayed as long as it is actually firing three. We've told you what needs to be done to make the naglfar not suck, please make it happen and we'll use it instead of subsidising nag pilots to fly other dreads.
Pretty much this, like most of us have said (at least those of us who actually fly Dreads and have a clue). Three hard points, choose a tanking layer, make the bonuses inline with the other dreads. Easy fix.
|
Blazde
4S Corporation Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 20:24:00 -
[304]
Those Thukker tribe Nags were shooting 4 torps a piece not 3 ^^ _
|
Odhinn Vinlandii
Viper Squad Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 20:30:00 -
[305]
Originally by: CCP Whisper How long does it take to make a ship model or modify an existing one? Anywhere from six months to a year, depending on the size and complexity.
Yet you did apocrypha, tech3 ships, and sleeper ships, from scratch in a few weeks. ...are you blowing smoke?
If creating many many new ships is easier than modifying a single existing ship. ...
Give is a brand new nag from scratch then!
The point is, do it right, the first time, or resign with honor.
|
Vertical Axis
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 20:36:00 -
[306]
Edited by: Vertical Axis on 30/04/2009 20:35:59
Originally by: Seishi Maru
Originally by: TraderE
Originally by: isdisco3 - 3 highs (2 turret, 2 missile hardpoints) - 5 meds - 7 lows
Bonus: - XL- Projectile damage per level (40%), Capital Launcher Damage per level (40%) - XL- Projectile fall off per level (5%) Citadel Torpedo velocity per level (5%) - 99% CPU requirement for siege modules per level
/ signed
I would make it 6 mid 6 low :) just to make it a bit different.... (and a lot of people happy)
I disagree. if its 6/6, its tank will be worse than either the phoenix or the rev, depending if you want to armor or shield tank it. it would be like an under-performing artillery phoenix.
|
Locan Todara
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 20:38:00 -
[307]
Originally by: isdisco3 - 3 highs (2 turret, 2 missile hardpoints) - 5 meds - 7 lows
Bonus: - XL- Projectile damage per level (40%), Capital Launcher Damage per level (40%) - XL- Projectile fall off per level (5%) Citadel Torpedo velocity per level (5%) - 99% CPU requirement for siege modules per level
this is the best solution so far suggested. gives the nag a good armor tank, a possible shield tank (although nobody will), and can use either torps or artilleries. quite good because when torps get buffed, maybe they'll be desirable again, and if it takes forever, you can still use projectiles.
|
Sertan Deras
Gallente Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 20:42:00 -
[308]
Edited by: Sertan Deras on 30/04/2009 20:46:00 Edited by: Sertan Deras on 30/04/2009 20:44:41 Edited by: Sertan Deras on 30/04/2009 20:44:13 Edited by: Sertan Deras on 30/04/2009 20:42:58 This is just silly. I have no idea why CCP is holding on so tightly to the failed idea of split weapon systems and nebulous tanking layer on a Dreadnought.
e:
Also, the 4 high 5 mid 7 low
All projectile setup is pretty much the best idea so far, and the one most of us have been advocating. Don't give me this "wahh, we need the art to match the functionality" BS and don't give me this "Wahh, Dreads needs to be versatile" BS. Just make it an artillery Revelation/Moros and everyone will be happy.
|
Vitrael
Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 20:46:00 -
[309]
I generally agree that split weapons does not equal versatility, it really just makes your ship fail. Poor Nagl.
Also the current Nag slot configuration is an attempt to make it a potential shield or armor tanker, just like the Tempest, and we all know how well the Tempest shield tanks.
Just let it tank armor. 4h 5m 7l slots FTW! -----
|
u2 bono
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 20:55:00 -
[310]
Originally by: isdisco3 - 3 highs (2 turret, 2 missile hardpoints) - 5 meds - 7 lows
Bonus: - XL- Projectile damage per level (40%), Capital Launcher Damage per level (40%) - XL- Projectile fall off per level (5%) Citadel Torpedo velocity per level (5%) - 99% CPU requirement for siege modules per level
YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH </southpark>
|
|
Evelgrivion
Ignatium. Rote Kapelle
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 21:41:00 -
[311]
Originally by: CCP Whisper Hi. So I just had Abathur and Greyscale and a bunch of other people come into my office asking me how many polygons the Naglfar has and how long it takes us to create a new model. I'm not in the art department but I have to deal with obtaining art resources with every project I take on. The short answer to the first question first: 10098 polygons.
How long does it take to make a ship model or modify an existing one? Anywhere from six months to a year, depending on the size and complexity. First we have to concept the ship or modification. This has to pass review by the lead artists (Asgeir being the main one of those) and believe me, the standards for art quality and concepting are extremely high. Then the accepted concepting proposal goes into extended concepting, detailing all angles of the proposed object. Not just how it is meant to look, but how light should fall on it, how it reflects, what sort of textures are where. How do the thrusters fire? Where are the turrets located? Do we want moving parts? Do we need faction variants? This is an incredibly detailed and complicated process because it has to be. Otherwise we deliver a concept for a battleship to the outsourcers and get a flashlight back. Yes, similar things to that have happened.
There then follows a lengthy process of back and forth between CCP and its outsourcers where models are tweaked, adjusted and finished. Then it comes back to us for more adjustment by the in-house art team. Shaders and such need to be generated and applied. If we want faction variants, that needs to be done several times. Then the whole model is baked and integrated into the client. Where it is tested for appearance. And changed based on testing. Which requires repetition of some of the steps above. All throughout this there are numerous reviews of the work by the lead artists. The whole process is a little bit more complex than firing up google sketch and hitting the magic "Put Into Game" button after half an hour of putzing around.
And all that I have described above takes place for every single thing we make and none of it is optional. At any given time we have several dozen objects at various stages of the process, requiring review, supervision and control. The entire process is in and of itself almost worthy of an hour-long documentary film. So things like "JUST ADD ANOTHER TURRET SLOT" are quite a bit more complex than copy pasting some textures.
OH! I almost forgot: Dreadnoughts are special because they have animations and this adds yet another chunk of work to be completed. That work needs to be done by the team up in the graphics cell, who would much rather work on optimising and improving the graphics engine to play better, stronger, faster, etc. So getting time from them is like pulling teeth. So for adding another turret slot to a dreadnought, add about another six to eight weeks for core graphics deliverables and associated QA.
And just for comedy value: When we asked the art department whether they couldn't just cut the Naglfar in half and use copy/paste to add a third turret bit, they threatened us with large rulers, scalpels and various other dangerous implements that artists like to surround themselves with in case someone from game design comes in and asks them a stupid question. I love my job. Really I do.
Perhaps now we can get some more constructive feedback and suggestions that build up on the several good comments that have already been made? Preferably ones that do not require us to rebuild the ship model in order to balance it.
I wasn't trying to make a mockery of the effort it takes to do the job right, and I apologize for coming across that way. I just wanted to show that it would look cool.
|
LightSnow
Gallente Drunk GanG
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 21:51:00 -
[312]
Originally by: CCP Whisper How long does it take to make a ship model or modify an existing one? Anywhere from six months to a year, depending on the size and complexity.
plz, dismiss the designers and take new
|
Gordan 23
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 21:58:00 -
[313]
Originally by: Pallidum Treponema
Originally by: Evelgrivion Edited by: Evelgrivion on 30/04/2009 10:51:27 The Naglfar model; now with 100% less rofl.
And a fourth one from the side.
This took me about one hour with Google Sketchup. Unfortunately, I have no ability what so ever with texturing.
^^ This
Yes, it'll change the Naglfar graphics. We get even more verticical, along with having a FUNCTIONAL ship! Win all around.
THIS!
|
To mare
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 22:11:00 -
[314]
Originally by: LightSnow
Originally by: CCP Whisper How long does it take to make a ship model or modify an existing one? Anywhere from six months to a year, depending on the size and complexity.
plz, dismiss the designers and take new
^^ this
|
BCE 3AHRTO
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 22:29:00 -
[315]
Torp explosion must be increased, as both Nag and Phoenix are pretty worthless at pvp with torps now. The Speed increase is definitely a welcome thing...
also, it seriously boggles the mind that CCP puts so much emphasis on how models look. CCP, I'll give you a hint: WE DON'T CARE FOR FLASHY GRAPHICS. In fact if you added text-based mode it would be the best thing to happen to EVE. People who play EVE are engineers and nerds, we care about functionality.
|
Evelgrivion
Ignatium. Rote Kapelle
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 22:39:00 -
[316]
Edited by: Evelgrivion on 30/04/2009 22:40:29 Edited by: Evelgrivion on 30/04/2009 22:39:58
Originally by: BCE 3AHRTO also, it seriously boggles the mind that CCP puts so much emphasis on how models look. CCP, I'll give you a hint: WE DON'T CARE FOR FLASHY GRAPHICS. In fact if you added text-based mode it would be the best thing to happen to EVE. People who play EVE are engineers and nerds, we care about functionality.
Speak for yourself. I happen to like the flashy graphics.
|
Sidus Isaacs
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 22:56:00 -
[317]
Originally by: BCE 3AHRTO Torp explosion must be increased, as both Nag and Phoenix are pretty worthless at pvp with torps now. The Speed increase is definitely a welcome thing...
also, it seriously boggles the mind that CCP puts so much emphasis on how models look. CCP, I'll give you a hint: WE DON'T CARE FOR FLASHY GRAPHICS. In fact if you added text-based mode it would be the best thing to happen to EVE. People who play EVE are engineers and nerds, we care about functionality.
I might be an engineer, but I like things that loks a bit better then text based. Tho my emphasis are still on mechanincs rather then eye candy :). I mean, my entire screen is filled by info panles when I PvP :P. and I look on all the status bars in the actuall fight. But inbetween fighs I like to "station spin" ^^.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html |
Fuzzy Duck
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 23:14:00 -
[318]
I am a Phoenix Dread pilot but I wanted to train my minmitar pilot up to fly the nag. I do think it's the best looking dread in the game so I think the model is fine, and I know it takes a **** ton of time to re-model a graphical object, been there, done that. Isn't the big focus of these changes because of tank? Even when we fight, the Nags are always primary because of their weak tanks. The whole duel style minmitar has is great, except that they are too much in the middle and are not focused enough. The goal should be to have a choice maybe but not to half ass the output. A lot of minmitar ships have dual roles and the Nag fits that role perfectly with the dual weapons, just give it a focused tank.
Do the following:
- Leave the model! Looks great as it is! - Modify the slots so it falls to a specific tank. Shield/Armor - Play with the bonuses for equal to other dreads damage.
These are all within the game parameters and should be pretty easy to adjust.
my 5c
|
Seishi Maru
M. Corp Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 23:27:00 -
[319]
Originally by: Fuzzy Duck I am a Phoenix Dread pilot but I wanted to train my minmitar pilot up to fly the nag. I do think it's the best looking dread in the game so I think the model is fine, and I know it takes a **** ton of time to re-model a graphical object, been there, done that. Isn't the big focus of these changes because of tank? Even when we fight, the Nags are always primary because of their weak tanks. The whole duel style minmitar has is great, except that they are too much in the middle and are not focused enough. The goal should be to have a choice maybe but not to half ass the output. A lot of minmitar ships have dual roles and the Nag fits that role perfectly with the dual weapons, just give it a focused tank.
Do the following:
- Leave the model! Looks great as it is! - Modify the slots so it falls to a specific tank. Shield/Armor - Play with the bonuses for equal to other dreads damage.
These are all within the game parameters and should be pretty easy to adjust.
my 5c
its not that simple... See my annalisys earlier.
Each day is more common to use dreads on long range setups. Lets suppose you demmand a range of around 170 km.. somethign HARDLY uncommon. With the new IMPROVED arties. You need 2 range mods for the arties and 1 range rig for the citatels. The guy in the revelation puts 1 range mod. Naglfar 1 slot behind (countign rig slots)
Now You want damage. The guy in the revelation puts 2 damage mods. You need to add 4 damage mods to escalate damage on same ammount. Naglfar +2 slots behind ( 3 total)
Naglfar starts with 1 less slot .. so naglfar is 4 slots behind.
The only way to sovle that is to remove the split weapon system to the naglfar can escalate to realistic deployment usages without needing a LOT more slots than the other dreads. OR make the naglfar have a MASSIVE damage advantage at poitn blank range. So it needs only 1 damage mod to match the damage of a revelation with 2 damage mods...
|
Lexa Hellfury
Incura
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 23:31:00 -
[320]
Edited by: Lexa Hellfury on 30/04/2009 23:31:50
Originally by: CCP Whisper Hi. So I just had Abathur and Greyscale and a bunch of other people come into my office asking me how many polygons the Naglfar has and how long it takes us to create a new model. I'm not in the art department but I have to deal with obtaining art resources with every project I take on. The short answer to the first question first: 10098 polygons.
How long does it take to make a ship model or modify an existing one? Anywhere from six months to a year, depending on the size and complexity. First we have to concept the ship or modification. This has to pass review by the lead artists (Asgeir being the main one of those) and believe me, the standards for art quality and concepting are extremely high. Then the accepted concepting proposal goes into extended concepting, detailing all angles of the proposed object. Not just how it is meant to look, but how light should fall on it, how it reflects, what sort of textures are where. How do the thrusters fire? Where are the turrets located? Do we want moving parts? Do we need faction variants? This is an incredibly detailed and complicated process because it has to be. Otherwise we deliver a concept for a battleship to the outsourcers and get a flashlight back. Yes, similar things to that have happened.
There then follows a lengthy process of back and forth between CCP and its outsourcers where models are tweaked, adjusted and finished. Then it comes back to us for more adjustment by the in-house art team. Shaders and such need to be generated and applied. If we want faction variants, that needs to be done several times. Then the whole model is baked and integrated into the client. Where it is tested for appearance. And changed based on testing. Which requires repetition of some of the steps above. All throughout this there are numerous reviews of the work by the lead artists. The whole process is a little bit more complex than firing up google sketch and hitting the magic "Put Into Game" button after half an hour of putzing around.
And all that I have described above takes place for every single thing we make and none of it is optional. At any given time we have several dozen objects at various stages of the process, requiring review, supervision and control. The entire process is in and of itself almost worthy of an hour-long documentary film. So things like "JUST ADD ANOTHER TURRET SLOT" are quite a bit more complex than copy pasting some textures.
OH! I almost forgot: Dreadnoughts are special because they have animations and this adds yet another chunk of work to be completed. That work needs to be done by the team up in the graphics cell, who would much rather work on optimising and improving the graphics engine to play better, stronger, faster, etc. So getting time from them is like pulling teeth. So for adding another turret slot to a dreadnought, add about another six to eight weeks for core graphics deliverables and associated QA.
And just for comedy value: When we asked the art department whether they couldn't just cut the Naglfar in half and use copy/paste to add a third turret bit, they threatened us with large rulers, scalpels and various other dangerous implements that artists like to surround themselves with in case someone from game design comes in and asks them a stupid question. I love my job. Really I do.
Perhaps now we can get some more constructive feedback and suggestions that build up on the several good comments that have already been made? Preferably ones that do not require us to rebuild the ship model in order to balance it.
So you want to fix one of the most broken things in the game to date, as long as it doesn't take too much :effort:
Edit: As I said in my previous post, who cares if you fix the actual graphics model or not, just give it three turrets.
|
|
Aprudena Gist
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 23:34:00 -
[321]
Originally by: Yorda
- 2 gun slots 100% damage role bonus
- 5% shield boost amount instead of missile RoF
- 3/6/5
- +15% cpu
There I did your job for you.
|
Abrazzar
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 23:37:00 -
[322]
I only know little about capitals and their performance. While it makes me a bit inept to comment on this, it also makes me less biased. So have some salt and a slice of lemon before jugging down my idea.
Keep all changes from the OP except the following. Scrap one high slot for a medium slot. Add a special bonus of 50% RoF to Capital Projectiles, effectively adding another turret. Instead of the Citadel bonus add a -10% duration and fuel need to siege modules, making it more agile.
With one less hardpoint to fit, it'll have more CPU and PG for a tank and balanced slots to either fit a shield or armor tank.
It also won't need another model.
Then you only need to take a look at the other dreads to make them more special and different from the rest.
That would be all I could possibly add. At worst it's just another silly idea among hundreds. -------- Ideas for: Mining
|
isdisco3
Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 23:39:00 -
[323]
Making the nag tank shields is just a bad idea. it doesn't match how people fly nidh's (which is, admittedly, different than how they fit hels) and it doesn't fit the type of tank (as if anyone fits tank anymore) on the titan.
the nag is supposed to be an upscale phoon, right? nobody in their right mind shield-tanks a phoon.
|
SSgt Sniper
Gallente legion of qui Southern Connection
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 23:54:00 -
[324]
Edited by: SSgt Sniper on 30/04/2009 23:57:29
Originally by: isdisco3 Making the nag tank shields is just a bad idea. it doesn't match how people fly nidh's (which is, admittedly, different than how they fit hels) and it doesn't fit the type of tank (as if anyone fits tank anymore) on the titan.
the nag is supposed to be an upscale phoon, right? nobody in their right mind shield-tanks a phoon.
If the phoon had six mids people probably would. Also, nanophoon anyone?
Back to the ship at hand, The ONLY way to fix the Nag is three turrets. Split damage is fail. So get over the :effort: problem and do it.
Also, why is it that the one thing that will fix it is the one thing you absolutely will not do? It's like you want it to stay broken as crap. ------- CEO of Maids. No I didn't pick the name. I've grown rather fond of it though.Poor PR in progress!
|
isdisco3
Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture
|
Posted - 2009.05.01 00:08:00 -
[325]
Edited by: isdisco3 on 01/05/2009 00:09:55 me personally, i dont care about 3 turrets. give it a role bonus which would give it the same effective damage. i dont want to wait a year for this to get fixed, and i don't presume to know how to do CCP's business better than CCP does.
|
Issaries Valran
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.05.01 00:10:00 -
[326]
What IĘd like to see changed for the Naglfar is for it to have the most damage potential out of the all the Dreadnaughts and a decent tank not the best tank but good enough tank that it wonĘt be primary every time the enemy FC sees one. The problems with the Naglfar is that it had lousy DPS before, and a lousy tank, making it not wanted in fleets and when it was in fleet the first to be targeted, because it was the weakest link. To do this properly I think you need to set the Naglfar up so its slot lay out and weapon systems and tank can be configured in such a way that it can do one of three things.
1.It can do scary damage and DPS, giving it the most damage potential of all the dreads but with this configuration you lack tank so it will be the weakest tank setup, basically a glass cannon. Comes into the fight makes a massive impact but easily tank out of the fight by the enemy.
2.In this configuration it will have average damage and DPS, and an average tank. Why? Well so when you see a Naglfar you donĘt automatically know its configuration. Cause if it only had the above configuration to choose from then the enemy FC would still primary it all the time.
3.And the last configuration the Naglfar would have a low damage and low DPS, but above average tank not the best but good enough to make people move on the next target.
Why I believe this is necessary, as I wrote before the Naglfar before was always primary target, because of how ineffectual it was in its role. With this Three configuration options it would give the Naglfar a reason to be in the feet, but also help keep it off of the always kill first list. The First configuration, the scary damage and DPS, most potential damage dealer of the all the Dreads would be really be its true configuration, with the other 2 options being there to discourage FCs from assuming the Naglfar is configured as a glass cannon.
|
Min Qa
|
Posted - 2009.05.01 00:40:00 -
[327]
Originally by: Issaries Valran What IĘd like to see changed for the Naglfar is for it to have the most damage potential out of the all the Dreadnaughts and a decent tank not the best tank but good enough tank that it wonĘt be primary every time the enemy FC sees one. The problems with the Naglfar is that it had lousy DPS before, and a lousy tank, making it not wanted in fleets and when it was in fleet the first to be targeted, because it was the weakest link. To do this properly I think you need to set the Naglfar up so its slot lay out and weapon systems and tank can be configured in such a way that it can do one of three things.
1.It can do scary damage and DPS, giving it the most damage potential of all the dreads but with this configuration you lack tank so it will be the weakest tank setup, basically a glass cannon. Comes into the fight makes a massive impact but easily tank out of the fight by the enemy.
2.In this configuration it will have average damage and DPS, and an average tank. Why? Well so when you see a Naglfar you donĘt automatically know its configuration. Cause if it only had the above configuration to choose from then the enemy FC would still primary it all the time.
3.And the last configuration the Naglfar would have a low damage and low DPS, but above average tank not the best but good enough to make people move on the next target.
Why I believe this is necessary, as I wrote before the Naglfar before was always primary target, because of how ineffectual it was in its role. With this Three configuration options it would give the Naglfar a reason to be in the feet, but also help keep it off of the always kill first list. The First configuration, the scary damage and DPS, most potential damage dealer of the all the Dreads would be really be its true configuration, with the other 2 options being there to discourage FCs from assuming the Naglfar is configured as a glass cannon.
That might actually be versatile <gasp>.
|
pyraX Sg
|
Posted - 2009.05.01 00:59:00 -
[328]
Originally by: Yorda
- 2 gun slots 100% damage role bonus
- 5% shield boost amount instead of missile RoF
- 3/6/5
- +15% cpu
Yes, I want this.
|
5pinDizzy
|
Posted - 2009.05.01 01:08:00 -
[329]
Originally by: pyraX Sg
Originally by: Yorda
- 2 gun slots 100% damage role bonus
- 5% shield boost amount instead of missile RoF
- 3/6/5
- +15% cpu
Yes, I want this.
Yeah is there an argument against this yet?
Because it makes sense to me.
if you disagree with me then you should probably post a response and stop reading my signature. |
isdisco3
Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture
|
Posted - 2009.05.01 01:24:00 -
[330]
Edited by: isdisco3 on 01/05/2009 01:25:51
Originally by: 5pinDizzy
Originally by: pyraX Sg
Originally by: Yorda
- 2 gun slots 100% damage role bonus
- 5% shield boost amount instead of missile RoF
- 3/6/5
- +15% cpu
Yes, I want this.
Yeah is there an argument against this yet?
Sure.
- It's got one less low+mid than every other dread. - It shield tanks, which is the opposite of the carrier. - It will tick off people who trained the month+ or so for citadel torps. - No need for shield tank because 1 weapon type means there's no need for dual weapon modifiers in lows. - The slots don't allow for either a decent shield or armor tank. It will have a worse shield tank than the phoenix and won't be able to fit a good armor tank like the rev / moros.
I still like my proposal (that I ripped off from someone else) that i put on the previous page, which is:
- 3 highs (2 turret, 2 missile hardpoints) - 5 meds - 7 lows
Bonus: - XL- Projectile damage per level (40%), Capital Launcher Damage per level (40%) - XL- Projectile fall off per level (5%) Citadel Torpedo velocity per level (5%) - 99% CPU requirement for siege modules per level
The dmg bonus can be exchanged for a 100% role bonus, with no argument from me.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 29 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |